杰西卡·麦克莱恩

Digital technologies are often put forward as a solution to environmental dilemmas. The spread of the Internet came with claims of a huge reduction in printing， and by replacing paper with bytes， we thought wed reduce our negative environmental impact.

But this early promise of solving environmental problems may not be delivering because digital devices， like most technologies， also have environmental impacts. Devices are powered by electricity—often produced in coal-fired plants—and are manufactured from materials such as metals， glass and plastics. These materials also have to be mined， made or recycled.

So， while digital technologies can facilitate environmental benefits， we shouldnt assume they always do. My research published this year shows much more needs to be done to debunk such myths.

Measuring digital eco-footprints

Its difficult to measure the environmental impacts of our digital lives， partly because the digital ecosystems that facilitate the Internet are complex. The United Nations Environment Assembly defines a digital ecosystem as “a complex distributed network or interconnected socio-technological system”.

Simply， digital ecosystems are the result of humans， digital infrastructure and devices interacting with one another. They rely on energy consumption at multiple scales. The term “digital ecosystem” relates to ecological thinking， specifically in terms of how human-technological systems work.

However， theres nothing inherently environmentally sustainable about digital ecosystems. Its worthwhile considering digital ecosystems environmental impacts as they grow.

In 2017， it was reported in Nature that Internet traffic （to and from data centers） was increasing at an exponential rate. At that stage， it had reached 1.1 zettabytes （a zettabyte equals one trillion gigabytes）. As our digital use continues， so do our carbon emissions.

Dangers of data centers

Data centers majorly contribute to the carbon emissions of digital ecosystems. They are basically factories that store， backup and recover our data. In April last year， it was estimated data centers around the world used more than 2% of the worlds electricity， and generated the same amount of carbon emissions as the global airline industry （in terms of fuel use）.

While there is debate about the impact of flying on climate change， were less likely to evaluate our digital lives the same way. According to British Open University Professor John Naughton， data centers make up about 50% of all energy consumed by digital ecosystems. Personal devices use another 34%， and the industries responsible for manufacturing them use 16%.

Tech giants such as Apple and Google have committed to 100% renewable targets， but theyre just one part of our giant digital ecosystem. Also， on many occasions， they rely on carbon offsets to achieve this. Offsets involve people and organizations investing in environmental projects to balance their carbon emissions from other activities. For instance， people can buy carbon offsets when booking flights.

Offsets have been critiqued for not effectively reducing the carbon footprints of wealthy people， while absolving guilt from continued consumption.

A carbon-filled road ahead

With more digital technologies emerging， the environmental impacts of digital ecosystems are probably going to increase. Apart from the obvious social and economic impacts， artificial intelligences （AI） environmental implications should be seriously considered.

A paper published in June by University of Massachusetts Amherst researchers revealed training a large AI machine could produce five times as much carbon as what one car （including fuel） emits over a persons lifetime， on average. Also， this figure only relates to training a large AI machine. There are various other ways these machines suck energy.

Similarly， bitcoin mining （an application of blockchain） continues to consume large amounts of energy， and is increasing on a global scale. According to the International Energy Agency， bitcoin mining uses more energy than some countries， including Austria and Colombia.

Putting the “eco” back in digital ecosystem

The digital ecosystem that supports our devices includes storage systems and networks that arent in our homes or workplaces， such as “the cloud”. But we should still take responsibility for the impact of such systems. Satellites are in space. Wires run beneath footpaths， roads and oceans.

All the while， the Internet of Things is creeping into old technologies and transforming how we use them. These underground and distant aspects of digital ecosystems may partly explain why the growing environmental impacts of digital are sidelined.

There are some ways people can find out more about responsible tech options. A 2017 guide by Greenpeace rated digital tech companies on their green credentials. It assessed a range of corporations， including some managing digital platforms， and others hosting data centers.

But while the guide is useful， its also limited by a lack of transparency， because corporations arent obliged to share information on how much energy is needed or supplied for their data centers.

Holding big tech accountable

The responsibility to make our digital lives more sustainable shouldnt lie solely with individuals. Governments should provide a regulatory environment that demands greater transparency on how digital corporations use energy. And holding these corporations accountable should include reporting on whether they are improving the sustainability of their practices.

One immediate step could be for corporations that produce digital devices to move away from planned obsolescence1. One example of this is when companies including Apple and Samsung manufacture smartphones that are not designed to last. Digital sustainability is a useful way to frame how digital technologies affect our environmental world.

We need to acknowledge that technology isnt just a source of environmental solutions， but also has the potential for negative environmental impact. Only then can we start to effectively transition to a more sustainable future that also includes digital technologies.

人们常说数字技术是解决环境困境的救星。互联网普及之初，人们宣称其将大幅减少印刷，通过用字节替换纸张，我们以为这样就可以降低对环境的负面影响。

但这种解决环境问题的初期愿景可能无法实现，因为数字设备和大多数技术一样，也会对环境产生影响。这些设备通常由燃煤电厂生产的电力驱动，由金属、玻璃和塑料等材料制成，而要获取这些材料还须进行开采、制造或回收。

因此，虽然数字技术可以提升环境效益，但我們不应该认为它们总会如此。我今年发表的研究表明，要破除这些误解，还需要做更多的工作。

测量数字生态足迹

我们很难量化数字生活对环境的影响，部分原因在于支撑互联网的数字生态系统十分复杂。联合国环境大会将数字生态系统定义为“一种复杂的分布式网络或互联的社会技术系统”。

简言之，数字生态系统是人类、数字基础设施和设备相互作用的结果，依赖不同等级的能源消耗。“数字生态系统”一词涉及生态思维，具体说就是人类―技术系统的工作机理。

然而，数字生态系统本质上并没有环境可持续性。随着数字生态系统的发展，其对环境的影响值得我们关注。

2017年，《自然》杂志报道，互联网流量（进出数据中心）呈指数级增长。在那个阶段，它已达到1.1泽字节（1泽字节等于1万亿吉字节）。随着数字应用持续不断，碳排放量也越来越多。

数据中心的危害

数据中心是数字生态系统碳排放的主要来源。从根本上说它们就是存储、备份和恢复我们数据的工厂。据估计，2018年4月全世界的数据中心消耗了全球2%以上的电力，产生的碳排放量与全球航空业相当（就燃料使用而言）。

关于飞行对气候变化的影响尚无定论，我们不太可能用同样的方式来评估数字生活。据英国开放大学教授约翰·诺顿称，数字生态系统消耗的能源中，数据中心约占50%，个人设备使用占34%，而制造这些设备的行业耗能占16%。

苹果和谷歌等科技巨头已承诺实现100%可再生能源目标，但它们只是庞大的数字生态系统的一部分。此外，很多情况下，它们主要依靠碳补偿来实现这一目标。碳补偿指的是个人和组织为环保项目提供资金以平衡在其他活动中造成的碳排放。例如，人们可以在预订航班时购买碳补偿。

然而碳补偿措施受到了批判，原因在于这不仅没能有效减少富人的碳足迹，还为他们持续消耗能源开脱责任。

“碳”路

随着更多数字技术不断出现，数字生态系统对环境的影响可能会加剧。除了明显的社会和经济影响外，人工智能的环境影响也值得认真考虑。

马萨诸塞大学阿默斯特分校研究人员2019年6月发表的一篇论文显示：训练一台大型人工智能机器，其平均碳排放量是一个人一辈子开的汽车（包括燃料）排放量的5倍。而且，这个数字只涉及一个大型人工智能机器的训练环节。这些机器还有其他各种耗能方式。

同样，比特币开采（区块链的一种应用）持续消耗着大量能源，且其规模在全球范围内不断扩大。据国际能源署称，比特币开采消耗的能源比某些国家，如奥地利和哥伦比亚全国的耗能还要多。

让“生态”回归数字生态系统

支持电子设备的数字生态系统包括那些不在自家或工作场所的存储系统和网络（如“云”），但我们仍应为这些系统的影响负责。卫星飘浮在太空中，电缆穿行于人行道、道路和海洋之下。

一直以来，物联网都在潜入旧技术，改变我们使用它们的方式。这些存在于地表下、遥远空间中的数字生态系统可能在一定程度上解释了为什么数字对环境日益增长的影响未能得到足够的重视。

有一些方法可以让人们发现更多负责任的科技选项。绿色和平组织2017年发布的一份指南对数字科技公司的绿色资质进行了评级。它评估了一系列公司，包括一些数字平台管理公司，还有数据中心托管公司。

尽管该指南很有用，但它也受限于缺乏透明度——因为企业没有义务共享数据中心需要或获得多少能源的信息。

建立大科技公司问责制

让数字生活更具可持续性的责任不应该仅由个人承担。政府应提供一个监管环境，要求数字公司就如何使用能源提高其透明度。建立企业问责制还应包括公布企业是否正在提升其各种行为的可持续性。

一个可以立即采取的措施是让生产数字设备的公司取消“计划报废”的惯常做法。举个例子，包括苹果和三星在内的公司生产的智能手机并非为经久耐用而设计。数字可持续性是描述数字技术如何影响环境世界的有效方法。

我们需要承认，技术提供了环境问题的解决方案，但同时也有可能对环境产生负面影响。只有这样，我们才能开始有效过渡到一个更可持续的数字未来。

（译者单位：江西科技学院）