Greenpeace says Netflix isn’t environmentally friendly

Greenpeace recently released a report detailing the carbon footprints left by video streaming services such as Hulu and Amazon Prime. Unfortunately, our favourite video streaming services are not having a great impact on the earth.

All the Netflix binges we indulge in are streamed to our phones, laptops and TVs through servers that utilise a lot of energy. Companies like YouTube, which use more renewable energy to power their streaming, are much more environmentally friendly than companies like Hulu, that rely more heavily on non-renewable energy sources. Greenpeace evaluated companies on factors such as the energy mix used to power services, commitment to renewable energy, transparency on their energy sources, and their support of clean energy.

Video streaming veteran YouTube received an A (the only one given) for their commendable energy use and advocacy for green energy. The service is owned by Google, which is demonstrably committed to renewable energy.

Netflix fared very poorly, receiving a final D grade for it’s environmental impact. The streaming giant’s failure to advocate for renewable energy or commit to its use caused failure marks in those sections. According to The Huffington Post, the company relies on Amazon Web Services, which has lambasted by Greenpeace for its lacking transparency regarding its carbon footprint. The company’s previous claims to be greener than breathing have unfortunately been disproved. Greenpeace called for Netflix to power its massive global growth with green energy and become more responsible environmentally.

Here is a chart of the performances of your favourite streaming services.