this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2023
163 points (88.3% liked)

Privacy

32130 readers
356 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Privacy (for robot vacuums) isn't cheap. via the Verge.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] volodymyr@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I think 4kg over 3years is a huge difference for many people. Not for morbidly obese maybe. Anyway, here it matters that difference exists.

There are many ways to make this difference in energy balance, by changing the kind of food eaten, while keeping the same intake volume, by changing the intake volume, or by adding an additional activity, like brooming.

Reducing intake by 100kcal by changing volume while maintaining composition is always going to be carbon wasteful. Do we agree on this?

There are many advisable ways to reduce the carbon effect. By changing the kind of food eaten, for sure. But also, but replacing manual brooming with less carbon-consuming process. One way does not cancel the other, does it?

By the way, we should be clear that instead of brooming one should not go for a run on something. Conversely, replacing some of the health-motivated physical activity with brooming is not a bad idea at all, that's a large part of the reason I still do it. Still, both sport and manual brooming are somehow wasteful.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 11 months ago

Reducing intake by 100kcal by changing volume while maintaining composition is always going to be carbon wasteful. Do we agree on this?

Yes but I think it will be difficult to calculate and will still depend on the exact thing you're eating. I think at this point you're focusing on psychics while ignoring all the practical aspects of the issue.

Yes, we can agree that brooming daily for years while eating exactly the same things will over many years result in reduced weight which for some individuals might be problematic and result in increase of the volume of food consumed and increased carbon footprint.

Is the increase in carbon footprint greater than the energy used by roomba? Depends on the energy source and food source. It's possible that in some specific scenarios the extra food consumed will have bigger carbon footprint than energy used by roomba. Is it greater than the carbon footprint of manufacturing a roomba? Definitely not.

Your arguments are getting so specific that soon we will conclude that any physical activity is bad for the environment and we should just lay down as much as possible and avoid any excess movements.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 11 months ago

Ok, so I've checked. If you want to get 100 kcal from food, for beef it would be 4kg of CO2, for chicken 400g of CO2, rice 400g of CO2. potatoes 50g of CO2.

To charge a Roomba in US you need 800g of CO2, in Spain 400g, in France 160g, in Australia 1kg, in Poland 1.2kg.

So as you see, it really depends on what you eat and where you live. In extreme cases yes, just don't move and let robots do everything, it will produce less CO2. If you live in Poland, broom your apartment, eat one potato more and you're saving shitload of CO2.

Carbon footprint of a roomba is around 400kg of CO2. Again, in extreme cases it's possible to offset that during it's lifetime.In some cases you're not offsetting it at all or it will take more than roomba will last. In other cases you're just adding to it.