Before presenting the results of our review of studies on ICT use and energy consumption (chapter 3 and 4), we will start with introducing an overall framework for understanding the different types of
energy-implications of ICT usage.
2.1 Conceptualising the relations between ICT and energy consumption
In the literature on broader environmental impacts of ICT, it is common to distinguish between first-, second- and third-order effects (Hilty 2008; OECD 2010): First-order effects are defined as the direct impact of ICTs on the environment. These are the impacts related to the physical existence of ICT. These effects are in general negative as they are related to the environmental impacts of production, use, recycling and
disposal of ICT hardware (Hilty 2008). In this way, first-order effects relate to classical Life-Cycle
Assessment (LCA) studies, and different types of ICT devices will typically have different first-order effects depending on how they are produced, their energy efficiency during the use phase and how they are
disposed.
Second-order effects are defined as the “indirect environmental effects of ICT due to its power to change processes (such as production, transport or consumption processes), resulting in a decrease or increase of the environmental impacts of these processes” (Hilty 2008: 16). Much literature has focused on the potential positive environmental impacts of the application of ICT – for instance studies of replacing traditional physical music media (CDs) with digital, online music purchase and streaming (Weber et al. 2010) or studies of online news reading or e-books replacing traditional paper media like physical books, newspapers or magazines (e.g. Achachlouei et al. 2013, Moberg 2010). Digitalising previous consumer goods is often described as a result of the potential of ICT for dematerialising consumption. For the same reason, these (positive) effects of ICT usage are also termed the “enabling impacts of ICTs” by OECD (2010). However, second-order effects might also be negative, e.g. in cases where the integration of ICT involves new practices with higher resource consumption. A classical example of this is the use of printers at offices and in homes, which have resulted in an increase in the overall paper consumption for printing. OECD (2010) identifies four ways in which ICT products can affect the environmental footprint of other products and activities:
Optimisation (use ICT to reduce the environmental impact of another product); dematerialisation and substitution (replacing physical products/processes by digital products/processes); induction (ICT products that help to increase demand for other products; e.g. increased demand for paper due to printers; and degradation (problems for local waste management due to the embedding of ICT-devices in non-ICT products).
8
Third-order effects relate to the “environmental effects of the medium- or long-term adaptation of behaviour (e.g. consumption patterns) and economic structures to the availability of ICT and the services it provides”
(Hilty 2010: 16). In practice, it can be difficult to distinguish clearly between second- and third-order effects, but while second-order effects focus particularly at the level of specific consumption activities (and how the integration of ICT into these have implications for the environmental impact of these activities), the third-order effects focus on the more general and systemic implications of ICTs on the environmental impact of behaviour (practices) and the economy. Examples of third-order effects include (from OECD 2010): ICT used for smart grid solutions aimed at reducing the overall energy consumption or integrating renewable energy sources (feedback to households about energy consumption patterns, demand-side management etc.);
environmental impacts of overall changes in economy and consumption patterns; rebound effects related to higher efficiency; etc.
The following table summarizes the main characteristics of first-, second- and third-order effects of ICTs. It also identifies effects related to households and outside households, although this distinction is primarily applicable for the first-order and (to some degree) the second-order effect, while the distinction between the household as a local unit of order and the “surrounding” socio-technical systems and institutions (which the household is part of) is rather problematic when it comes to the systemic impacts (third-order effects). Also, as indicated by the broken lines, the distinction between second- and third-order effects is in many cases open for interpretation.
9 instead of on paper increase in electricity cons. for ICT devices; centres – and also other types of energy consumption related to
(No clear distinction between energy implications in/outside households at the systemic level)
The practice theoretical perspective, which focuses on practices as collective entities of doings and sayings, does not fit easily with the typology of first-, second- and third-order effects. By placing practices in the centre of the analysis, this perspective cuts across the distinction between the levels of the product, activity and system. In a sense, social practices is most closely associated with the activity level perspective (second-order effects), as activities and routines are important parts of the performance of practices. However, practices also involve the use of material objects (the product level) as well as are related to the production and reproduction of overall socio-technical structures (the third-order level).
The classical and widespread distinction between direct and indirect energy consumption is in general problematic. For instance, it might be obvious that the electricity consumption for ICT devices (e.g. a smart phone) is a direct electricity consumption, but what about the electricity consumption of the data processing at the data centres that is related to the use of these devices for, e.g., streaming a movie? In a sense, this is also “direct” electricity consumption, as it is a direct outcome of your use of the device. On the other hand, this type of consumption may take place at different locations at the same time.
Thus, the distinction between direct and indirect energy consumption seems not fruitful and constructive when it comes to this kind of complex relationships between activities/uses, technologies and infrastructures.
Instead, a more relevant distinction might be between energy consumption at the household level (for ICT in
10
the form of electricity consumption for ICT devices) versus the other types of energy consumption taking place outside the household domain (related to the ICT infrastructure, the provision of internet services, overall systemic changes etc.).
In addition to the general concepts above, we will also use the following (and more specific) terms for different types of energy consumption related to the use of ICT:
Direct electricity consumption: The electricity consumption directly related to the use of ICT devices (e.g. for PCs/laptops, charging batteries of mobile phones or other gadgets, etc.). Much of this electricity consumption happens within the home (and thus contributes to the residential electricity consumption) – but as many ICT devices are portable (e.g. laptops, tablets and mobile/smart phones), some of the direct electricity consumption will also happen outside the home. This concept is related to the first-order effects.
Embodied energy consumption: Is the energy consumption related to all other life-cycle phases of ICT products; i.e. to the production of ICT devices (including energy consumption for extraction and
manufacturing of raw materials/metals) and for the disposal and waste handling phase. This concept is also related to the first-order effects.
Internet-related energy consumption: Is the energy consumption related to the provision of internet-based services accessed by ICT devices (e.g. video streaming, social media, e-mail etc.). This includes the energy consumption for internet data traffic (the infrastructure for transmission of data between users and data centres etc.) and for storing and processing data at data centres. This might (in some studies) also include the energy consumption related to access networks (providing the access to the internet; e.g.
local area network (LAN) that the user is connected to at home or mobile broadband connections.
Internet-related energy consumption is related to the second-order effects.
The following chapter will present a literature review of studies on energy consumption related to the use of ICT.
11