By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Gaming Is Ruining The Environment?

 

How many hours do you use your consoles each week?

40+ hours 7 33.33%
 
30-40 hours 3 14.29%
 
20-30 hours 2 9.52%
 
10-20 hours 9 42.86%
 
Total:21
TomaTito on 02 March 2020

Largely ignored in that video, gotta love Nintendo for saving the world.

Console Consumption Watts
Nintendo Switch 10-18
PS4 Pro 75-160
PS4 Slim 55-110
PS4 90-150
Xbox One X 65-180
Xbox One S 35-90
Xbox One 70-120
Wii U 35
PS3 Slim 85
PS3 Original 190
Xbox 360 S 90
Xbox 360 Original 180
Wii 40

Source



@Twitter | Switch | Steam

You say tomato, I say tomato 

"¡Viva la Ñ!"
Around the Network
SvennoJ on 02 March 2020

Nintendo Switch also doesn't need a tv! Mobile gaming for the win, phones use even less! (But pollute a lot more with yearly updates)

Gaming laptops use less than consoles as well without requiring an extra screen.



DonFerrari on 02 March 2020

Nope it isn't, next.
Unless you change the title to "does games have environmental effects?" Because it is very far from ruining it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

sales2099 on 02 March 2020
konnichiwa said:
sales2099 said:
Lol it’s not. I’d worry more about limiting the worst offenders (India and China)


Really? If whole the world was so abusive against our planet like Canadians are we would all be living on ships =p


I don't get that attitude of blame other countries especially countries like India were 90% not even used an airplane in their life.




Rankings by per capita emissions /CO2 emissions (per capita)

1 Saudi Arabia 16.3T
2 Australia 16.2T
3 United States 15.0T
4 Canada 14.9T
5 South Korea 11.6T
6 Russian Federation 9.9T
7 Japan 9.0T
8 Germany 8.9T
9 Poland 7.7T
10 South Africa 7.4T
11 Islamic Republic of Iran 7.1T
12 China 6.4T
13 United Kingdom 5.6T
14 Italy 5.4T
15 France 4.5T
16 Turkey 4.2T
17 Mexico 3.6T
18 Brazil 2.0T
19 Indonesia 1.7T
20 India 1.6T



Anyway I guess buying digital helps a lot. 

Per capita isn’t as important as total population. Motorbikes and cars and manufacturing industry is the main causes...not airplane use. And nm China and their use of coal 
. I’m saying video games in western countries are a drop in the bucket compared to the big causes. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Conina on 02 March 2020
sales2099 said:

Per capita isn’t as important as total population.

Why? Per capita seems a lot fairer to me.



Around the Network
TomaTito on 02 March 2020
Shadow1980 said:
TomaTito said:

Largely ignored in that video, gotta love Nintendo for saving the world.

I thought I remembered consoles specifically not using a lot of electricity. Your old incandescent light bulbs typically use around 40-100 watts, so even an Xbox One X at peak power consumption only uses as much electricity as two or three old-style light bulbs. Even if you averaged, say, 6 hours of play time per day, that's still a very small portion of the typical household's total power consumption.

Save the world, one light bulb at a time

SvennoJ said:
Nintendo Switch also doesn't need a tv! Mobile gaming for the win, phones use even less! (But pollute a lot more with yearly updates)

Gaming laptops use less than consoles as well without requiring an extra screen.

I agree wholeheartedly, mobile gaming for the win

Last edited by TomaTito - on 02 March 2020

@Twitter | Switch | Steam

You say tomato, I say tomato 

"¡Viva la Ñ!"
DonFerrari on 02 March 2020
Conina said:
sales2099 said:

Per capita isn’t as important as total population.

Why? Per capita seems a lot fairer to me.

Depends on analysis. If we have a 1.2B country with 1B people living in extreme poverty in the rural area then they will drop the average a lot. But since all comparisons tend to be average to population then this one also being per capita is ok.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

sales2099 on 02 March 2020
Conina said:
sales2099 said:

Per capita isn’t as important as total population.

Why? Per capita seems a lot fairer to me.

Who said this had to be fair? Total pollution per country is ultimately a far more accurate number then per capita. 

Like Canada is only about 35 million, even if the country is horrible per capita, it’s ultimately a drop in the global bucket 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Pemalite on 02 March 2020
Conina said:
sales2099 said:

Per capita isn’t as important as total population.

Why? Per capita seems a lot fairer to me.

Whilst per capita might seem "fairer" the real denominator we should be adhering to is absolute totals, the environment doesn't care about per-capita totals afterall.

In that regard, China is the biggest offender, whilst the likes of Europe are going extremely clean.
However the flip side is... China has the most green energy and is investing the most while still having an insatiable appetite for coal.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

SvennoJ on 02 March 2020
Pemalite said:
Conina said:

Why? Per capita seems a lot fairer to me.

Whilst per capita might seem "fairer" the real denominator we should be adhering to is absolute totals, the environment doesn't care about per-capita totals afterall.

In that regard, China is the biggest offender, whilst the likes of Europe are going extremely clean.
However the flip side is... China has the most green energy and is investing the most while still having an insatiable appetite for coal.

China is also making all our toys and clothes and recycling our waste...

Per capita is indeed not fair, the actual CO2 footprint of the average Chinese is much lower, while those in Europe and NA are much higher.