Skip to main content
Solved

Power Move Flex- carbon footprint of emails

  • October 10, 2024
  • 6 replies
  • 241 views

I’m signed up to the Power Move Up/Down events. 
 

Ultimately the purpose of this is to save carbon, with hopefully some financial incentives too(!)

Just been wondering… like the blockchain debate, has OVO / anyone else worked out the carbon footprint of all of the emails being generated, distributed and stored on servers. Is that taken into account with the overall figures…? Does it negate the good action being done at all? Just curious… 

Best answer by Emmanuelle_OVO

Updated on 21/01/26 by Chris_OVO

 

Over the 18 months, Power Move Flex (as part of CrowdFlex) has shifted 864,700 kWh's and paid out over £1.02 million in bill credits.

We've had over 100,000 customers take part over the 3 trials in which Power Move Flex helped match the demand to the power being generated. So homed used cleaner, greener energy.

The trials were aimed at understanding how households can contribute to a greener electricity grid. The learnings we gathered from being part of these trials will be essential for the Electricity System Operator to plan for the future of the electricity grid, and how our customers can play a role in this. Together we've been making energy better for people and the planet. 

 

Our current trials are now closed, and we'd like to thank our users for their participation.

You can find more information Power Move can be found here:

 

It’s an interesting point @Carter_99! I’ll bring it to the team. 

 

I’d imagine the emails sent are necessary? Mid month check ins & so on? I do completely agree with you it’s certainly something big companies should consider when thinking about their overall carbon footprint. 

 

Did some googling & found he average carbon footprint of an email is 0.3g CO2e. LED lightbulbs by comparison produce 0.2 pounds of CO2 per hour of use (a relatively eco friendly appliance. One load of Washing including the dryer is equivalent to: 2.4kg CO2e. So I imagine the consensus is that the positive environmental impact of power move & other grid balancing schemes (green energy used during off peak times vs fossil fuels) far outweigh the negative impact of emails sent. 

 

This fact though is quite scary! ...Worldwide, we send 300 billion emails every day. If an email produces 0.2 grams of CO2 at best (short email), that's 600,000 kilograms of CO2 per day

6 replies

Tron Burgundy
Rank 4

I’ve used servers that can vomit out hundreds of thousands of emails per hour.  You’re talking pennies on the sending side.


  • Author
  • Rank 2
  • October 10, 2024

Thanks for the reply. I understand what you’re saying… but it’s all carbon right? Googling some numbers, the carbon footprint of sending / transmitting / receiving an email plus storage for a year could be 60g of carbon. Just wondering how me powering up / down for 30 mins relates to the savings by just not running the scheme, and saving all the notification e-mails I will be getting. As you say, multiply than up by hundreds of thousands, and that’s a big carbon saving by just not doing something? Wondering about the trade off of that versus the benefits of the scheme and the overall carbon & financial costs. 


Nukecad
Super User
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Super User
  • October 11, 2024

 Just wondering how me powering up / down for 30 mins relates …...

 

Surely you would be powering your device up/down anyway to check if you had any emails from anywhere.

So whether OVO had sent you one for Power Move or not becomes irrelevant to that aspect.

The servers storing the emails are running 24/7 anyway, so no saving there by not having PM emails stored on them.

In effect the only extra energy use that could be saved is the actual transmission of the messages.

Once you just consider that transmission, and not the other energy use that happens anyway, then it will be a lot less than the 60g carbon that you quoted above.


  • Rank 2
  • October 11, 2024

This question prompts another; the human implications (in terms of the employees, overheads, office and other support) of the diversification of focus of energy providers like OVO, or retailers like M&S away from the core business (selling me gas, leccy, groceries, pants, etc) into online marketing and trickery?  

I was always really impressed by both OVO and Marks for their service and product quality and value - and for the helpfulness and knowledge of their front line and call centre staff. But this faith began to waver as the Marketing and IT geeks began to seemingly take over. Now you need a degree in Computer Science and an array of technology (laptop, tablet, smartphone, passwords and log-in ID…) to interact with ‘em.
 

And the baffling complexity of the messages which clog up my inbox but fail to deliver? I’ve so far earned exactly £1.43 from many months of gimmicky-titled OVO initiatives, and when an overdesigned email from Marks (with eight brightly coloured tile-graphics guaranteeing joy) lured me into my local shop, neither the staff nor till computer could deliver the promised “10% off four bottles of wine”. 

However, let’s look on the bright side?  If all these armies of software engineers, marketeers and designers weren’t getting paid to exert power above their station and churn out this geekery, what would they be up to? Unemployed, starving and roaming the streets mugging old codgers like me?


Tron Burgundy
Rank 4

This is my favourite reply of all time.


Emmanuelle_OVO
Community Manager
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Community Manager
  • Solved
  • October 14, 2024

Updated on 21/01/26 by Chris_OVO

 

Over the 18 months, Power Move Flex (as part of CrowdFlex) has shifted 864,700 kWh's and paid out over £1.02 million in bill credits.

We've had over 100,000 customers take part over the 3 trials in which Power Move Flex helped match the demand to the power being generated. So homed used cleaner, greener energy.

The trials were aimed at understanding how households can contribute to a greener electricity grid. The learnings we gathered from being part of these trials will be essential for the Electricity System Operator to plan for the future of the electricity grid, and how our customers can play a role in this. Together we've been making energy better for people and the planet. 

 

Our current trials are now closed, and we'd like to thank our users for their participation.

You can find more information Power Move can be found here:

 

It’s an interesting point @Carter_99! I’ll bring it to the team. 

 

I’d imagine the emails sent are necessary? Mid month check ins & so on? I do completely agree with you it’s certainly something big companies should consider when thinking about their overall carbon footprint. 

 

Did some googling & found he average carbon footprint of an email is 0.3g CO2e. LED lightbulbs by comparison produce 0.2 pounds of CO2 per hour of use (a relatively eco friendly appliance. One load of Washing including the dryer is equivalent to: 2.4kg CO2e. So I imagine the consensus is that the positive environmental impact of power move & other grid balancing schemes (green energy used during off peak times vs fossil fuels) far outweigh the negative impact of emails sent. 

 

This fact though is quite scary! ...Worldwide, we send 300 billion emails every day. If an email produces 0.2 grams of CO2 at best (short email), that's 600,000 kilograms of CO2 per day