SolidFish
Digital sustainability15 min readMay 5, 2020

The camel that broke the Internet's back

The cloud feels weightless. The infrastructure behind it is anything but.

L. PatrickSolidFish Journal
cloud storagedata centresdigital pollutionsustainability
Laptop and digital work illustrating the carbon cost of online activity.

The camel that broke the Internet's back

None of us could have predicted the extent to which 2020 will go down in history. The new decade has forced us to adjust to a life viewed through the lens of remote video and various online sharing platforms. Unquestionable convenience made possible by the advancements of the information and communication technology (ICT).

Among countless other benefits, ICT progress has allowed us to remain connected, entertained, and educated. It has also enabled remote working to become part of the new normal in our business life. But what is the price attached to the advantages of our digitalized culture?

Digital information can feel weightless, but the services behind it are not. Email, streaming, backups, cloud drives and online applications depend on physical networks, servers, storage devices, cooling and power. The environmental cost of any individual action varies enormously with the service, infrastructure, location and methodology used to measure it, so simple per-email or per-click figures should be treated as estimates rather than universal facts.

When this article was first written, several studies and campaigns tried to make that hidden infrastructure easier to understand by estimating the footprint of email and the rapidly growing volume of messages sent worldwide. [[1]](#citenote-1) [[2]](#citenote-2) The useful lesson is not that every message carries one fixed carbon price; it is that billions of small digital actions collectively require real infrastructure.

A widely discussed OVO Energy campaign also modelled what might happen if people sent fewer unnecessary emails. [[3]](#cite_note-3) Its headline numbers were estimates, not a measurement of what every deleted or unsent message will save. SolidFish takes the more modest principle from examples like this: reducing unnecessary digital persistence is worthwhile even when the effect of one action is small. Every little helps.

The same principle applies beyond email. Browsing, streaming, social media, backups and cloud storage all rely on infrastructure, and growing volumes of data can contribute to demand for additional storage and processing capacity. Cloud copies still live on physical systems. That does not make ordinary digital activity inherently wasteful; it does give us a reason to ask whether fleeting data really needs to be copied and retained indefinitely.

Laptop and digital work illustrating the carbon cost of online activity.
Laptop and digital work illustrating the carbon cost of online activity.

What Cloud storage really is

The word ‘cloud’ can make storage sound abstract, but cloud services run on physical data-centre infrastructure: servers, storage devices, networks, buildings, power systems and cooling. The scale and efficiency of those facilities vary widely, but the important point is simple — keeping data online has a physical resource cost somewhere.

Earlier commentary sometimes used dramatic projections to illustrate how quickly data-centre demand could grow, including the Japan scenario cited when this article was originally written. [[4]](#cite_note-4) Projections depend on assumptions and should not be treated as inevitable outcomes. The more durable point is that storage demand, efficiency, energy sources and infrastructure growth are connected, which makes avoiding unnecessary retention a reasonable part of digital responsibility.

But what is the magnitude of the environmental danger posed by the datacenters

Estimates of the ICT and data-centre footprint have changed over time and depend on what researchers include, how electricity is generated, and how efficiently facilities operate. The study cited in the original article explored a high-growth scenario for communication technology rather than a guaranteed future. [[5]](#cite_note-5) The useful takeaway is not a single percentage; it is that large-scale digital infrastructure has environmental consequences worth understanding.

Cloud providers have also invested in renewable electricity, efficiency and lower-carbon operations. Those changes matter, but they do not make storage physically free or remove every environmental trade-off. Energy sources, hardware manufacture, land, water, cooling and local infrastructure can all form part of the picture, and the balance differs by provider and region. [[6]](#cite_note-6)

Renewable power and more efficient systems can reduce some impacts while continued demand growth can offset part of those gains. That is one reason SolidFish focuses on a behaviour users can understand directly: keep what has a reason to persist, and let fleeting data expire rather than accumulating by default.

Data centres also need thermal management, and their cooling approaches and refrigerants vary. [[7]](#cite_note-7) Rather than turning those engineering choices into a claim about every data centre, the broader point is that digital infrastructure consumes real resources and has design trade-offs.

Digital sustainability is therefore a systems problem rather than something solved by one technology or one personal action. [[8]](#citenote-8) [[9]](#citenote-9) [[10]](#cite_note-10) Cleaner infrastructure, better efficiency and more deliberate consumption can all play a part.

Efficiency can lower the resource cost of a unit of computing while demand for digital services continues to grow. That tension is why SolidFish uses a deliberately modest principle: do not keep fleeting information indefinitely without a reason. One share is small; habits at scale are not. Every little helps.

Data-centre infrastructure representing the physical footprint of cloud storage.
Data-centre infrastructure representing the physical footprint of cloud storage.

And why has digital pollution eluded us for so long

Digital infrastructure is easy to overlook because most of us interact with screens rather than server halls, substations, cooling systems or storage hardware. That distance can make online activity feel detached from the physical resources that support it.

Digitalisation can replace some physical materials and journeys while creating different demands elsewhere. The useful lesson is not that digital is inherently greener or dirtier; it is that the trade-offs are real. Good decisions start by making those trade-offs visible instead of assuming the cloud has no footprint.

Surely it cannot be that bad

When this article was written, examples such as the Fortune discussion of the enormous viewing figures for ‘Despacito’ were used to make the infrastructure behind streaming feel more tangible. [[11]](#cite_note-11) Comparisons between a piece of online activity and household energy use depend heavily on assumptions, so they are better read as illustrations of scale than as fixed conversions for every stream or service.

The broader lesson still matters: digital convenience depends on physical resources, and those resources are not limitless. Understanding that connection does not mean treating every click as an environmental failure; it means recognising that digital choices, infrastructure design and retention habits all have real-world consequences.

The International Telecommunication Union has published climate-alignment guidance for the ICT sector, including ambitious emissions-reduction pathways. [[12]](#cite_note-12) Targets and methods evolve, but the direction is clear: efficiency, cleaner energy and more thoughtful demand all have roles to play.

SolidFish focuses on the part of that picture its product can influence directly. When data is fleeting, give it a lifetime instead of keeping another copy indefinitely. We do not claim that this alone delivers a particular environmental saving; it is one small, repeatable habit in a much larger system. Every little helps.

A global view of digital infrastructure and its environmental impact.
A global view of digital infrastructure and its environmental impact.

So what is our part to play in this

Our part is not to feel guilty about ordinary digital life. It is to become a little more deliberate about what we ask digital systems to keep doing on our behalf.

Keep information because it has value, not simply because deletion was never considered. Let fleeting material expire when its purpose is finished. Choose tools that make those decisions easier instead of hiding them behind unlimited-storage language.

Individual habits are only one layer of a much larger system, but repeatable choices can still shape expectations about how products are designed. Every little helps — especially when the easier behaviour is also the more deliberate one.

Here are some practical steps we can all take to start with today:

Practical changes work best when they remove real clutter or make a useful choice easier, rather than turning digital life into a list of things to feel bad about.

  • Keep important files deliberately, and remove duplicates or abandoned copies when they no longer serve a purpose.
  • Unsubscribe from messages and services you no longer want rather than letting unwanted data accumulate indefinitely.
  • Use expiry for links, notes and files that are fleeting by nature.
  • Avoid creating extra copies simply because a sharing tool makes duplication the default.
  • Keep working devices useful for longer where practical, then reuse or recycle them responsibly.
  • Treat sustainability claims — including SolidFish's — with healthy scrutiny and look for evidence behind quantified promises.
  • Choose the habits that fit your circumstances. Small actions are not the whole answer, but every little helps.
A person outdoors representing practical digital sustainability.
A person outdoors representing practical digital sustainability.

Sources and further reading