Your first mistake towards sustainability is visiting Nestle in the first place. That company's existence is the opposite of sustainability.
According to a Purdue University Study dark mode can save 3 to 9% of your battery if you're on auto brightness. Let's say your average phone uses 15Wh per day (5.475 kWh per year). Let's say 5 billion people use smartphones. That's around 30 TWh for total yearly smartphone consumption.
So if everyone was using dark mode, it could save around 0.8 to 2.5 TWh a year in the best case scenario. But that is if everything on your phone was dark mode. Not sure how much time people spend browsing websites percentually.
That's around 0.1 to 2.7 times the daily electric energy production of all nuclear power plants.
The world electricity production is around 23000 TWh per year, so you could save around 0.0036% to 0.01% of yearly energy consumption by switching everyone to dark mode.
Such impactful, much environment, wow
Fuck Nestlé, but technically they are right - it saves a little bit of energy and that's not a bad thing.
Yes, it's a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of energy we produce and no doubt there's better ways to save energy but heck, I'm down for doing the little things too.
Besides, it might encourage others to offer dark mode and that's no bad thing.
Again, I reiterate my opening statement: fuck Nestlé.
While I think it's nice that more people care about the environment, I wish that that same attention was proportially distrubuted amongst the issues causing the most damage instead of inconsequential shit like this.
People get extremely neutrotic about the most inconsequential environmental issues, but completely ignore all of the most impactful ones.
Aside from the existing well placed criticism like oil subsidies, I wish people were that passionate about using wood in conctruction instead of concrete. Switching to heat pumps where possible. Or not driving cars more than necessary or switching to smaller vehicles, like small electric cars, motorcycles, ebikes and bikes or public transport. Or that people would demand the end of corn and soy subsidies and biofuels, which are completely counter productive in their current form. Or that people care more about how zoning and building codes destroy the environment with things like single-family zoning, minimum parking requirements, banning mixed use etc..
I would like a more rational approach to environmentalism instead of this endless pointless virtue signaling, self-flaggelating and greenwashing.
But I get the feeling that things are going in the right direction at least.
I’m pretty sure those savings would apply only on pitch black interfaces on OLED screens, IPS panels do not use less energy by displaying black, unless is the only color on screen.
If a UI is dark grey (like the Nestle one in this post screenshot), all of the diodes on an OLED screen are lit up, so there shouldn’t be any savings whatsoever.
Also, we’re far from having dominance of OLED screens in the smartphone market, which would be required for your scenario to apply.
Yeah but when you consider that this massive show of goodwill came from the shriveled-up raisin that Ulf Schneider calls a 'heart', it's an improvement of 420%!
Fuck Nestlé and all but it is a more sustainable experience for your retinas.
So would not visiting nestle.com in the first place.
This is true, good point. Avoiding nestle is a more sustainable experience for life on earth.
On devices with OLED screens, the more pixels on the screen are lit up, the more power the screen consumes. So on the majority of smart phones these days, dark mode will slightly reduce energy consumption. Devices with LCD screens will likely show no difference, and we're talking a fairly negligible amount of power here anyway.
Not if Dark=Grey like on the screenshot. Needs to be proper black.
Not exactly. Yes dark grey will consume more power than full on "the pixel is turned off" black but it does take less energy to show a dark grey screen than a bright white one.
Lmao, says company that literally dries out local aquifers and puts that water in plastic bottles…but dArK ModE 🫠
On OLED screens dark mode does actually save power. My phone switches to dark mode when I turn on battery saving mode.
It probably doesn't matter much in the grand theme of this, but let's keep the criticism factual. God knows you don't need to make up arguments to criticize Nestle.
Yeah its not that you (and Nestle) arent right, its that its such a pissingly small amount of energy even on a global scale to be laughable.
Like "Nestle, you arent wrong. You're just an asshole"
It doesnt really matter when its just a gray theme and not black then on oled the pixels are still on
They still use less power for gray than for full white... so it's "something".
It should be noted that it’s on light mode by default, then they give you the pop-up to turn on dark mode
It only really does anything if the pixels can turn off completely. So the dark theme would have to feature full black backgrounds, not dark grey or anything like that.
That's not true. You can go upwards to 33% grey and it'll have the same effect as completely black if I recall correctly, but the all around energy saved by using dark mode isn't anything to write home about, really.
Advertising and corporate messaging are not about being right, but only about appearing right to a sufficient number of people.
It doesn't, but Nestlé's CEO probably thinks he can use this as an excuse to enter through the Pearly Gates rather than get tossed into the pit that's reserved for him in Hell.
Also make sure to accept our eco-friendly cookies
Plant-based and organic cookies!
I don't think anyone spenda enough time on their site to make a real difference, it's all show-boating.
Guess what? Cycling dark mode results in over 300 requests to nestle servers, so it does use power sending all those requests
Minecraft furnaces use more energy than the dark mode on the nestle website saves
