Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Carbon footprint of movie distribution via the internet: a Swedish case study
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Environmental Strategies Research (fms).
KTH, School of Electrical Engineering (EES), Communication Networks.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4876-0223
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Environmental Strategies Research (fms). School of Computer Science and Communication (CSC), Centres, KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Centres, Centre for Sustainable Communications, CESC.
2015 (English)In: Journal of Cleaner Production, ISSN 0959-6526, E-ISSN 1879-1786, Vol. 87, 197-207 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Peer-to-peer (P2P) has been suggested as an energy-efficient means of movie distribution, indicating potential environmental benefits. An alternative option for the user would be to stream the movie from an internet protocol television (IPTV) solution. This paper presents an assessment of the carbon footprint of these two alternatives. When studying the environmental impacts of a product (goods or services), it is important to adopt a life cycle perspective in order to avoid moving the potential impacts from one part of the life cycle to another. Therefore the carbon footprint was assessed with a screening life cycle assessment (LCA). The results show that end-use equipment and distribution (in both P2P and IPTV systems) are clearly key aspects. Both manufacturing and use are important. In the use phase, the electricity for using the end-use devices and for distribution is the main contributor to the carbon footprint. For the distribution, another major contributor to the carbon footprint is the construction work involved in installing cables. Downlink/uplink bandwidth and movie size have a major influence on the environmental impact related to watching a movie by P2P, as the total time for which end-use devices need to be used is critical. Movie size determines the impact related to the distribution. In terms of the carbon footprint from the two systems, the P2P system has a higher impact, mainly caused by the end-use devices. Downlink uplink bandwidth and movie size determine the overall impact of the P2P system. The carbon footprint from P2P systems could be lowered either through higher uplink bandwidth or through decreased movie size.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 87, 197-207 p.
Keyword [en]
IPTV, Peer-to-peer, Carbon footprint, Greenhouse gas emissions, Screening LCA
National Category
Environmental Sciences Communication Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-159609DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.012ISI: 000347493700022Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84922476987OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-159609DiVA: diva2:787407
Funder
VINNOVA
Note

QC 20150210

Available from: 2015-02-10 Created: 2015-02-05 Last updated: 2017-12-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Dan, György

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hochschorner, ElisabethDan, GyörgyMoberg, Åsa
By organisation
Environmental Strategies Research (fms)Communication NetworksCentre for Sustainable Communications, CESC
In the same journal
Journal of Cleaner Production
Environmental SciencesCommunication Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 329 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf