Discord vs Facebook

This comparison uses the current IdleForest model for Discord and Facebook: their category, modeled CO2 per use unit, methodology notes, key drivers, and assumptions.

Supporting comparison page

Discord

Social

35g

CO2 / HOUR

Facebook

Social

65g

CO2 / HOUR

Higher emissions

Data-backed comparison

Summary

When comparing Discord and Facebook, Facebook generates significantly more CO2 emissions per hour (65g) than Discord (35g). Both applications rely on devices, networks, and server infrastructure, which all contribute to their environmental impact.

Why the gap happens

Facebook is modeled at 65g CO2 per unit, while Discord is modeled at 35g, so the visible gap is 30g in the current dataset.
Both products sit in the Social category, so the difference comes from the per-product estimate and page-level methodology fields rather than a category change.
The estimate treats Facebook as a media-rich social feed where autoplay, image loading, ads, and long mobile sessions are the main drivers.
Autoplay, recommendation loops, and image/video-heavy feeds extend session length.

What to act on first

Because Facebook is higher in the current model, start there: Disable autoplay and cut accidental scroll time where possible.

Facebook is currently modeled at 30g CO2 more per unit of use than Discord.

Deep dive into their footprints

Read the full Discord report Read the full Facebook report

Comparison takeaways

Facebook is modeled at 65g CO2 per unit, while Discord is modeled at 35g, so the visible gap is 30g in the current dataset.

Both products sit in the Social category, so the difference comes from the per-product estimate and page-level methodology fields rather than a category change.

About IdleForest

IdleForest is a passive browser extension that plants trees while you browse, game, or stream. It uses your unused internet bandwidth to fund reforestation projects.

Start Planting Free