Carbon Footprint of Online Multiplayer Games

Abstract

The growth of online gaming has raised questions about its environmental impact. This study estimated the carbon footprint generated by user-side activity in two of the most-played PC games—Counter-Strike and Dota 2—during 2024. The assessment followed ISO 14067 principles and included preoperational emissions (PC manufacturing and game installation) and operational emissions (gameplay electricity use and data transmission). Counter-Strike and Dota 2 generated 0.693 and 0.358 MtCO₂e, respectively. Electricity consumption during gameplay accounted for about 75% of total emissions, while computer manufacturing contributed around 24%. Emissions from installation and data transfer were negligible. A Sobol sensitivity analysis identified computer power consumption as the dominant factor affecting total emissions. The combined footprint of these two games exceeded the annual emissions of countries such as Belize and Seychelles. These results highlight the importance of improving gaming hardware efficiency and considering digital leisure in climate policy and carbon budgeting.

Keywords

sustainable development GHG emissions carbon footprint online gaming

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbasi

A. Z.

Rehman

Fayyaz

M. S.

Ting

D. H.

Shah

M. U.

Fatima

(2022). Using the playful consumption experience model to uncover behavioral intention to play multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) games. Data Technologies and Applications, 56(2), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/DTA-02-2021-0055

Batmunkh

(2022). Carbon footprint of the most popular social media platforms. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(4), 2195. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042195

Berner

Brockman

Chan

Cheung

Dębiak

Dennison

Farhi

Fischer

Hashme

Hesse

Józefowicz

Gray

Olsson

Pachocki

Petrov

Pinto

H. P. d. O.

Raiman

Salimans

Schlatter

Zhang

(2019). Dota 2 with large scale deep reinforcement learning. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1912.06680. http://arxiv.org/abs/1912.06680

Burtscher

Barret

Borkar

A. P.

Grinberg

Jahnke

Kendrew

Maffey

Mccaughrean

M. J.

(2020). The carbon footprint of large astronomy meetings. Nature Astronomy, 4, 823–825. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-020-1207-z

Caviglione

(2006). Traffic analysis of an internet online game accessed via a wireless LAN. IEEE Communications Letters, 10(10), 698–700. https://doi.org/10.1109/LCOMM.2006.060759

European Commission, J. R. C. (JRC). (2025). GHG emissions of all world countries—2025 edition. https://doi.org/10.2760/5917997

Ferreira

Domingos

Santos

Barreto

Ferreira

(2025). Environmental and economic assessment of desktop vs. laptop computers: A life cycle approach. Sustainability (Switzerland), 17(10), 4455. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104455

Filimonau

Archer

Bellamy

Smith

Wintrip

(2021). The carbon footprint of a UK University during the COVID-19 lockdown. Science of the Total Environment, 756, 143964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143964

Holmner

Ebi

K. L.

Lazuardi

Nilsson

(2014). Carbon footprint of telemedicine solutions—Unexplored opportunity for reducing carbon emissions in the health sector. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e105040. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105040

10.

Kim

Y. H.

Nauright

Suveatwatanakul

(2020). The rise of E-sports and potential for post-COVID continued growth. Sport in Society, 23(11), 1861–1871. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2020.1819695

11.

Liu

C. C.

Chang

I. C.

(2016). Model of online game addiction: The role of computer-mediated communication motives. Telematics and Informatics, 33(4), 904–915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.02.002

12.

Mayers

Koomey

Hall

Bauer

France

Webb

(2015). The carbon footprint of games distribution. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 19(3), 402–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12181

13.

Melodia

Canale

Griffiths

M. D.

(2022). The role of avoidance coping and escape motives in problematic online gaming: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 20(2), 996–1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00422-w

14.

Mills

Bourassa

Rainer

Mai

Shehabi

Mills

(2019a). Green gaming: energy efficiency without performance compromise (Vol. 10). https://casrai.org/credit

15.

Mills

Bourassa

Rainer

Mai

Shehabi

Mills

(2019b). Toward greener gaming: Estimating national energy use and energy efficiency potential. The Computer Games Journal, 8(3-4), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40869-019-00084-2

16.

Mills

(2016). Taming the energy use of gaming computers. Energy Efficiency, 9(2), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-015-9371-1

17.

Newzoo. (2025). 2025_Newzoo_The PC and console gaming report. https://newzoo.com/resources/trend-reports/the-pc-console-gaming-report-2025

18.

Ong

Moors

Sivaraman

(2012). Complete life-cycle assessment of the energy/CO2 costs of videoconferencing vs face-to-face meetings. 2012 IEEE Online Conference on Green Communications, GreenCom 2012, 50–55. https://doi.org/10.1109/GreenCom.2012.6519615

19.

Pengmatchaya

Natwichai

(2024). Identifying player skill of dota 2 using machine learning pipeline. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-024-00139-y

20.

Preist

Schien

Shabajee

(2019, May 2). Evaluating sustainable interaction design of digital services: The case of YouTube. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300627

21.

Rico

Martínez-Blanco

Montlleó

Rodríguez

Tavares

Arias

Oliver-Solà

(2019). Carbon footprint of tourism in Barcelona. Tourism Management, 70, 491–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.09.012

22.

Samala

A. D.

Bojic

Vergara-Rodríguez

Klimova

Ranuharja

(2023). Exploring the impact of gamification on 21st-century skills: Insights from DOTA 2. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 17(18), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v17i18.42161

23.

Sharpe

B. T.

Besombes

Welsh

M. R.

Birch

P. D. J.

(2022). Indexing Esport Performance. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports, 1(1), jege.2022-0017. https://doi.org/10.1123/jege.2022-0017

24.

Statista. (2025, May 25). Games-Worldwide. https://www.statista.com/outlook/amo/media/games/worldwide#users. https://www.statista.com/outlook/amo/media/games/worldwide#users

25.

Stoll

Klaaßen

Gallersdörfer

(2019). The carbon footprint of bitcoin. Joule, 3(7), 1647–1661. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOULE.2019.05.012

26.

World Business Council for Sustainable Development and World Resources Institute. (2015). The Greenhouse Gas Protocol A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard .

27.

Xenopoulos

Doraiswamy

Silva

(2020). Valuing player actions in Counter-Strike: Global offensive. Proceedings – 2020 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, Big Data 2020, 1283–1292. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData50022.2020.9378154

28.

Williams

Yang

(2010). Forecasting global generation of obsolete personal computers. Environmental Science and Technology, 44(9), 3232–3237. https://doi.org/10.1021/es903350q

29.

Yunhao

Sophie

Elizabeth

M,C

Bianca

(2025). Behind the screen: How gaming habits, motives, and content shape cyberbullying behaviour. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 18, 100675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100675

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.19 MB

0.00 MB

0.01 MB