Well, if you want to get people talking throw together a story about the environment, the internet, Google, soundbites and general hysteria. According to lots of reports that I've been reading recently, Harvard University physicist Alex Wissner-Gross says that doing 2 Google searches uses the same amount of energy as boiling a kettle for a cup of tea. Nothing like simplification for the masses eh? Except - he didn't say that. In fact, he doesn't mention Google in his actual study at all, and he's spent the last few days trying to set the record straight on Internet carbon study. Quite why The Sunday Times decided to use Google as their example isn't clear, other than assuming that they've got a particular down on the search engine, and that everyone knows them. Though to be fair, they also have a go at Twitter as well. Google put their own point of view in their official blog and for once I've got some sympathy with them over this.
Of course, the whole story is pointless anyway. If I need the answer to a query and I don't have access to Google, the Internet or a computer for that matter I'm going to have to drive to my local library, which is going to cost over 1,000 Google searches in terms of energy consumption, or ring someone up and ask them. So in actual fact, using a search engine is going to decrease the problem, not increase it. Oh - and I wonder how much energy gets used to create a single copy of the Sunday Times, just out of interest.
Of course, the whole story is pointless anyway. If I need the answer to a query and I don't have access to Google, the Internet or a computer for that matter I'm going to have to drive to my local library, which is going to cost over 1,000 Google searches in terms of energy consumption, or ring someone up and ask them. So in actual fact, using a search engine is going to decrease the problem, not increase it. Oh - and I wonder how much energy gets used to create a single copy of the Sunday Times, just out of interest.
Comments