Monday, April 29, 2019

How music listening effects the climate


In 1977 consumers were willing to pay roughly 4,83 percent of their average weekly salary for a vinyl album. In 2013, this number is down to roughly 1.22 percent of the equivalent salary for a digital album in 2013.

"Consumers now have unlimited access to almost all recorded music ever released via platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music, Youtube, Pandora and Amazon," Devine says.

While his colleague in Glasgow has concentrated on studying the economic costs, Devine has looked into the environmental cost of music consumption from the 1970s to today.

As downloading and streaming took over the music industry, the amount of plastics used by the US recording industry dropped dramatically.

"Intuitively you might think that less physical product means far lower carbon emissions. Unfortunately, this is not the case," Devine says.

Storing and processing music in the cloud depends on vast data centers that use a tremendous amount of resources and energy.


Devine has translated plastic productions and the electricity use to store and transmit digital audio files into greenhouse gas equivalents (GHGs). He has then compared the GHGs from recorded music in the US in 1977, 1988, 2000 and 2016.

The findings are clear. The GHGs caused by recorded music are much higher today than in the past. In 1977 the GHGs from, recorded music were 140 million kg.

By 2016, they were estimated to somewhere between 200 million kg and over 350 million kg.

"I am a bit surprised. The hidden environmental cost of music consumption is enormous," he says.