Category: Applications sobriety

Reading Time: 11 minutes

Previously, we provided a ranking of mobile video games :

• https://greenspector.com/en/2019-mobile-video-games-ranking-12-apps-measured/
• https://greenspector.com/en/best-2019-android-apps-and-games-ranking-by-greenspector/

Since the most recent update (beginning of 2020), downloads and revenues have significantly surged. Today, mobile games account for most of the digital gaming revenue (source: https://www.statista.com/topics/1680/gaming/#topicOverview ), notably experiencing unprecedented increases during the pandemic (source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/511639/global-mobile-game-app-revenue/ ) 

If we took at the most downloaded mobile games in 2022, we get the following ranking: 

Source : https://www.statista.com/statistics/1285134/top-downloaded-gaming-apps-worldwide/

App name	Package name	Version
Subway Surfers	com.kiloo.subwaysurf	3.16.1
Stumble Guys	com.kitkagames.fallbuddies	0.54
Roblox	com.roblox.client	2.589.593
Candy Crush Saga	com.king.candycrushsaga	1.259.0.1
Race Master 3D	com.easygames.race	4.0.4
8 Ball Pool	com.miniclip.eightballpool	5.13.3
FIFA Mobile	com.ea.gp.fifamobile	18.1.03
Merge Master - Dinoasaur game	com.fusee.MergeMaster	3.11.0
Garena Free Fire	com.dts.freefireth	1.100.1
Bridge Race	com.Garawell.BridgeRace	3.23

The first thing that stands out compared to the previous mobile games ranking is that three games reappear: Subway Surfers, Candy Crush Saga, and 8 Ball Pool. In terms of downloads, Subway Surfers remains in the first position of the ranking 

Looking at the APK deployments, we notice that the frequency of new APK versions varies widely: at most one every 15 days or so for Candy Crush Saga or Race Master 3D, and at least one per week for Roblox. These updates undoubtedly have an environmental impact. For the sake of simplicity, we will focus here on the impact of their usage, assuming the conditions of the initial game launch. The functional unit would thus be: “starting a game session for the first time on a mid-range Android mobile device using Wi-Fi. 

This will allow us to assess the environmental impacts of these games to compare them.

Methodology

Definition of the User Journey

For measurement, it was essential but challenging to define a common user journey for all the games. As mentioned earlier, the obvious choice for us was a journey starting with the launch of the application and then the start of a game session. However, things quickly became more complex. 

For most of the games studied, the initial launch involves several intermediate screens: 

• Gathering GDPR-related consent 
• Input of the player’s age 
• Gathering consent related to advertisements 
• Creating a profile or linking to an account on a third-party service (Google, Facebook, etc…) (It would be interesting to analyze the third-party services used in each game in more detail at a later stage) 
• Loading content updates 

If the first three items on the list are only filled out once, content updates can occur unexpectedly and independently of the APK update. 

Linking the games to a Google account made automating the Bridge Race game too complex compared to the time we had decided to allocate for this study. This led to the exclusion of the game from the sample studied here. We observed differences in behavior when linking the Google profile depending on the device used. In the future, we will consider conducting a complementary study that directly assesses the impacts of one minute of gameplay using Greenspector’s Testunner tool.

In the end, we still attempted to automate the following user journey for each game: 

Between these measured steps, some actions for consent validation or login that were not measured because they were absent in some applications. The significant number of elements to click on and intermediate screens during the initial launch of the FIFA Mobile game prevented us from reaching the actual gameplay launch. The measurements and calculations presented here are therefore below the actual values but have been retained to highlight other aspects. 

As part of this study, the data was collected between August 11th and August 16th, 2023, using Greenspector Studio. We utilized the Greenspector Domain-Specific Language (GDSL) to create test scripts that automatically replicate the actions to be performed on a mobile phone. The Testrunner module then enabled us to take measurements on an Android smartphone, providing us with energy and resource consumption (memory, CPU, data exchanged), and response times for each step of the user journey. 

Subsequently, based on these measurements, the impact model integrated into Greenspector Studio assessed the corresponding environmental impact and Eco-Scores. As a reminder, in the case of a user journey measurement, the overall Eco-Score is divided into three Eco-Scores: Performance, Mobile Data, and Energy. Each is rated on a scale from 0 to 100, with 100 being the best score. Each of these scores is derived from the ratings achieved for each measurement step, which depend on predefined thresholds. For instance, in the case of mobile data for loading steps: 

Hypotheses

During this evaluation, we started from the perspective of the initial application launch. This inherently represents a more impactful journey than subsequent uses but provides a better understanding of the game’s operation. It’s worth noting that during actual gameplay, there are often regular updates that can also have an impact. 

Measurement Context 

• Device: Samsung Galaxy S9, Android 10 
• Network Connection: Wi-Fi 
• Screen Brightness: 50% 
• Tests were conducted over at least 3 iterations to ensure result reliability. 

Hypotheses for Environmental Projections 

• User Location: 100% World
• Server Location: 100% World
• Devices Used: Smartphones only 

The environmental footprint depends on the location and type of application servers, user locations, and the type of devices they use. We have focused our study solely on the use of applications on smartphones. We have also assumed that users and servers are overwhelmingly located outside of France, as precise statistics were unavailable.

Résultats 

App name	APK size (Mo)	Data exchanged (MB)	Total battery discharge (mAh)
Subway Surfers	177,1	5,3	18,3
Stumble Guys	198	46,4	44,9
Roblox	160,8	17	15,4
Candy Crush Saga	92,2	12,1	22,3
Race Master 3D	182,6	33,2	17,1
8 Ball Pool	89,9	0	7,8
FIFA Mobile	180,4	161,5	34,3
Merge Master - Dinoasaur game	175	26,1	24,5
Garena Free Fire	400,8	5,7	19,8
Bridge Race	170,9

First and foremost, we observe that APK files for initial downloads are mostly between 160 and 200 MB, which is already quite substantial. Only Candy Crush Saga and 8 Ball Pool are below this range, at around 90 MB. For Free Fire, the file size goes up to 400 MB! 

The duration of usage is estimated to be a little over 20 minutes per day according to this study by Statista: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1272891/worldwide-game-apps-time-spent-daily-age/. The impact of installation and updates, assuming daily or near-daily usage, has therefore been excluded from the present study. However, it’s possible that for a game used sporadically over time, updates might have a more significant impact than actual usage. In such cases, there is a risk for the game publisher that users may lose interest in the game. While the APK update can be managed daily like other mobile applications, it’s the content update during the game launch that can become problematic. As we will discuss later, everything is designed to encourage daily play. 

Regarding the data transferred for the initial launch of the game, most games require a few additional megabytes. Only 8 Ball Pool does not require any data transfer. Conversely, FIFA Mobile, Stumble Guys, Race Master 3D, and Merge Master require downloading a few tens of megabytes. In particular, FIFA Mobile requires downloading over 160 MB, which includes updating the content based on sports news. This is seen as added value by the publisher but is considered a poor practice from a sustainability perspective. Initially, efforts should focus on how to reduce the technical size of the necessary information, and ideally, limit the refresh frequency and the comprehensiveness of the information. 

These substantial data transfers are often correlated with degraded performance. For instance, for Stumble Guys and FIFA Mobile, it sometimes takes 1 to 2 minutes for the screen that allows the game to appear to be launched. For half of the games, simply launching the application takes between 10 and 20 seconds, which is particularly long. In the case of Roblox, the title screen loads quickly, with content loading occurring after selecting a game (and generally taking quite a while). The longest launch time is for 8 Ball Pool, but for this game, no data is transferred, and the impact on the battery is relatively low (particularly due to the limited number of animations). This game ultimately has the best scores. In general, the scores obtained are as follows:

We can observe that 8 Ball Pool is the game with the best scores, mainly due to what we just discussed (few animations, no data transferred). In this regard, its operation during launch is closer to what I would tend to associate with “old-school” mobile games: offline and relatively simple games (though not as basic as Snake and similar games). It’s worth noting that once the onboarding process of 8 Ball Pool is completed, it reverts to a more typical operation, including online gameplay by default, which would need to be measured separately. 

In comparison, the other games have lower scores. Only Race Master 3D and Subway Surfers stand out somewhat. It appears that the games studied here have scores that are at best around the average, with very few exceptions. All of this may indicate concerns regarding efficiency or sustainability but is more likely attributed to the nature of these applications themselves: animation, data exchanges, and often a multitude of persuasive design mechanisms. We will revisit this later. 

As for the environmental impacts, the calculations lead to the following results: 

App name	GHG emissions in gCO2e	Water consumption in L	Land use in cm2
Subway Surfers	1,1	0,1	1,3
Stumble Guys	6,5	0,6	3,6
Roblox	2,5	0,2	1,6
Candy Crush Saga	1,9	0,2	1,6
Race Master 3D	4,4	0,4	1,9
8 Ball Pool	0,2	0	0,6
FIFA Mobile	20,1	1,6	6,1
Merge Master - Dinoasaur game	3,8	0,4	2,4
Garena Free Fire	1,1	0,1	1,3

The high impacts observed here are correlated with findings made previously, particularly significant data loads that lead to performance degradation and increased battery consumption on the device. Consequently, the games with the highest impacts are FIFA Mobile (far ahead of the others), as well as Stumble Guys and Merge Master. Unsurprisingly, 8 Ball Pool is also the least impactful game in this regard. 

Analyse 

The measurements conducted highlight certain design choices that directly contribute to increased environmental impacts. 

As mentioned earlier, the length of onboarding processes often highlights three interrelated concerns: the collection of personal data, advertising, and more broadly, the use of persuasive design mechanisms. As a reminder, these mechanisms are aimed at keeping the user engaged with the application for as long as possible and are present in many applications and websites. Ethical Designers, among others, have a keen interest in this matter. However, let’s delve into the case of the games studied here. 

The RGPD consent, as well as that related to advertisements (and sometimes age verification), aim to minimize the display of ads during the game. This, of course, serves as a source of revenue for game developers. The level of intrusiveness of advertisements can vary. Often, players are offered the option to watch video ads in exchange for rewards or to continue playing. Sometimes, it’s even possible to purchase the game to get rid of these ads. The vigilance and attention of players make them more susceptible to such suggestions, which is linked to persuasion mechanisms. 

In the field of design, particularly in terms of user interface and interaction design, the concept of “gamification” has been discussed for several years. This involves incorporating game elements to increase user engagement and make the experience more enjoyable. This shouldn’t be underestimated, as some games are very skilled at attracting and retaining players. Furthermore, by taking this approach further, it’s possible to encourage players to spend money. 

For example (among many others), let’s consider Candy Crush Saga. It would be possible to offer this game in a more limited form, focused solely on the gameplay itself: progressing through levels of varying difficulty with the objective of clearing candies or obstacles. The rules and challenges are simple and form the core of the game as such. However, various artificial elements have been added here: 

• Bright colors, visual effects, and sounds are used to enhance the impact of user actions. This is referred to as feedback. 

• Limited resources (lives, bonuses, etc.) are introduced to create the need and, more importantly, a sense of scarcity. Often, it’s possible to replenish these resources by watching videos or spending money (virtual or real). 
• Progress bars (level or otherwise), trophies, rewards, avatars, and scores are incorporated to encourage constant improvement and enable users to compare themselves with others. This leads us to another important element of gamification and attention capture: 
• Social connection: seeing what others are doing, comparing oneself with them, and allowing them to see what one is doing. Like social networks (often through a connection with them), this mechanism encourages more and better gameplay but also creates attachment to the game through connections with other players. This is accomplished through online gameplay or by connecting with social networks (for sharing achievements, finding players, etc.). 
• Randomness to create addiction (analogous to slot machines). Correlated with limited resources, this factor appears in the form of random rewards, sometimes in the form of loot boxes (https://medium.com/behavior-design/hooked-on-loot-boxes-how-design-gets-us-addicted-79c45faebc05 ). This is expected to increasingly lead to legal framework changes for regulatory purposes: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/european-parliament-votes-to-take-action-against-loot-boxes-gaming-addiction-gold-farming-and-more . 

All of this contributes to the player’s motivation, particularly through a subtle balance of their frustration between two states that the player consciously or unconsciously seeks to achieve: 

• Flow: The player’s state of concentration where objectives seamlessly follow one another. This is typically the period when time seems to fly by. Consequently, this can encourage the player to invest (time, virtual resources, real money) to maintain this state and avoid frustration. 
• Fiero: A state of satisfaction linked to overcoming a particularly formidable obstacle (in non-mobile video games, this is one of the basic mechanics in what is sometimes called “Souls-like” games: games that emphasize player mastery to offer a very high challenge). 

The game design often revolves around these two states, directly or indirectly (gradual increase in difficulty, rewards, etc.). This delicate balance will be crucial for the quality of a game and, more importantly, the gaming experience. For publishers, it also affects the time players spend on the game and the money they spend. This can sometimes lead to higher environmental impacts. 

Directly, it encourages players to spend as much time as possible on the game by utilizing online play and links with social networks, displaying advertisements, and designing interfaces that are rich in information and visual effects. 

Indirectly, it promotes consumption (spending money) but also overconsumption (wanting more and generating frustration). This leads to environmentally unfriendly behaviors that go against the principles of environmental sustainability. 

It’s worth noting that the video game industry is becoming increasingly aware of its environmental impacts. 

Polygon has shown interest in the topic: https://www.polygon.com/features/22914488/video-games-climate-change-carbon-footprint . 

This growing awareness often leads to actions as well as greenwashing efforts (example: https://www.ouest-france.fr/high-tech/jeux-video/ecologie-le-secteur-du-jeu-video-fait-il-du-greenwashing-355c56fc-0c3d-11ee-8e71-2cd44afe92ef?utm_source=pocket-newtab-bff [FR]). 

However, more and more relevant resources are emerging on the subject: https://playing4theplanet.org/resources. Some manufacturers are looking into the environmental impact of their hardware, while publishers are trying to assess their environmental footprint. The regular turnover of gaming machines and the release schedules of games themselves pose inherent environmental challenges. Online gaming and digitization do not necessarily make things better. In this regard, you can refer to the study by ADEME (French Agency for Ecological Transition) on the digitization of cultural services. Similar to what can be observed, for example, with websites, optimizations are possible (efficiency), but the real challenge lies in sustainability (in contrast to the extravagance of open-world games). There are also broader issues to consider:   

• How video games can encourage more eco-friendly behaviors: https://usbeketrica.com/fr/article/si-notre-smartphone-avait-une-conscience-est-ce-qu-on-le-remplacerait-aussi-facilement [FR] 

• How video games can implement systems that do not encourage excessive consumption (accumulation logic, power race, etc.) 
• How to strengthen our connection to nature? How to introduce game mechanics that go beyond accumulation and competition? How to portray possible (e.g., The Climate Trail ) or desirable futures? 

Conclusion 

Mobile games are an integral part of many people’s daily lives, making it even more essential to study their environmental impacts (although other aspects of Responsible Digital, such as the attention economy, accessibility, and personal data management, remain relevant). While technical optimizations are still possible, the crux of the issue lies in their design and the behaviors they induce (including the risk of addiction and financial risks for players). 

Video games, in general, could and should become a catalyst for raising awareness about ecological issues. Just as with accessibility, some initiatives have already begun, and it will be interesting to see how they evolve in response to the urgent challenges at hand. 

Reading Time: 8 minutes

With the emergence of transport apps in France, urban mobility has undergone a significant transformation in recent years. Indeed, these mobile applications are among the most downloaded and used by the French. Every major city has an app published by an urban transport company, offering practical, flexible solutions for getting around town. However, behind this ease of use and convenience lies an aspect that is often overlooked: the environmental impact of these applications.

These companies have understood that the development of mobile applications makes it possible to offer services to passengers (timetables, traffic information, transport maps, intermodality), but also to reduce costs by providing ticket sales and stamping services directly integrated into the application on our phones.

The aim of this study is to measure the environmental impact of transport applications in France’s 10 most populous cities, according to the Statista website:

• Bonjour RATP for the Paris region
• RTM in Marseille
• TCL in Lyon
• Tisséo for Toulouse
• Lignes d’azur in Nice
• TAN in Nantes
• TAM in Montpellier
• CTS in Strasbourg
• TBM in Bordeaux
• Ilevia in Lille

These applications differ in terms of user interface, but they all meet a set of essential user needs. We have therefore determined a common user path, enabling us to compare these applications in terms of carbon impact, energy consumption and data exchanged. Finally, in the second part, we analyze the causes of these results.

Reading Time: 8 minutes

Selection method of websites and applications

User path definition

Implementation of Greenspector’s solution

We used our innovative solution to measure the environmental impact of different stages of the user journey. We ran the automated tests several times on a real device, in this case the Samsung Galaxy Note 8. We measured resource consumption (energy, memory, data) and response times. This data then allowed us to obtain the environmental impact of applications and websites. We explain it all in detail in our methodology.

Ranking of the environmental footprint of the 10 most visited m-commerce sites in France

Projection of global carbon impacts over one month

In last year’s article we based ourselves on the figures presented in the ECN report. For this new study, we used the Fevad barometer enriched by Médiamétrie in order to be as close as possible to reality.

For this projection, we consider that the share of global e-commerce traffic is 55% on mobile, 39% on PC and 6% on tablet (source). We also used the ADEME tool to project the equivalences.

With an average of 16.15 million monthly users and an average visit time of 5 minutes and 50 seconds, these 10 e-commerce sites have an average projected impact of 172 tons of CO2e per month (29 tons on mobiles, 139 tons on PCs, 4 tons on tablets). This is the equivalent of 20 times the circumference of the Earth covered by a light vehicle.

Impact projection for the most and least sober website

Concerning the best website of this ranking (Leclerc) for 14.84 million visits / month with a duration of 3 minutes, the total carbon impact would be 58 tons of EqCO2 per month (9 tons on mobile, 47 tons on PC and 1 ton on tablet). This is the equivalent of 6 times the circumference of the Earth travelled in a light vehicle.
Concerning the worst website of this ranking (Amazon) for 38.29 million visits / month with a duration of 8 minutes, the carbon impact would be 690 tons of EqCO2 per month (121 tons on mobile, 553 tons on PC and 15 tons on tablet). This is equivalent to 79 times the circumference of the Earth travelled by light vehicle.

Ranking of the environmental footprint of the 10 most visited m-commerce applications in France

Review of the study

This year again we observe that the impact is almost three times greater between the most sober platform and the one with the highest impact.
To shop online, it is better to use applications than websites. Indeed, in the scenario studied, websites have on average 44% more impact. Only Leroy Merlin and Leclerc have a greater carbon impact on applications than on the web. We remind you that applications have an impact on their download and their updates. They are therefore to be preferred only in case of regular orders.

We would like to complete this assessment with an observation we made during our tests. Indeed, we observed that on some websites and applications the path could change or be altered. This is the case for Amazon which has implemented AB testing. This method allows the application and the website to vary the displays. For example, on the description of a product, the description can be different from one user to another.

In our case we encountered a phenomenon of change of path on the Amazon website. During a first test we were redirected directly to the shopping cart with the addition of the product to it. In a second test the next day we were no longer automatically redirected to the shopping cart page. Instead, we had to go to the shopping cart ourselves by clicking on the icon provided for this purpose.

Depending on the path, the site or application will consume more or less energy and exchange more or less data. AB testing is a feature used by many digital solutions in the world and we handle it in our path automation thanks to our GDSL language. In the case of our study we have of course taken care to base our measurements on a single path.

Results tables

Ranking of the 10 most visited websites in France

Sites web	url	Energy (mAh)	Exchanged Datas (Mo)	Impact carbone (gEqCO2)	Water Imprint (Litres)	Ground Imprint (cm2)	Scenario length (secondes)
Leclerc	e.leclerc	12,09	3,97	0,67	0,12	1,37	102,71
Leroy Merlin	leroymerlin.fr	14,85	4,19	0,79	0,14	1,67	123,27
Fnac	fnac.com	17,26	4,43	0,90	0,16	1,94	109,37
Cdiscount	https://cdiscount.com/	15,07	7,32	0,94	0,16	1,73	123,48
Carrefour	carrefour.fr	18,93	4,74	0,99	0,18	2,12	125,94
Aliexpress	https://fr.aliexpress.com/	18,35	6,75	1,05	0,18	2,08	128,71
Veepee	veepee.fr	17,00	14,27	1,32	0,20	2,03	118,11
Darty	https://www.darty.com/	22,19	9,98	1,35	0,23	2,54	117,84
Rakuten	https://fr.shopping.rakuten.com/	21,57	12,12	1,41	0,23	2,50	113,64
Amazon	amazon.fr	24,38	11,17	1,49	0,25	2,80	123,62

Ranking of the 10 most visited applications in France

Application	Version	Energy (mAh)	Data exchanged (Mo)	Impact carbone (gEqCO2)	Water Imprint (Litres)	Ground Imprint (cm2)	Length Scenario (secondes)
Carrefour	16.9.1	11,27	1,35	0,52	0,10	1,25	107,77
Darty	4.2.5	11,40	2,70	0,59	0,11	1,28	108,52
Veepee	5.43.1	9,87	5,70	0,65	0,11	1,15	102,25
Fnac	5.3.6	13,46	2,37	0,66	0,12	1,50	126,91
Cdiscount	1.62.0-twa	16,63	1,07	0,73	0,14	1,83	111,73
Leclerc	19.2.0	14,38	3,42	0,74	0,13	1,61	127,75
Rakuten	9.3.0	13,75	4,03	0,74	0,13	1,55	130,35
Leroy Merlin	8.11.2	13,30	8,85	0,93	0,15	1,56	119,27
Aliexpress	8.67.2	16,17	9,12	1,06	0,17	1,88	120,11
Amazon	24.6.0.100	21,59	14,29	1,51	0,24	2,53	130,15

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Since the creation of the geolocation feature for smartphones, dating applications have become very popular. Today, there are more than 8,000 of them in the world, including 2,000 in France. Nearly a third of French people use or have used a dating application. Moreover, users spend 55 minutes a day on them. 

Given these figures, we can wonder about the impact of these applications on the environment.

The dating applications we chose to measure 

Three criteria were used to choose the 10 applications we evaluated: popularity, free access, and availability on Android. Indeed, we chose to evaluate applications that are free to use because they are among the most used. Less than 3% of French people use paid applications.  

Regarding the evaluation, a common scenario was determined that is compatible with all applications, namely consulting profiles, liking or not liking the profile, and sending a message. This allows us to get as close as possible to the real use of the application.

Ranking of the environmental footprint of the 10 most used free dating applications in France

We note that the most impactful application (Lovoo) has an impact 5 times greater than that of the least impactful application (Bumble).   

The average carbon impact of these applications is 0.25 gEqCO2 for an average duration of 25 seconds. This is equivalent to driving 1 meter in a combustion engine car.

Projecting carbon impacts over one month

To project the impact of the applications in this ranking, we will use the following assumptions  

• 100% of users are in France   
• 100% of users are on mobile phones  

Various studies show that one-third of the French population (23 million individuals) used dating applications in 2022 with an average of 55 minutes spent on them.   

Projected over a month, the impact of these 10 dating apps is 9614 tons of CO2e. This is equivalent to driving around the Earth’s circumference 1102 times in a combustion engine car.   

For the highest-ranked application (Bumble), for an average of 55 minutes per day for a month, a user has an impact of 579 gEqCO2. This is equivalent to driving 2.7 kilometers in a combustion-engine car.   

For the lowest ranked application (Lovoo), for an average of 55 minutes per day for a month, a user has an impact of 2.7 kgEqCO2. This is equivalent to driving 12.4 kilometers in a combustion-engine car.

Greenspector experts focus on the soberest application: Bumble

Greenspector experts focus on the least sober application: Lovoo

Summary 

Between the soberest dating application and the least sober application, we note that the impact is 5 times more important.   

Note that the differences are mostly due to animations, the consequent loading of data (photos, videos…), and the management of the elements displayed on the screen. By applying good practices, it is possible to reduce the environmental impact of applications.   

As a user, we can reduce our impact by using only one dating application if we have several.   

And to go further in digital sobriety, it is always possible to meet people in real life!

Results table

Applications	Version	Energy (mAh)	Data exchanged (MB)	Carbon impact (gEqCO2)	Water Footprint (Litres)	Soil Footprint (cm²)	Scenario duration (seconds)
Lovoo	143.0	58,9	5,3	0,7	0,1	0,2	25,3
Grindr	9.2.0	44,5	3,3	0,4	0,0	0,2	21,0
Happn	26.31.2	36,6	0,9	0,2	0,0	0,1	30,7
Fruitz	3.6.2	41,4	0,9	0,2	0,0	0,1	27,6
Hinge	9.15.1	36,6	1,0	0,2	0,0	0,1	29,0
Adopte un mec	4.9.21	86,0	0,6	0,2	0,0	0,2	30,4
Badoo	5.306.0	37,2	1,5	0,2	0,0	0,1	23,6
OKCupid	74.1.0	42,1	1,5	0,2	0,0	0,1	20,2
Bumble	5.307.0	35,6	0,8	0,1	0,0	0,1	23,2
Tinder	14.2.0	55,2	0,6	0,1	0,0	0,1	21,4

 

Reading Time: 5 minutes

We have decided to proceed differently for this year’s ranking 2022. Unlike the 2021 edition, we have reduced the number of applications measured. We have both taken measurements on the phone and also on the PC to meet demand. It is the purpose of these new measures to compare how the solutions stack up in terms of environmental impact (Carbon) on different user scenarios but also on two platforms: PCs and phones.

We compared 10 apps: BlueJeans, Google Meet, Go To Meeting, JITSI, Skype, Teams, Webex, Whereby, Zoho Meetings et Zoom.

For our daily use of videoconferencing: 

In the study carried out in 2021, we indicated that videoconferencing is preferable to travelling by car. Indeed, this solution is less polluting, however, beware of rebound effects! Since the global pandemic, working from home has become widespread in many companies, but this practice encourages more people to live away from their workplaces. As a result, the environmental benefits of working from home can be offset depending on the pace of remote working and the means of transport used.

In addition, it is necessary to draw attention to the increase in energy consumption of the generated hearths. It is possible that this increase might compensate for the drop in energy needs on business premises, but this must be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Examples:

• Office vs Home Working: How we can save our carbon footprint.  
• Comment réduire son empreinte écologique au travail ? (French language)
• Le télétravail est-il vraiment meilleur pour l’environnement ? (French language)

Reading Time: 7 minutes

Introduction

Shopping cart abandonment accounts for $18 billion in lost sales every year. Mobile abandonment rates are higher (97%) than desktop abandonment rates (between 70 and 75%). The reasons are multiple: the price, the shipping costs, the speed of delivery, the discounts available, but also the loading time of the site (Source). M-commerce sites and applications, therefore, have every interest in demonstrating performance and digital sobriety.

What about the ten most visited e-commerce sites and applications in France? What are the most frugal sites and applications on which to do your e-shopping in complete sobriety?

Choice of sites and applications

Projection of carbon impacts over one month

Conclusion

Whether for the most visited websites or m-commerce applications in France, we see an impact almost three times greater between the soberest platform and the most impactful one.

It shows that by managing the information visible on the screen, the loading of images, the consumption of scripts and the data exchanged during the scenario differently, it is possible to reduce the environmental impact of a website and a mobile app.

As an e-shopper using his mobile, it is better to go through applications than websites. Indeed, websites have an average impact of 39% more on the scenario studied. Only AliExpress has a higher consumption on the app than on the website. However, applications have an effect on their download and updates. They are therefore to be preferred only in the event of regular orders.

In terms of digital sobriety, nothing will equal buying food products at the market and other products from local traders, of course!

Results

Ranking of the 10 most popular websites in France

Websites	URL	Energy consumption (mAh)	Exchanged Data (Mo)	Carbon Impact (gEqCO2)	Water footprint (Litres)	Surface footprint (cm²)	Scenario duration (seconds)
Leclerc	e.leclerc	11,57	2,59	0,61	0,10	1,29	102.72
Cdiscount	cdiscount.com	13,49	2,62	0,69	0,13	1,50	108.03
eBay	ebay.fr	14,00	3,96	0,78	0,14	1,58	122.24
Leroy Merlin	leroymerlin.fr	15,47	3,15	0,80	0,14	1,72	112.67
AliExpress	fr.aliexpress.com	14,84	3,89	0,80	0,13	1,67	114.46
ManoMano	manomano.fr	13,60	6,30	0,87	0,14	1,56	107.33
Fnac	fnac.com	16,88	4,20	0,90	0,15	1,90	118.37
Veepee	veepee.fr	14,50	8,19	1,00	0,16	1,68	114.95
Carrefour	carrefour.fr	20,25	4,14	1,04	0,19	2,25	118.8
Amazon	amazon.fr	19,04	18,06	1,68	0,24	2,29	123.84

Ranking of the 10 most popular apps in France

Applications	Version	Energy consumption (mAh)	Exchanged Data (Mo)	Carbon Impact (gEqCO2)	Water footprint (Litres)	Surface footprint (m²)	Scenario duration (seconds)
eBay	6.51.0.2	11,69	0,53	0,51	0,09	1,27	119,73
Carrefour	14.4.3	11,67	0,57	0,52	0,10	1,29	108,64
LeclercDrive	15.2.0	11,97	0,45	0,52	0,10	1,30	128,01
Leroy Merlin	7.12.3	12,95	0,51	0,55	0,11	1,41	115,84
Cdiscount	1.43.0-twa	13,81	0,04	0,58	0,11	1,49	115,44
Fnac	5.2.7	12,78	1,14	0,59	0,11	1,41	128,84
Veepee	5.24.2	12,17	2,32	0,63	0,11	1,35	114,47
ManoMano	1.15.2	15,48	0,26	0,65	0,12	1,69	124,59
AliExpress	8.44.0	17,55	2,33	0,84	0,17	1,94	123,71
Amazon Shopping	24.6.0.100	19,74	12,86	1,46	0,22	2,31	126,03

Reading Time: 4 minutes

The use of social networking-type mobile applications is increasing every year. Like the professional use of videoconferencing tools, these uses have put additional pressure on the network and the servers of these solutions.

How do the players take the environmental impact into account in their strategy? What are the impacts of our activities on social networks? What are the most/least impacting solutions for the environment, network congestion and the autonomy of our smartphones?

For this study, we chose to measure the news feed of the 10 most popular social media applications: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, TikTok, Twitch, Twitter, and Youtube. These applications are different in terms of functionality. We have chosen to compare them in terms of carbon impact, consumption of energy and data exchanged.

For each of its applications, measured on an S7 smartphone (Android 8), the scenario for scrolling the news feed was carried out through our Greenspector Test Runner, allowing manual tests to be carried out over 1 minute in one-to-one. Learn more about the methodology and How does Greenspector assess the environmental footprint of digital service use.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

We invite you to consult the 2022 edition. Read the article.

For this new 2021 edition of our ranking, we have completed our 2020 study with new solutions and even extended it to web solutions. The objective of these measures is to see how the solutions stand in terms of environmental impact (Carbon) with each other on common user scenarios but also to provide benchmarks on our uses of videoconferencing.

So this time we compared 19 mobile applications: Big Blue Button, BlueJeans, Circuit by Unify, Cisco Webex Meetings, ClickMeeting, Go To Meeting, Discord, Google Meet, Infomaniak kMeet, Jitsi, Pexip, Rainbow, Skype, StarLeaf, Microsoft Teams, Tixeo, WhereBy, Zoho Meeting et Zoom.

Reading Time: 7 minutes

Netflix, along with others like the BBC, has researched, with support from the University of Bristol, the impact of its service. The precise figures and the methodology will be published soon, but it appears that one hour of viewing Netflix is equivalent to 100 gEqCO2.

When the communication was released, several digital players took up this figure, but, in my opinion, not for good reasons. Communicating the impact of video through The Shift Project emerges as a systematic point of debate. As of March 2020, the Shift post had been widely disseminated in the media with a significant evaluation error. This error had been corrected in June 2020 but the damage was already done.

In this context, the IEA carried out a contradictory analysis on the subject. In the end, many studies on the impact of the video came out (IEA, the German Ministry of the Environment, ourselves with our study on the impact of playing a Canal + video). It is always difficult but not impossible to compare the figures (for example, whether or not the manufacturing stage is taken into account, the representativeness of the terminals, the different infrastructures, and optimizations between players, etc.), however, if we take things comparable, all studies have similar orders of magnitude. By taking the correction for the Shift Project error (Ratio 8 resulting from an error between Byte and Bit), the numbers are also close.

Reading Time: 8 minutes

The internet browser is the most important tool on a mobile device. It is the engine for browsing the internet. No longer just for websites but also now for new types of applications based on web technologies (progressive web app, games, etc.).

For this new edition of our ranking, carried out in 2018 and 2020, we have chosen to compare 16 mobile applications: Brave, DuckDuckGo, Chrome, Ecosia, Edge, Firefox, Firefox Focus, Firefox Nightly (formerly Firefox Preview), Kiwi, Mint, Opera, Opera Mini, Qwant, Samsung, Vivaldi et Yandex.

The objective of these measures is to see how the solutions stand in terms of environmental impact (Carbon) in relation to each other on common user scenarios but also to provide benchmarks on our uses of browsers.