Dear Umbra,
Does the increasing use of video games as a form of recreation bode well for the environment? Fewer people using real resources means less of an impact on the world.
Tadeusz
Rockville, Md.
Dear Tadeusz,
Now that is an interesting spin on things. No one knows the complete answer, and we won't know until we fully assess the footprint of our electronic age.
Playing video games is similar to home computing in obvious impacts: electricity, electronics manufacture and disposal, increased entertainment coupled with less person-to-person and person-to-outdoor interaction. I hazard that, at this point, any pundits who might be holding forth on the topic are more influenced by their own relationship to gaming than by any quantifiable information linking video gamers and environmental issues.
Gamers, like people on computers, are using real resources. As I mentioned, the components of video gaming -- the monitors, the consoles and handheld devices, the discs and packaging -- all have their trails of planetary destruction. Coltan, for one example: another toe on the footprint of our electronic age. Coltan (the nickname of columbite-tantalite) is a heavy ore used to control the flow of electric current in tiny circuit boards. Coltan is almost exclusively mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the demand for it, and the Congolese desperation for survival, is wreaking social and environmental havoc. Miners have pushed into national parks, destroying gorilla habitat and even apparently eating the gorillas. The coltan "market" is characterized by violence, gangs, and economic links to the area wars. Hey, why play fake wars at home when you have actual complicity and involvement in the Congolese war? But non-gamers can't point fingers at gamers. Coltan is in virtually all our small "personal electronics," including the very computer upon which I write these words.
What you meant, I think, is that gamers may have less of an impact on the outdoors in person, because they presumably stay inside all day and night, Leaving No Trace. And perhaps, by squirreling themselves away at home all day, they avoid driving and its negative impacts. It's an interesting argument and one not normally seen in the general "Today's Yoot is Going to Heck in a Video Console" folderol. We have seen studies exploring whether gaming leads to environmental disinterest. A Nature Conservancy-funded study correlated the rise in indoor entertainment, including video games, with declining use of national parks. Correlation is not causation, though, so we shouldn't get too excited, especially since declining park visits were also correlated to the rising price of gas.
I've never seen any studies exploring whether staying at home is good for the planet because we leave the natural world alone. You could lead the way. Our imagined home-bound gamer might drive fewer miles, yes. But I don't see why a gamer would eat less meat, or more organic foods; in fact, stereotypes dictate that our gamer eats Archer Daniels Midland corn-based snack foods. And a home-bound gamer would probably use more electricity and heat than the imaginary out-and-about socialite or hiker.
As I said, however, we don't know whether video games are actively helping or harming the general environmental cause. We can only speculate. And since games are a bit addictive, appear antisocial, are mysterious to the general taste-makers and largely played by teenage boys, there is quite a lot of negative speculation. Whether or not the cultural concerns play out, we do need to be cautious about over-consuming personal electronics in general. In a previous column I wrote on video games, a reader bemoaned my focus on the small stuff. I don't fault him; I do focus on small consumer choices, perhaps too often. But personal electronics are small only in a physical sense. From all we know so far, this little toe of the electronic footprint is linked to environmentally dangerous resource extraction and disposal all across the globe. As with all things, moderation should be our watchword. Or, as we like to say, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
MMORPly,
Umbra
Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting
Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo
This Friday, don’t just Buy Nothing—use nothing!
Comments
View as Threaded
Carolyn H. Posted 12:19 am
09 Apr 2008
In the winter we are bundled into our New England home so this usually takes the form of console games and there is a quirky side effect: console as space heater. We can keep our central heating system down low because the electronics keep our den nice and warm and it is the only room we occupy during those hours. When we are done for the night, we just run into the bedroom and get under the covers. Our KW usage has actually gone down since we got the new generation of consoles.
In the summer, that room gets a really nice cross-breeze so it stays comfortable for many hours. If we do get too hot, we stop playing and let everything cool off. Its a good signal that we've been spending too much time in there and should hang out with some friends.
Permalink
kellymayk Posted 4:01 am
09 Apr 2008
I think a lot of people forget that video games are just another form of entertainment like TV, movies and music. They're not going to ruin corrupt our youth or ruin our planet any more than the rest. I am still hoping to see more video games with a message, but it's a pretty young industry and widespread distribution of indie games are just starting to become possible. We should be the ones making games with an eco-theme!
Do the Sims recycle?
Permalink
racc Posted 4:49 am
09 Apr 2008
So by all means, get the driving out of your system on a game console and save the world.
Permalink
mskellyann Posted 5:33 am
09 Apr 2008
What about the lack of a personal connection with nature? As environmental educators have been saying over and over and over, you don't care about what you don't know, and you need to care in order to protect something.
Get yourselves and your kids outdoors and engaged in the real world!
Permalink
ratatosk Posted 6:59 am
09 Apr 2008
Permalink
nathangsm Posted 7:53 am
09 Apr 2008
So we have several statements here, all of them leading to "negative speculation". Let me address them in turn...
1) "games are a bit addictive"
On what grounds do you make this statement? What supports that position? Yes, people may become addicted to games, just as they can become addicted to reading books, watching television, and posting comments to articles online, but that doesn't mean that any of these activities can be defined as an "addictive activity" (in the manner of such notables such as nicotine-containing cigarettes).
I could continue on this topic at length, but I'll instead direct you to a feature in Gamasutra (a publication of the Game Developer's Conference), which examines the topic more concisely and eloquently than would be able to do here.
The link is: http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060228/clark_01.shtml ...
But here's an except from the conclusion:
". . . so far research has simply suggested that at most, people are becoming addicted to games, not that games themselves are actually responsible for addicting people."
2) "games . . . appear antisocial"
First of all, that completely ignores the huge number of games where interaction with other humans is implicit (MMOs such as World of Warcraft immediately come to mind, as well as a plethora of online multi-player first person shooters, such as Halo 3 and Team Fortress 2, which can involve a great deal of person-to-person interaction).
This statement also disregards the siblings who play together, the spouses who play together, the parents who play with their children, the children who play with their friends, as well as the many adults who socialize at the homes of their adult friends while playing games together.
I could go on for hours, with antidotal evidence from my own life, and the lives of people I know, but how about I just direct you to this (one of many like it) press releases on research about the social lifestyles of gamers?
The link is: http://www.theesa.com/archives/2005/01/new_data_shatte.ph ...
But here's an except:
"According to a survey conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates, computer and video game players spend more than three times the amount of time exercising or playing sports, volunteering in the community, reading, or engaging in religious, creative, and cultural activities than they do playing video games. In total, gamers spend 23.4 hours per week on these activities, compared to 6.8 hours per week playing games. Avid gamers -- those who play games 11 or more hours per week -- spend 34.5 hours per week on the activities mentioned above."
3) "games are . . . mysterious to the general taste-makers"
I can only speculate that the "general taste-makers" must be the antisocial ones, because gamers are... Everyone.
Since the support of this statement is the same as the next, I'm going to move right on to...
4) "games are . . . largely played by teenage boys"
Umbra, for shame! That attitude is sexist, ageist, and completely untrue! One highly relevant factoid is that Women age 18 or older represent a significantly greater portion of the game-playing population in the U.S. then boys age 17 or younger, in fact, 50% greater!
There's a plethora of data out there, here are a couple more pertinent factoids (according to the ESA and NPD):
72% of American's aged 6-44 play video games.
69% of American heads-of-household play computer and video games.
While just over a quarter of gamers are under 18 (28%), nearly a full quarter is 50 or over (24%).
The average PLAYER (not buyer) of games in the U.S. is 33, and has been playing games for 12 years (Which makes the average age to begin playing video games 21, the same age they begin to drink alcohol legally... Regardless, it's not just a hold-over pastime from adolescence).
If you want data on gamers who play a LOT, it starts getting pretty tricky, and for the comprehensive figures, you have to pay big bucks, but gleaning from the press releases and reported snippets...
Just over 1 out of 50 American women between the ages of 18 and 34 fall into the category of "Heavy Gamer" (this segment averages 40 hours of gaming per week), and while I don't have data on the gender split for kids aged 6 to 17 who fall into this category, if it's the same as the gender split for that age segment at large, then just over 1 out of 50 American boys aged 6 to 17 would be there as well.
Actually, the prevalence for boys to be "heavy gamers" might be somewhat lower, because while I've seen it reported that almost twice as many boys as girls play video games in the 6-17 segment at large, it appears that the gap may disappear during the teen years (and that, incidentally, playing video games is an important part of a young teen's social activities).
So, if at LEAST as many (if not more) career-age women as teenage boys fit the stereotype for the gamer with little time for anything else in their life but games (about 1 out of 47 Americans aged 6-44), I think we can all agree that pointing at one age-group and gender (teen males) while ignoring another at least equally as prevalent (adult females), is is a bit unfair to the gaming populace at large...
In fact, when 72% of Americans (age 6-44) are gamers, and the average adult plays 7.5 hours a week (and there's only a 12-minute gap between adult men and women's weekly game playing), it makes you wonder about the other 28%...
Apparently, they're the ones doing all the "negative speculation".
Aside from all that, I appreciated your commentary in general, regarding the ecological impact of video games. For certain, it's one of my biggest eco-vices, in terms of non-essential consumption. I don't own or drive an automobile (I bike, walk, and use public transportation), don't live in a stand-alone, single-family dwelling, eat almost no meat, buy organic (and fair-trade or local when I can), and in general, consume a whole lot less unnecessary "stuff". But, aside from the impact of producing the electronics to begin with, the energy consumption is my biggest concern, as the draw from my game console, TV, and the single source of ambient light I'll have on while gaming uses as much wattage in a single hour as my refrigerator does in 8. So there are certainly improvements to be made...
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 10:26 am
09 Apr 2008
There's nothing more fun than hooking up with a pack at 1am in Unreal Tournament 3 and rampaging for hours in Sinkhole and Market District.
It keeps people out of their cars. Although my nVidia 8800GT sure does put out a lot of heat...
Permalink
rraimo Posted 12:35 am
10 Apr 2008
If any of you are at the Green Apple Music Festival on the National Mall in DC on April 20th, stop by the IBM tent and give it a try.
www.powerupthegame.org
Permalink
bailsout Posted 6:03 am
10 Apr 2008
Permalink
cgp18 Posted 11:36 pm
10 Apr 2008
"Saving" the environment, as much as I hate the term for its anthropocentric connotations, will be done by those who are passionate abotu the issue, and in my view many of those are the same people outside, experiencing all that is at risk, all that can be "saved". Grist had a recent article about E.O. Wilson's comment that children need to get outside more instead of being driven around to soccer games - I think he was spot on...
Permalink