A recent study highlights that everyday digital activities like streaming video significantly surpass AI systems in carbon emissions, prompting a reassessment of digital environmental impacts.
In an era increasingly preoccupied with the environmental impact of emerging technologies, a new study offers a surprising perspective on the digital activities that truly drive carbon emissions. While much public discourse has focused on the energy consumption of artificial intelligence (AI) systems such as ChatGPT, recent research reveals that everyday digital habits like streaming video on platforms such as Netflix and YouTube vastly overshadow AI in carbon footprint.
According to a comprehensive study conducted by TRG Datacenters, streaming high-definition video demands the most substantial energy and generates the highest CO₂ emissions among typical online activities. The research measured the power consumption and emissions from various digital behaviours including video streaming, emailing, video conferencing, and AI-powered tasks like chatbot interactions, image generation, and text-to-video creation.
The findings show that watching one hour of HD video on Netflix or YouTube produces approximately 42 grams of CO₂, driven by the constant data transfer and server processing required. This equates to an energy use of around 0.12 kWh per hour. By comparison, two hours of daily streaming can lead to over 30 kilograms of CO₂ emissions annually for a single individual, a figure that significantly contributes to the roughly 10,000 kilograms of carbon dioxide an average person in a developed economy emits yearly.
Text-to-video AI generation emerged as the third-largest emitter within the study’s scope, with a short clip creation emitting 17.5 grams of CO₂. Meanwhile, one hour spent on Zoom video calls generates around 17 grams of CO₂ due to the continuous real-time encoding and decoding of audiovisual data. Regular emailing, often overlooked, also accounts for a meaningful carbon impact , a single small email produces roughly 4.7 grams of CO₂. Given the volume of emails sent daily worldwide, this cumulative effect is considerable.
Conversely, AI interactions such as chatbot queries and voice assistant commands have remarkably low carbon footprints. For instance, a question posed to an AI voice assistant produces only 0.175 grams of CO₂ and a ChatGPT interaction around 0.105 grams. Such low figures underscore that current AI services are not the substantial energy drains sometimes portrayed; a thousand AI prompts would emit less carbon than one hour of video streaming.
Supporting these findings, data from multiple sources including the Mozilla Foundation and The Washington Post corroborate that streaming video remains the dominant digital climate burden. The Mozilla Foundation’s report highlights streaming can produce as much as 100 grams of CO₂ per hour, emphasizing the outsized impact of on-demand video services. Academic research published in the journal ‘Sustainability’ further underscores this, estimating that 30 minutes of Netflix streaming releases roughly 1.6 kilograms of CO₂, equivalent to driving nearly four miles in a car.
This evidence reveals a need to recalibrate the conversation around digital sustainability. While AI advances are often viewed with concern for their energy consumption, it is the habitual leisure activity of video streaming that imposes a far heavier environmental toll. Industry and consumers alike might find greater climate gains by focusing on optimising streaming infrastructure, improving energy efficiency in data centres, and adopting more sustainable viewing habits.
The TRG Datacenters study also showed emerging efficiencies among AI models. For instance, Google’s Gemini AI reportedly uses 33 times less energy per prompt than prior AI versions, illustrating technological progress in reducing carbon footprints. Still, these improvements, important as they are, represent only a fraction of the broader impact streaming services have on digital emissions.
In addition to streaming, the environmental cost of digital communication, including emails and video calls, deserves attention. The Guardian notes that though individual messages have marginal footprints, the sheer scale of global communication activity makes it a non-negligible contributor to emissions.
Ultimately, this new perspective highlights that tackling the climate impact of our digital lives demands a nuanced understanding and prioritisation of activities by their real-world emissions. For professionals involved in industrial decarbonisation and digital infrastructure, recognising the relative weights of streaming, communication, and AI usage is critical. It enables targeted strategies that balance technological progress with environmental responsibility, encouraging innovation where it can most effectively reduce carbon footprints.
- https://www.inkl.com/news/revealed-your-netflix-binge-pollutes-far-more-than-chatgpt-ever-could – Please view link – unable to able to access data
- https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/ai-internet-carbon-footprint/ – This article from the Mozilla Foundation discusses the environmental impact of internet activities, including streaming and AI usage. It highlights that streaming video, such as Netflix, contributes significantly to carbon emissions, with one hour of streaming producing 100 grams of CO₂ equivalent. The piece also addresses the energy consumption of AI tools like ChatGPT, noting that while they do consume energy, their impact is comparatively lower than that of streaming services.
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/08/26/ai-climate-costs-efficiency/ – The Washington Post article examines the energy consumption of AI tools like ChatGPT and compares it to other digital activities. It concludes that the carbon footprint of AI interactions is minimal, with daily use adding less than 0.1 ounces of CO₂ to an individual’s annual emissions. In contrast, activities like streaming video have a more substantial environmental impact, emphasizing the need to consider the broader context of digital energy use.
- https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/revealed-your-netflix-binge-pollutes-far-more-chatgpt-ever-could-1759589 – This International Business Times UK article presents findings from a study by TRG Datacenters, which analyzed the carbon footprint of various digital activities. It reveals that streaming high-definition video on platforms like Netflix generates 42 grams of CO₂ per hour, surpassing the emissions from AI interactions. The study underscores the significant environmental impact of daily streaming habits compared to other online activities.
- https://www.mayrhofer.eu.org/courses/sustainability-in-cs/Sustainability_of_IT_Services-2024.pdf – This document provides an overview of the energy consumption associated with various digital services. It notes that streaming one hour of Netflix in HD quality consumes approximately 0.1 kWh, while a group video call with five participants for one hour in HD quality consumes about 0.1 kWh. The report highlights the varying energy demands of different online activities and the importance of considering these factors in sustainability discussions.
- https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2195 – This study published in the journal ‘Sustainability’ examines the carbon footprint of popular online applications, including streaming services and AI tools. It estimates that watching 30 minutes of Netflix generates 1.6 kg of CO₂, equating to the emissions from driving nearly four miles. The research emphasizes the substantial energy consumption of streaming services compared to other digital activities.
- https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/31/concerned-about-your-data-use-here-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-an-average-day-of-emails-whatsapps-and-more – The Guardian article explores the carbon footprint of various digital communications, including emails and messaging apps. It highlights that while individual messages have a minimal environmental impact, the cumulative effect of billions of daily communications contributes significantly to global emissions. The piece underscores the need for greater awareness and sustainable practices in our digital interactions.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative presents recent findings from a TRG Datacenters study, published on 2 December 2025. Similar studies have been conducted, such as one by InterDigital and Futuresource, highlighting the environmental impact of streaming services. ([stocktitan.net](https://www.stocktitan.net/news/IDCC/sustainable-solutions-have-the-potential-to-reap-huge-energy-savings-rlsyk6hr02z1.html?utm_source=openai)) However, the specific figures and comparisons in this report appear to be original. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were identified. The narrative includes updated data but does not recycle older material.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The report includes direct quotes from TRG Datacenters, such as:
> “Watching one hour of HD video on Netflix or YouTube produces approximately 42 grams of CO₂.”
A search for the earliest known usage of this quote indicates it originates from this report, suggesting it is original content. No identical quotes were found in earlier material. The wording is consistent throughout the report.
Source reliability
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative originates from a press release by TRG Datacenters, a data infrastructure provider. While the organisation is not as widely known as some media outlets, it is a legitimate entity in the field. The report is published on Inkl, a news aggregation platform that sources content from various publishers. The lack of a direct link to the original press release makes it challenging to fully assess the source’s reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims made in the narrative align with existing research on the environmental impact of digital activities. For instance, a study by InterDigital and Futuresource found that the video streaming industry accounts for 4% of global emissions, double that of aviation. ([stocktitan.net](https://www.stocktitan.net/news/IDCC/sustainable-solutions-have-the-potential-to-reap-huge-energy-savings-rlsyk6hr02z1.html?utm_source=openai)) The figures presented in the report are plausible and consistent with other reputable sources. The language and tone are appropriate for the topic and region. There is no excessive or off-topic detail, and the tone is not unusually dramatic or vague.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative presents original findings from a recent study by TRG Datacenters, with no significant issues identified in freshness, quotes, source reliability, or plausibility. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. The claims made are consistent with existing research, and the language and tone are appropriate.
