Are "Vagabond" Influencers Climate Heroes?
- Savannah & Kadin Jones
- Dec 15, 2021
- 4 min read
Updated: Mar 16, 2022
We've all seen the trend in recent years where individuals, couples, or friends build a tiny house, live in a van, or travel by sailboat and then vlog about their experiences on YouTube. I personally love it and I've followed quite a few channels where the creators explore the world and share what they see and how they live. This platform allows us nine-to-fivers to peer into a life that for so long seemed incomprehensible and it gives us a vague idea as how to replicate their success.
It would seem that these creators have cracked the code to life. Some how they are magically able to take fancy drinks and sunsets and turn them into an income source to continue their adventure. However, as any honest YouTuber would readily admit it takes a ton of work to capture and edit the footage. Yes, I agree that it still sounds like a ton of fun but I won't be disillusioned. These creators have to carry camera equipment every where with them and be constantly aware of recording worthwhile content. In addition, there is a substantial amount of time that goes into even simple video work. The higher the quality of the channel, the hours spent in front of a computer editing the video increases exponentially. Furthermore, I am not going to discuss the trade-off of giving up privacy and letting trolls and constant criticism into your life for one's newfound dream career.
My point is... these individuals work just like the rest of us to continue living in relatively First World conditions. (If you have running water, your own transportation, use a toilet, eat varied meals, and have a laptop and internet you're living First World) Whether their job is better than ours is up for debate.
Here is the crux of the truth. I can't think of a job anywhere that has a zero-carbon footprint. If you are participating in the economy (i.e. receiving money for doing something) then at some point there is energy or resources being spent. This brings me to my next point. I readily agree that YouTubers should benefit from the fruits of their labor but there does need to be a little bit more sobriety on the behalf of a small subset of these creators.
With little effort, it does not take long to find a channel where a creator will frequently preach from their pulpit about sustainability or low-impact living. They often spout the choices they themselves have made to protect the environment. Some evangelize veganism, others use solar panels, while yet more endorse the product of a company that has a "green" business model. They all have good arguments but they are all missing the monster in the room... YouTube.
It hit me as I was watching a video when the host who lives out of her van mentioned several times the buzz word sustainability. At first glance, you might self-reflect and think "What kind of inconsiderate and selfish person am I to continue living this large carbon footprint middle-class lifestyle? If only I make the same choices as this person I could have an enjoyable life and leave a better world to the next generation." This is when I decided to do a little research and math.
At standard video quality, a YouTube video will consume the energy of one AA battery per minute. "How?" you may ask. Well... keeping those servers, laptops, and phones running isn't carbon free. This is when your heart sinks in your chest because as you guessed it were going to see what this all adds up to.
Ten minutes seems to be a popular video length for many of these channels. Now the popularity of these channels varies wildly but if we were to take a fairly popular channel that has 100k views per video we can turn out some quick figures.
One AA battery provides about 3.6 watts of energy. By using that number we can assume that one individual watching a 10 minute video consumes 36 watts of energy. "Not a big deal so far," you may say "My light bulb consumes that in an hour." Ok, but lets multiply that by the number of views. 36 watts multiplied by 100k views is 3,600,000 watts or 3,600 kWh.
Now we need to put this all in perspective. A conservative estimate of the average annual household kWh usage is 10,000 kWh. This means that just three videos from this YouTube creator uses more energy than the average home in the U.S. uses in 1 year. If they publish one video a week, in a year they would consume the amount of power that would be used by a neighborhood of 17 homes annually.
The tree hugging devil's advocate might say, "Yes, but if their videos weren't produced, those computers and servers would still be on and probably would be playing someone else's videos." Correct, but the environmentally conscious creator wouldn't then be monetizing the energy hungry system that is YouTube. Influencers make money by trying to monopolize not just your attention but inadvertently the energy market that makes the internet possible. You can't profit and at the same time ethically claim impeccability. In fact, if you think of the meager payouts from YouTube this may be one of the more energy intensive careers per earnings.
The truth is we all love YouTube and it isn't going away but to pretend that by moving in your van, eating vegan, and living off-grid while vloging about your environmentally ideal lifestyle is going to save the earth you're fooling yourself. I do agree that there is value to promoting a more green lifestyle but it just goes to show how complicated our energy consumption problem is as a species. Using less carbon is a problem that needs to be addressed on a governmental and industrial scale. I don't believe that the world's carbon rich appetite can be solved by stroking our own egos.
Energy use statistics can be found via:
YouTube channel MinuteEarth
U.S. Energy Information Administration
Comments