Thread by @AlexRothMusic

This highlights an issue that really concerns me: the lack of ecologically sound ways to release music that work for both artists and listeners. Here's a thread compiling some thoughts & other articles about the music industry’s environmental impact.

amp.theguardian.com/music/2020/jan…

First, some context: this @Forbes article charts the industry’s progression through the eras of vinyl, tape, CDs and downloads to our current era of streaming.

forbes.com/sites/billrose…

Interestingly, the download era, which saw a huge drop in the use of plastics, was also the shortest-lived. Why? Because it generated the lowest industry revenue. Major labels fought to stem the disruption of the CD era - by far the most lucrative in history.

Widespread adoption of subscription-based streaming models has put the industry’s revenues back on track, but at what environmental cost? Here's what a lot of people don't seem to realise:

To quote @kyledevinephd's piece, "digital media is physical media too". Although digital audio files seem virtual, they rely on data storage & transmission infrastructures that have potentially higher carbon footprints than LPs/CDs – streaming burns coal, uranium & gas too.

This earlier @RollingStone piece explores some of Devine's research on streaming & makes some important points re its environmental impact:

rollingstone.com/music/music-fe…

Key figures quoted therein: music consumption in the 00s resulted in the emission of ~157m kgs of greenhouse gas equivalents; now the energy needed to transmit music for streaming is estimated to result in 200-350m kgs GHGs. Why is this?

Because the data centres housing and transmitting the audio files are hugely energy-intensive. They're responsible for about 2% of the world’s GHG emissions i.e. as much as the airline industry.

This @WiredUK article actually puts that figure at 2-4% and says it’s likely to rise above 10% in the next 5 years.

wired.co.uk/article/micros…

And according to this @BBC report, the IT sector is on course to consume as much as 20% of the world's electricity by 2030.

bbc.com/news/technolog…

Meanwhile, @dataeconomy reports that could even happen by 2025:

data-economy.com/data-centres-w…

To illustrate the issue: the 5 billion downloads & streams clocked up by "Despacito" consumed as much electricity as Chad, Guinea-Bissau, Somalia, Sierra Leone and the Central African Republic combined in a year.

Amazon, Apple & Google all claim their data centres run on 100% renewable energy but, while they may be buying the amount of energy they need from green suppliers, they still draw power from the same grid as everyone else. Bottom line: the same amount of coal is being burned.

That said, those 3 companies are doing better than Spotify, as you can see from this report by @Greenpeace, whose #ClickClean initiative is a useful tool for checking tech companies' green credentials.
clickclean.org/usa/en/

But if streaming is a problem, Devine’s Guardian article shows that reverting to older formats like vinyl isn’t the answer. Even aside from the malpractices of major vinyl manufacturers like TPC and Keysor-Century, vinyl is not a sustainable option. Here's why...

According to this @ConversationUK piece, the 4.1m records sold in the UK in 2018 produced 1,900 tonnes of CO₂ – not taking transport & packaging into account. That is equivalent to the entire annual carbon footprint of ~400 people.

theconversation.com/the-environmen…

So what should we do?

The most important thing, I think, is to put pressure on governments to force tech companies to use 100% clean renewable energy. Next...

Musicians (especially those on major labels who shift more units and set industry standards) could consider moving away from vinyl releases and looking for other, greener, ways to sell their music. I'd love to hear about any 🌍-friendly alternative formats out there...

Listeners: consider how many times you listen to a record.
Streaming 27x uses more energy than it takes to produce & manufacture the same record, so for repeated plays it makes sense to download the files or buy a physical copy if you can afford to...

Below the 27-streams threshold, download music for offline listening where possible - this keeps the data closer and reduces the need for streaming from remote servers.

Some final thoughts:

All of this really highlights wider issues around consumerism in a general sense. Devine again: “The amount that people are streaming and downloading is increasing at such a rate that they may outweigh any gains in the efficiency of the system.”

We’re all acting within an ecosystem dominated by corporations and the consumer expectations they help foster. These forces have created a feedback loop that is spiralling out of control, leaving individuals feeling powerless to enact change.

I don't have all the answers (I'm a musician after all, not a cultural theorist) but it feels important to talk about how our industry fits in to the bigger picture and to seek alternatives to unsustainable practices.

[THE END]

@threadreaderapp unroll please