Scientist: CO2 Report Didn't Name Google

Harvard Physicist Says Newspaper "Had An Ax To Grind" In Reporting Search Giant's Impact On Carbon Footprint

(CNET)  A report in The Times of London on Sunday generated a firestorm of controversy when a Harvard physicist was identified as saying a typical Google Web search on a desktop computer generates about 7 grams of carbon dioxide, making two searches comparable to bringing a tea kettle to boil.

"A Google search has a definite environmental impact," Alex Wissner-Gross was quoted as telling the newspaper.

Problem is, Wissner-Gross tells TechNewsWorld, his study never singles out or even mentions Google.

"For some reason, in their story on the study, The Times had an ax to grind with Google," Wissner-Gross said. "Our work has nothing to do with Google. Our focus was exclusively on the Web overall, and we found that it takes on average about 20 milligrams of CO2 per second to visit a Web site."

So where did The Times get the kettle stat?

"I have no idea where they got those statistics," said Wissner-Gross, who acknowledged and defended making the statements about Google. "Everything online has a definite environmental impact. I think everybody can agree on that, including Google."

Google, which the newspaper described as "secretive about its energy consumption and carbon footprint," was swift to respond to the reported statistics in a blog late Sunday:


We thought it would be helpful to explain why this number is *many* times too high. Google is fast--a typical search returns results in less than 0.2 seconds. Queries vary in degree of difficulty, but for the average query, the servers it touches each work on it for just a few thousandths of a second. Together with other work performed before your search even starts (such as building the search index) this amounts to 0.0003 kWh of energy per search, or 1 kJ. For comparison, the average adult needs about 8000 kJ a day of energy from food, so a Google search uses just about the same amount of energy that your body burns in ten seconds.

As my report noted Sunday, Google has become a de facto leader in the effort to reduce energy consumption not only in IT but in the general population.


Google is a board member of a new coalition called the Climate Savers Computing Initiative, which aims to reduce computing power-consumption by half by 2010. And the search giant's Google.org philanthropy has made policy recommendations on how the U.S. could wean itself from coal and oil for electricity generation and nearly halve its gasoline consumption by 2030.

However, while Wissner-Gross criticized The Times for finding a "really easy way to sell papers," the physicist is riding a tsunami of press inquiries to highlight CO2stats.com, a site he manages to help educate people about energy efficiencies on the Internet.

[andy41298]

You don''''t think humans can change the climate? Funny, considering it has been done before. Mass deforestation has changed the climate in rainforests as well as the eastern American. The increase in CO2 we put out is slowly being absorbed by the oceans, but they are reaching their max capacity. And any increase in CO2 levels can have a drastic effect on the environment. Humans can play a massive role in the earth''''s environment. We currenly have the ability to blow the Earth up a few times over, and you say we can''''t change its climate.

Posted by mccarthy51 at 11:17 AM : Jan 14, 2009

First, what the hell is a rain forest? does it produce rain, it''s a freekin jungle. Second, deforestation changes the habitat not the climate. Third, if we launched all the nuclear weapons we had we might kill most human and animal life but we can''t destroy the planet and in time it would recover. We just might not be part of it. Man what flavor Al Gore koolade do you drink.

[Mccarthyaw]

The current concentration of Carbon Dioxide on the Earth is .03% Man''''s contribution is .00096%. The Earth is five billion years old, man has been around for about 100,000 years and industry has been around for about 150 years and you tree hugging pre-industrial loving, carbon dioxide is killing us all wackos actually believe that man is capable of changing the climate on this planet are either arrogant beyond comprehension or are just so simple minded that your combined intelligence couldn''''t generate enough power to light an oven bulb.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by andy41298 at 11:03 AM : Jan 14, 2009

You don''t think humans can change the climate? Funny, considering it has been done before. Mass deforestation has changed the climate in rainforests as well as the eastern American. The increase in CO2 we put out is slowly being absorbed by the oceans, but they are reaching their max capacity. And any increase in CO2 levels can have a drastic effect on the environment. Humans can play a massive role in the earth''s environment. We currenly have the ability to blow the Earth up a few times over, and you say we can''t change its climate.

[andy41298]

The current concentration of Carbon Dioxide on the Earth is .03% Man''s contribution is .00096%. The Earth is five billion years old, man has been around for about 100,000 years and industry has been around for about 150 years and you tree hugging pre-industrial loving, carbon dioxide is killing us all wackos actually believe that man is capable of changing the climate on this planet are either arrogant beyond comprehension or are just so simple minded that your combined intelligence couldn''t generate enough power to light an oven bulb.

The scientists don''t have to convine me about global warming. The permafrost and glaciers are melting right before our eyes at alarming rates and the data show that the melting speeded up significantly since the industrial revolution. Of course, there are scientists having some ax to grind who claim otherwise, but climatological studies leave little doubt.

[cbscrash072]

How many milligrams of CO2 do you produce breathing while looking at a web site? Besides I think Google''s computers are solar powered. The problem with this CO2 thing is it has turned into a craze. What are we going to do when Science and business get carried away stripping CO2 out of the atmosphere and they remove all of it?

[ubrew12]

"For some reason, in their story on the study, The Times had an ax to grind with Google," Wissner-Gross said. "Our work has nothing to do with Google."

I''m sorry... this is news??

[mnelsonix]

I like to use the google. I like to find my ranch on the maps.

[mnelsonix]

"For some reason, in their story on the study, The Times had an ax to grind with Google," Wissner-Gross said.

Alright, what''s the real story. Why is The Times picking a fight with The Google? The Google will win. Your Google will crush that obsolete The Times.

[Mccarthyaw]

Love these quotes...

%u201CI am a skeptic%u2026Global warming has become a new religion.%u201D - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
%u201CSince I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly%u2026.As a scientist I remain skeptical...The main basis of the claim that man%u2019s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.%u201D - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called %u201Camong the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.%u201D



Warming fears are the %u201Cworst scientific scandal in the history%u2026When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.%u201D - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by markavelli2 at 12:44 PM : Jan 13, 2009

How many quotes do you want from prominent scientists stating global warming is true? There probably is 100 of those to one of your quotes.

[legacyabq]

for coounter-spin:

the article only mentions the electricity used by the server time on the actual data query, @ .001 -.006 seconds.
What about the facilities, powerlines, fiberoptic stations, switches, university backbones, local ISP''s, your local home computer, your monitor, the lights in all these buildings involved in every hop btw. you and the web site, the people who commte to those facilities, etc. etc. etc.

If you want to calculate something, do it right

[ibzjem]

If you''''re talkng about reports done by James Hanson''''s NASA group or NOAA I would agree total junk science.

Posted by louiville2 at 01:43 PM : Jan 13, 2009

I don''t know. Were the produced/modified by the Bush Admin?

[toolmangler-2009]

If I am alive I will breathe out CO2, Does that count for any thing? how about we euthanize all those employed by the Times of London so the rest of us can justify using Google which is much more efficient in the first place. Just think of the CO2 debt we can erase.

[louiville2]

Posted by markavelli2 at 12:40 PM : Jan 13, 2009

Is that one of those distorted scientific reports done by the Bush Admin?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by ibzjem at 01:20 PM

If you''re talkng about reports done by James Hanson''s NASA group or NOAA I would agree total junk science.

[ibzjem]

Posted by markavelli2 at 12:40 PM : Jan 13, 2009

Is that one of those distorted scientific reports done by the Bush Admin?

[evian_ycnan]

This is a perfect example of the religion of environmentalism running amok.

Posted by trumpetstuff at 11:49 AM : Jan 13, 2009

As the religious wingnuts constantly say to us atheists, "If we Christians are wrong, then we have led a good life** and we will spend eternity in exactly the same place as you, but if we''re right..."

So too with disbelieving the religion of Climate Change... Okay so if we''re (Greens) are wrong, we will have advanced technology for saving the atmosphere... But if you''re wrong we all get to test the Christian Theory...


**Good life -- imposing their will on others...

[markavelli2]

a couple more...

%u201CThe IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn%u2019t listen to others. It doesn%u2019t have open minds%u2026 I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.%u201D - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.



%u201CSo far, real measurements give no ground for concern about a catastrophic future warming.%u201D - Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.

[markavelli2]

Love these quotes...

%u201CI am a skeptic%u2026Global warming has become a new religion.%u201D - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
%u201CSince I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly%u2026.As a scientist I remain skeptical...The main basis of the claim that man%u2019s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.%u201D - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called %u201Camong the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.%u201D



Warming fears are the %u201Cworst scientific scandal in the history%u2026When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.%u201D - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

[markavelli2]

All this fuss over CO2 is premature. Until there is a consensus that co2 is the problem this whole obsession with Carbon Dioxide is pointless. Unfortunately the green-necks have made up their minds despite the huge and growing movement of scientists who now dispute the IPCC''s findings that global warming is man made.


Here''s a government link, best look at it before Obama''s enviro-nutt job staff takes it down....

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2674e64f-802a-23ad-490b-bd9faf4dcdb7

[iocor]

I tried to calculate the CO2 generated by printing 700,000 copies of the Times-harvesting the trees, making the ink and paper, running the presses etc.
My calculator started generating so much CO2 that I had to stop! It''s obviously a case of resenting a new technology replacing their old one.

[trumpetstuff]

This is a perfect example of the religion of environmentalism running amok.