Lights! Camera! Climate Crisis!?

Don’t get me wrong, I love movies, especially those that highlight climate change. Don’t Look Up, Interstellar, An Inconvenient Truth, and my kids’ favorite, Wall-E, all inspire action to protect our planet.

As I dive deeper into climate change and the industries contributing to environmental destruction, I can't help but wonder about the resources used to bring these climate-conscious films to life. Is there a disconnect between the message to save the planet and the environmental cost of producing these movies?

Film productions generate substantial carbon emissions, consume vast amounts of water, and require significant natural resources. Hollywood’s environmental impact is substantial, both in the U.S. and globally.

Carbon Footprint from Film Productions

Hollywood’s influence on public opinion is also powerful, but climate change rarely takes center stage. Even when mentioned, it’s often in passing, missing opportunities to drive meaningful change. Critics argue Hollywood's environmental impact, from production carbon footprints to resource use, exacerbates the problem it's trying to raise awareness about.

• United States: The carbon footprint of film productions in Hollywood is substantial, with transportation, energy usage on sets, and post-production being major contributors. Large film shoots often require extensive travel, sometimes using private jets, and large-scale productions use considerable energy to power lights, equipment, and set constructions. One study estimated that a single major film production could generate up to 3,370 metric tons of CO2, equivalent to the annual energy use of several hundred homes.

• Worldwide Impact: Hollywood's influence extends globally through international co-productions, film festivals, and global film distribution. This means film crews frequently travel to various countries, contributing to global carbon emissions. Additionally, global film industries in countries like the UK, India, and China emulate Hollywood’s large-scale production techniques, further increasing the worldwide carbon footprint.

Set Construction and Waste

Set construction in the film and television industry involves building environments to match the visual needs of a production. These sets can range from small-scale interiors to elaborate cityscapes or landscapes. However, the process generates substantial waste, primarily due to the temporary nature of sets.

Materials such as wood, plaster, paint, and foam are commonly used, and often, once production concludes, these materials are discarded instead of being reused or recycled. This results in significant environmental impacts, with thousands of tons of waste entering landfills annually.

Efforts to mitigate waste include adopting sustainable practices like using recyclable materials, designing modular sets for reuse, and incorporating virtual production techniques to reduce physical construction needs. Such measures not only address environmental concerns, but also promote more efficient use of resources throughout the production process.

• United States: Many Hollywood productions involve building temporary sets, which require large amounts of materials like wood, metal, and plastic. Once filming ends, these sets are often discarded, contributing to landfill waste. While some studios have started recycling materials, much of this waste is still not managed sustainably.

• Worldwide Impact: The environmental footprint of set construction is a global issue, as film industries around the world follow similar practices. In countries with less stringent environmental regulations, waste from film productions may be even harder to manage.

Energy Usage on Sets and Locations

Energy usage on film and television sets, as well as on-location shoots, is significant due to the extensive power demands of lighting, cameras, equipment, and transportation. Generators, commonly used on remote sets, often rely on diesel fuel, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.

Large-scale productions often use high-wattage lights and cooling systems, which consume substantial energy. On-location shoots may require energy-intensive transportation for crew, cast, and equipment, as well as temporary power installations.

Efforts to reduce energy consumption include transitioning to energy-efficient LED lighting, using renewable energy sources, and adopting electric vehicles for transport. Some productions also collaborate with sustainability experts to monitor and minimize their carbon footprint, making the entertainment industry more eco-friendly.

• United States: Hollywood productions require vast amounts of electricity to run lights, cameras, and other equipment. Powering these large sets often involves diesel generators, which are not only inefficient, but also release pollutants into the environment. Some studios have begun investing in renewable energy or energy-efficient technologies, but adoption is slow.

• Worldwide Impact: This issue is replicated globally in film hubs such as Bollywood (India), Nollywood (Nigeria), and the UK film industry. Without industry-wide sustainability standards, global productions continue to rely on energy-intensive practices.

Water Usage

Water usage on film sets encompasses multiple needs, from hydration for cast and crew to on-set effects and maintenance. Bottled water is a common feature, particularly in hot climates, to keep crews hydrated during long shoots, although this contributes to significant plastic waste and environmental impact.

Film productions also use water for aesthetic purposes, such as creating “wet-downs” to enhance the visual appeal of streets or surfaces for filming. A life cycle analysis of water consumption during a feature film production revealed that 2,102 liters of drinking water can generate approximately 1.2 tons of CO2, highlighting the environmental footprint associated with water use on sets.

Efforts to reduce water usage and waste, such as utilizing reusable water bottles and optimizing effects techniques, can help mitigate this impact.

• United States: Productions often use water in large quantities, especially for action sequences or special effects involving water. Additionally, productions filmed in arid regions like California exacerbate local water scarcity issues. For example, the use of artificial rain or water tanks on set can strain local water resources.

• Worldwide Impact: Water overuse is not limited to Hollywood. In countries facing water stress, film productions can aggravate existing problems. Large productions in areas like Australia or South Africa may face similar challenges in managing water use sustainably.

Plastic Waste and Consumables:

Plastic waste and consumables have long been significant contributors to the environmental footprint of Hollywood productions. Film sets generate vast amounts of single-use plastic, particularly water bottles, food packaging, and other disposable items required for the convenience and fast pace of production.

It is estimated that certain initiatives have helped productions save millions of plastic water bottles from disposal. Despite these efforts, the entertainment industry as a whole continues to grapple with the environmental consequences of its operations, which often prioritize efficiency over sustainability.

Beyond Hollywood, plastic waste from other industries and consumer behavior adds to a growing global crisis. Strategies like promoting reusable alternatives, integrating circular economy practices, and educating stakeholders about sustainable choices are essential for reducing reliance on disposable plastics and consumables. Implementing these approaches can significantly curb waste, while setting a standard for environmentally conscious practices across industries.

• United States: Film sets often generate significant plastic waste from single-use items, such as disposable water bottles, catering supplies, and packaging for props and costumes. Although some studios have introduced green initiatives, single-use plastic consumption remains a persistent problem.

• Worldwide Impact: The wasteful practices of Hollywood are mirrored in film industries across the globe, especially in high-volume film centers. Efforts to reduce single-use plastics in film production are still in the early stages worldwide.

Film Festivals and Travel

Film festivals and associated travel significantly impact the environment, primarily through high carbon emissions. A large portion of a festival's carbon footprint comes from audience, crew, and talent transportation, often involving long-haul flights and extensive ground travel.

These emissions dominate the total environmental impact, surpassing energy use or waste generated during the festival itself. Film festivals often serve as international hubs, amplifying their reliance on resource-heavy logistics like air-conditioned venues, lighting, and catering.

The environmental strain extends beyond carbon emissions, involving resource consumption and waste generation. Significant quantities of single-use plastics, food waste, and promotional materials contribute to the footprint. These factors underscore the need for more sustainable practices, such as virtual events, renewable energy use, and eco-conscious travel policies, to mitigate the ecological consequences of film festivals.

• United States: Film festivals in places like Los Angeles, New York, and Sundance draw large crowds, increasing travel-related carbon emissions as filmmakers, industry professionals, and fans fly to attend. Events require substantial resources to power venues, transport attendees, and manage waste.

• Worldwide Impact: Major international festivals, such as Cannes, Venice, and the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) face similar environmental challenges. As Hollywood content dominates these festivals, the carbon footprint of the industry grows due to the global nature of film promotion.

Climate Action Based Movies with a Huge Carbon Footprint

While it’s difficult to provide precise carbon footprint numbers for each specific movie, especially since productions don’t always disclose such data, we can estimate the carbon impact of big-budget films based on industry averages and available reports.

Several Hollywood movies have tackled the subject of climate change, often presenting powerful messages about the dangers of environmental neglect. However, there’s an irony in the fact that while these films raise awareness, the industry itself—through large-scale productions, energy use, and carbon emissions—has not always taken sufficient steps toward becoming environmentally sustainable. Here's a look at some of these movies, with a reflection on this irony:

1. "The Day After Tomorrow" (2004)

• Plot Summary: This disaster film directed by Roland Emmerich depicts catastrophic climate change events that result in a new ice age. The movie highlights the potential consequences of global warming, including severe weather patterns and the destruction of human civilization.

• Irony: The Day After Tomorrow was a large-scale blockbuster that required significant environmental resources to produce. Despite its message about climate change, the carbon footprint of making such a CGI-heavy film involving global travel, special effects, and large production teams likely contradicted the environmental message it intended to deliver.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 10,000 to 15,000 metric tons of CO2

• Reasoning: As a large-scale disaster movie, The Day After Tomorrow featured numerous action sequences, heavy use of CGI, and large production sets, all of which contribute to high energy use. The need for extensive global travel for location filming, special effects, and marketing further added to the emissions.

2. "An Inconvenient Truth" (2006)

• Plot Summary: This documentary, spearheaded by former Vice President Al Gore, was one of the first major Hollywood productions to focus explicitly on the issue of climate change. It played a key role in raising awareness about global warming and environmental responsibility.

• Irony: While An Inconvenient Truth itself had a smaller carbon footprint as a documentary, its promotion, and the surrounding media campaigns, relied on the traditional Hollywood machine, which is not known for being eco-friendly. Marketing efforts for the film, including global press tours, contributed to emissions despite its message of reducing one’s carbon footprint.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 300 to 500 metric tons of CO2

• Reasoning: An Inconvenient Truth was a documentary with a much smaller carbon footprint than most feature films. However, the promotional efforts—particularly Al Gore’s international tours and speaking engagements—contributed to a larger footprint than the actual production. The film's footprint was still relatively low compared to blockbusters.

3. "Interstellar" (2014)

• Plot Summary: Directed by Christopher Nolan, Interstellar explores a future where climate change has ravaged the Earth, forcing humanity to seek a new home in space. The film touches on themes of environmental collapse and human survival.

• Irony: Interstellar was a high-budget, effects-heavy film that required international travel, massive sets, and significant energy use. While it addressed climate concerns, its production—like most large-scale Hollywood blockbusters—contributed to the environmental issues it warned about.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 10,000 to 20,000 metric tons of CO2

• Reasoning: Interstellar was a high-budget, special effects-driven film, with significant CGI, large set designs, and multiple location shoots. The heavy reliance on technology, visual effects, and international promotion increased the carbon footprint significantly.

4. "Don't Look Up" (2021)

• Plot Summary: This dark comedy, directed by Adam McKay, serves as a satirical commentary on climate change denial, with a plot centered around two scientists trying to warn the world about a planet-destroying comet (an allegory for climate change). The film critiques the apathy and inaction of governments, media, and society regarding existential environmental threats.

• Irony: Despite the film’s poignant message about climate inaction, Don't Look Up was produced with the typical Hollywood scale—large sets, high-profile cast, and extensive promotional campaigns, all of which contributed to emissions. It raises the question of whether the entertainment industry itself is fully aligned with the sustainability principles it promotes in such films.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 2,000 to 3,000 metric tons of CO2

• Reasoning: Don't Look Up was filmed during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have slightly reduced its carbon footprint due to fewer international travel and location shoots. However, with A-list stars, extensive CGI, and global marketing campaigns, it still had a notable environmental impact.

5. "Avatar" (2009)

• Plot Summary: James Cameron’s Avatar is set on Pandora, a lush alien planet threatened by human exploitation. The film is often seen as an allegory for environmental destruction, corporate greed, and the exploitation of natural resources, making it relevant to climate change discussions.

• Irony: Despite its environmental themes, Avatar was one of the most resource-intensive films ever made, with a budget of nearly $300 million. The vast energy consumption needed for the film’s groundbreaking CGI, as well as its global promotional tours, stands in stark contrast to the film's pro-environment message. James Cameron has since been an outspoken advocate for environmental causes, but the film’s production showcased the energy-hungry nature of Hollywood’s biggest projects.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 20,000 to 25,000 metric tons of CO2

• Reasoning: Avatar was one of the most resource-intensive films ever made, with a massive production budget and extensive use of groundbreaking CGI and visual effects. Filming took place over several years, requiring vast amounts of energy and materials. The promotional tour and 3D screenings around the world further added to the carbon footprint.

6. "Geostorm" (2017)

• Plot Summary: In Geostorm, global weather-controlling satellites malfunction and cause devastating climate disasters around the world. The film highlights the fragility of Earth's climate systems and humanity's technological interventions to prevent catastrophe.

• Irony: Like other disaster films, Geostorm used extensive special effects and energy-intensive production methods, contributing to environmental degradation in the process. The film's portrayal of climate-related destruction feels disconnected from the reality of Hollywood's large-scale environmental impact.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 8,000 to 12,000 metric tons of CO2.

• Reasoning: As a disaster film with extensive use of special effects and action sequences, Geostorm required significant energy resources. The global locations and marketing also contributed to the film’s substantial carbon footprint.

7. "Snowpiercer" (2013)

• Plot Summary: Directed by Bong Joon-ho, Snowpiercer is set in a post-apocalyptic world where a failed climate change experiment has caused the Earth to freeze. The story unfolds on a train carrying the last remnants of humanity, exploring themes of environmental collapse, resource scarcity, and social inequality.

• Irony: While the film criticizes human mismanagement of the environment, its Hollywood production values required significant energy consumption and global travel for promotion. It’s another case where the industry’s reliance on carbon-intensive practices contradicts the film’s core environmental message.

• Estimated Carbon Footprint: 5,000 to 7,000 metric tons of CO2

• Reasoning: While Snowpiercer was a mid-budget sci-fi film, it still required significant resources for location shoots, special effects, and the creation of detailed sets. The promotional tour added to the film’s overall carbon impact.

General Carbon Footprint of Hollywood Films

• The average blockbuster film can generate between 2,000 and 20,000 metric tons of CO2, depending on the scale, travel, effects, and marketing efforts.

• The biggest films (like Avatar or Interstellar) are on the higher end of this range, while smaller productions, especially documentaries or indie films, tend to have lower footprints.

The key irony in Hollywood’s climate change films lies in the massive carbon footprint of making and distributing such films. Big-budget productions often rely on extensive energy use, including air travel, diesel-powered generators, and resource-heavy sets. The marketing campaigns that follow—global press tours, premieres, and merchandising—add more emissions, further contradicting the environmental themes these films promote.

The industry’s tendency toward disposable set design, single-use plastics, and the heavy use of CGI contributes to the broader environmental crisis these films often warn about. While many studios have started adopting sustainable practices, the progress is slow and not yet widespread across all productions.

Sustainability Initiatives in Hollywood

Several initiatives and incentives are in place to encourage Hollywood to reduce its environmental footprint. These incentives help studios and production companies adopt greener practices, reduce waste, and lower carbon emissions:

• Tax Credits and Financial Incentives:

  • California Film Commission’s Green Initiative: California offers film tax credits to productions that follow environmentally sustainable practices. Productions that demonstrate efforts such as recycling set materials, using energy-efficient lighting, or sourcing eco-friendly transportation can qualify for enhanced incentives.

  • International Incentives: Other countries, such as the UK, offer similar green tax breaks or rebates to productions that follow sustainability guidelines. These incentives aim to encourage producers to consider environmental impacts in exchange for financial benefits.

• Green Production Guide:

  • A joint project by the Producers Guild of America (PGA) and the Sustainable Production Alliance (SPA), the Green Production Guide offers tools, resources, and best practices for making film and TV production more sustainable. It includes guidelines for waste reduction, water conservation, energy use, and eco-friendly transportation options.

• Environmental Certifications:

  • Some productions strive to achieve Environmental Media Association (EMA) Green Seal Certification, which is given to those that successfully implement sustainable production practices. This certification is a mark of environmental responsibility and can enhance the reputation of the production or studio.

• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR):

  • Major studios like Warner Bros., Disney, and Sony Pictures have established internal sustainability programs to align with their broader corporate social responsibility goals. These programs often focus on reducing emissions, conserving water, and minimizing waste on set and in office buildings. Studios often publicize these efforts as part of their branding and public relations campaigns.

To truly reduce Hollywood’s environmental footprint, the industry could implement more ambitious and widespread initiatives, particularly those targeting systemic changes:

• Mandatory Green Standards Across Productions:

  • Implementing mandatory industry-wide green standards would push productions to consistently adopt sustainable practices. These standards could include requirements for renewable energy use, set recycling, electric vehicle (EV) fleets, and sustainable catering.

  • Enforcement through government policies or agreements within the industry could further encourage all studios and production companies to comply, with penalties for non-compliance.

• Carbon Neutral Commitments:

  • Studios and production companies should commit to making their operations carbon neutral by investing in renewable energy and purchasing carbon offsets. More ambitious productions can aim to be carbon negative, meaning they offset more carbon than they emit.

  • Netflix, for example, has pledged to achieve net zero emissions by the end of 2022 through reducing direct emissions and purchasing offsets. Similar commitments across the industry would be impactful.

• Green Technology Investments:

  • Hollywood should invest heavily in green technology, including solar-powered film sets, energy-efficient lighting systems (like LED), and electric-powered equipment. Leveraging virtual production technology, such as the “Stagecraft” LED video wall used in The Mandalorian, can reduce the need for on-location shoots, cutting travel-related emissions.

• Sustainable Set Design and Circular Economy:

  • Studios can adopt a circular economy approach to set design, where materials used in set construction are reused and recycled for future productions. Instead of building new sets for each production, studios could develop reusable modular sets that can be easily disassembled and repurposed for other projects.

  • The industry could create “set libraries”, where different productions can rent or borrow set pieces, reducing the need for creating new materials and reducing waste.

• Zero-Waste Productions:

  • The ultimate goal would be for productions to aim for zero waste by eliminating single-use plastics and non-recyclable materials from the set. This could include providing reusable water bottles, compostable packaging for catering, and incentivizing the use of sustainable alternatives in costume and prop design.

  • Incentivizing caterers and suppliers to offer zero-waste services could make this a realistic goal.

• Sustainable Transportation and Travel Policies:

  • Encourage the use of electric vehicles (EVs) for transporting cast, crew, and equipment. Studios could build infrastructure for EV charging stations at production sites and soundstages.

  • Develop policies that reduce the need for air travel by promoting virtual production methods, local hiring for cast and crew, and selecting film locations based on proximity to minimize emissions from travel.

• Sustainability Training for Crew Members:

  • Create mandatory sustainability training programs for crew members and department heads (like production designers and transportation coordinators) so that everyone involved in the production is aware of and capable of implementing eco-friendly practices.

  • Studios could offer certifications or recognition for crew members who participate in these programs, which can be seen as an additional professional credential.

• Public Transparency and Sustainability Reporting:

  • Major studios should commit to publicly reporting their sustainability progress on an annual basis, similar to how corporations report on financial performance. These reports could include energy consumption, waste produced, and emissions generated during production. This would increase accountability and allow the public to track which studios are truly making an impact.

• Collaborative Sustainability Fund:

  • The industry could establish a Sustainability Fund, where a portion of every film’s budget is dedicated to implementing green technologies or offsetting environmental impact. Contributions to the fund could also come from studios and production companies, helping smaller independent films afford eco-friendly production options.

• Industry-Wide Pledge or Agreement:

• Similar to the Paris Agreement, Hollywood could benefit from an industry-wide climate pledge, where studios and production companies agree to cut emissions by a certain percentage over time. This would require collective action, and studios would be responsible for making progress and sharing results publicly.

By implementing these more aggressive and collaborative initiatives, Hollywood could serve as a global leader in sustainable film production, influencing other industries and international film markets to follow suit.

Hollywood’s environmental footprint is significant, primarily due to its energy-intensive practices, resource waste, and the carbon footprint of travel and transportation. Globally, the industry's influence extends, with similar environmental impacts seen in major film production hubs worldwide. Although there are emerging efforts to make Hollywood and the broader film industry more sustainable, much more work is needed to reduce the environmental impact of film and television production on a global scale.

Follow me for expert insights into sustainability and environmental writing that connects brands with conscious consumers. Whether you need website copy, blog articles, or campaigns that build trust and credibility, I craft compelling content that drives results.

Let's create content that not only elevates your brand, but also makes a positive impact on the planet. Ready to start?

Hire me today and bring your sustainability mission to life!