Spam costs $3 billion a year in wasted electricity alone

Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:07PM EDT

See Comments (82)

My previous blog post on the hidden costs of computing -- which pointed to a study that said that leaving computers on overnight wasted $2.8 billion of electricity a year -- was hotly contested by readers, many of whom felt the time spent rebooting their computer every morning was a far greater waste of money.

That remains open for debate, but here's a statistic that I think everyone can get behind: Spam wastes even more electricity than leaving your computer running 24/7, costing roughly $3 billion a year in wasted power alone.

McAfee calculated that sending, routing, and otherwise dealing with spam eats up a total of 33 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity each year. As The Guardian notes, that's enough to power 2.4 million American homes and, by my math (as the average kw-hr costs about a dime), a total cost of over $3 billion.

And that doesn't even take into account money spent on spam filtering software, the loss of productivity due to users spending time deleting spam messages and finding false positives, and losses from people who get caught up in spam-based scams, either purchasing useless or undelivered products or being the victims of a spam-based crime.

The additional insights in McAfee's Carbon Footprint of Spam Report (registration required) suggest that spam transmission creates the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as 3.1 million passenger cars using two billion gallons of gasoline each year. That's shocking.

But all is not lost: The good news is that McAfee notes that current levels of spam filtering save 135 billion killowatt-hours of electricity that would otherwise be wasted if all users and computers went unprotected from spam.

Comments on Spam costs $3 billion a year in wasted electricity alone

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 26 Posted by amaritlal on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:52PM EDT Report Abuse

    the moment i registered a new email acct at gmail.com somehow thousands of scammers got my account aven before i had used it.looks like google is selling the information.despite signed up for filter i get 100 of spam mails for which i spend lot of time to delete for ever.i even complained to google.no luck.Now yahoo has taken over majority of my email space for scammer advertisers.will you believe to day the skippers of CREDIT like the rhree credit reporting agencies attacked my email space.they did not want to leave.they wanted me to buy their SACRED credit

  • 27 Posted by bduds on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:04PM EDT Report Abuse

    ridiculous.. that's like saying overweight people that spend toom much time on the web can save electricity by geting off the computer and exercising!

  • 28 Posted by kingtomboshere on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:51PM EDT Report Abuse

    Yeah, right. That's like saying yelling at a light bulb will make it use more energy. Computers, especially servers, consume the same amount of electricity regardless of you are sending spam, watching CNN, or looking up your favorite web site.

  • 29 Posted by zttanner10 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 11:02PM EDT Report Abuse

    Some cat chick said: "I believe it. I probably receive 200-300 e-mails per day at my workplace. I estimate that 99 percent of them are spam. It's pernicious." Lol no that's me

  • 30 Posted by johnjhalloran on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:39PM EDT Report Abuse

    Spam is really bad and most people are still not awear that its a thing of the past with Woomail. Woomail users have not gotten 1 spam message since the service was launched in Feb of 2007. Email spam is a thing of the past so if it bothers you then get yourself a spam free Woomail account today. Johnny

  • 31 Posted by mlopez_2008 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:23PM EDT Report Abuse

    Well you can't really "waste" electricity. Electricity is just a form of energy, and the amount of energy in the universe is constant. It only differs in its form. One can only waste the amount of money it takes to pool this energy for use by humans, not the energy itself. I find it funny that we pay for something that is all around us and can neither be created nor destroyed.

  • 32 Posted by rb_tech on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:31PM EDT Report Abuse

    On the flip side how much money would be lost by the companies that sell bandwidth and equipment to the spammers if they were shut down? The fact is that if spam was stopped tomorrow your internet bill would be the same. If the cost of spam was truly $3 billion dollars then a bunch companies would see a profit increase when spam went away. The savings will not be passed on to the consumer. I'm waiting for the next story from Chris where if we all lived right next to the power plant we would save $10 billion from less power loss over shorter lines.

  • 33 Posted by andrew_williams76 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:54PM EDT Report Abuse

    Spam only costs a couple bucks at walmart. The problem with it is sodium. It's got way too much of it. The whole thing tastes like a big hunk of salt.

  • 34 Posted by teds_efax on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:59PM EDT Report Abuse

    What an erroneous statement. The capacity is already there, this equipment would be running regardless. If you snapped your finder and eliminated spam, the machines would still be running consuming the same amount of energy!

  • 35 Posted by sadiehall@ymail.com on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:59PM EDT Report Abuse

    That's why I use woomail, i don't get spam and I get to choose to contacts me. I just love it!

  • 36 Posted by cindybin_bz on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:25PM EDT Report Abuse

    I eat Spam cold so I don't use electricity heating it up.

  • 37 Posted by rvbaby1 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:57PM EDT Report Abuse

    America is an inherently wasteful country. Forty billion dollars of food is wasted every year. Trillion dollars was wasted in Iraq war. Drinking water from plastic bottles is a shameful waste. Our children will paying communist China for the wasteful nature of capitalism.

  • 38 Posted by carouselmed on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:18PM EDT Report Abuse

    This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of...no wait..second stupidest. The stupidest is the flock of people that believes their is global warming...If the government were to pay you 1 milion dollars per year to prove global warming..and 0 dollars if you didnt ..would their be global warming?

  • 39 Posted by cknight1317 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:26PM EDT Report Abuse

    They should just illegalize spam outright. Its annoying, it can be malicious, and as you have so kindly shown it wastes resources.

  • 40 Posted by geischen1 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:07PM EDT Report Abuse

    This number is bull crap.. I'm tired of the green band wagon jumpers who make up numbers to push a radical agenda. It doesn't cost any more for spam then it does to run the Obama teleprompters.

  • 41 Posted by tomsatdragon on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:16PM EDT Report Abuse

    Spam is delicious. Cut it thin and fry it in the frying pan till is almost crispy outside, good and brown, then fry a couple eggs in the leftover spam grease. Make two slices of toast with real butter and you got a breakfast for a king.

  • 42 Posted by peterwimsey2003 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:08PM EDT Report Abuse

    Makes sense to me. Small appliance usage, mostly electronics has offset all of the energy saving efforts in the last 30 years. We are still using the same btuh/sf we did before the first energy crisis, even in new buildings. A little less is for heating. 25% is now used for small appliances.

  • 43 Posted by fishuman on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:00PM EDT Report Abuse

    I somehow agree with rdpettit about white house waste OUR $, NOT their $ because of wealth and business owner/ceo screwed up and put s#!t on us. I will personal want see trouble companies out of business. Let new business built better company. That worse than $3bb on electric. Spammers have no respect for us people. we need make cooperative to put spammers out of business.

  • 44 Posted by looknfor1 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 6:56PM EDT Report Abuse

    i believe it could be true. i think spam should be banned. i think o stupid should appoint a spam czar lmao. he can fix it all. hes lord o stupid.

  • 45 Posted by inetassociation on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:24PM EDT Report Abuse

    And how much does postal and PAPER advertising cost per year in wasted resources??? So which is better for the environment? Electronic advertising like SPAM or paper and billboard and TV and Radio advertising? I wonder how much TV, Radio and other advertising forms cost per year in electricity? Spam wins.

Post a Comment


My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.