UPDATE – A number of reports are now circulating that suggest the Sunday Times may have got slightly the wrong end of the stick.
TechNewsWorld spoke to Wissner-Gross, who says: “For some reason, in their story on the study, the Times had an ax to grind with Google. Our work has nothing to do with Google. Our focus was exclusively on the Web overall, and we found that it takes on average about 20 milligrams of CO2 per second to visit a Web site.”
Can you really destroy the environment by using Google? That apparently ridiculous claim was made yesterday by the Sunday Times, which stated:
Performing two Google searches from a desktop computer can generate about the same amount of carbon dioxide as boiling a kettle for a cup of tea, according to new research.
The paper cites work by Harvard physicist Alex Wissner-Gross, who claims that Google’s vast set up of servers means the average search puts out 7g of carbon dioxide vs a kettle’s 15g.
“Google operates huge data centres around the world that consume a great deal of power,” says Wissner-Gross. “A Google search has a definite environmental impact.”
The search company disputes the claim, with Urs Hölzle, senior vice president of operations, claiming in a blog post that the number is “*many* times too high”. Leaving aside that one of the most high-tech companies in the world can’t find a better way add emphasis than …, Hölzle says a Google search is equivalent to about 0.2 grams of carbon dioxide.
Unfortunately neither side is particularly revealing about how they come up with these numbers.
Many websites also point out that Wissner-Gross is a founder of CO2stats, which looks to make money by advising companies on energy-efficiency. “So let’s first congratulate Wissner-Gross on getting himself and his company talked about all over the internet, including here,” says the Guardian.
The Washington Post adds, the “Times article only mentions the site in passing, and fails to acknowledge that CO2Stats is a company that earns money, not just an informative website. I sincerely doubt there is anything sinister going on, but such a major potential source of bias seems worthy of more than just a mention.”
Disclosure: Google was used at least 12 times in the construction of this article. Oh, and I originally read the Sunday Times article on a print edition of that paper. On a transatlantic flight. Anyone know a good offset company?