Users Pay Twice:
The Hidden
Energy Cost

of Web Advertising

Samuel Pélissier*, Naif Mehanna, Sterenn Roux, Quentin Perez§, Walter Rudametkin, Johann Bourcier, and Pierre Laperdrix#
* CentraleSupélec, Inria, IRISA, Rennes, France Independent, Lille, France Univ. Rennes, CNRS, Inria, IRISA, Rennes, France § INSA Rennes, Univ. Rennes, CNRS, Inria, IRISA, Rennes, France Univ. Rennes, CNRS, Inria, IRISA, IUF, Rennes, France Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, E2S UPPA, LIUPPA, Anglet, France # CNRS, Univ. Lille, Inria, Lille, France

ACM Web Conference 2026
doi: 10.1145/3774904.3792414

01 — Context

The Web isn't free

Since the first online ad in 1994, advertising has grown into a vast ecosystem delivering billions of ads daily. Advertisements are everywhere on the Web: search engines promote results, most websites display ads, some require users to accept ads as a condition for access, video streaming services fund their infrastructure through an increasing volume of ads, and much of the gaming industry has adopted ad-based revenue models. In exchange for free access to a wide range of content, web users sacrifice their privacy and pay with personal data to enable targeted marketing.

We argue that the ad ecosystem imposes an additional, overlooked, cost on web users: energy consumption. Indeed, every ad rendered on a screen requires CPU cycles, GPU calculations, RAM and bandwidth usage, all at the users' expense.

In our paper, we quantify that cost. We design a robust methodology aimed at realistically modeling user behavior and monitoring CPU activity. Through measurements of 724,994 website visits across four real consumer devices, we study the energy implications of blocking ads and consenting to tracking.

02 — Methodology

Comparing energy consumptions

01

Crawl for a first baseline

We visit a set of relevant, high-traffic websites without blocking ads and tracking. We measure the energy consumption induced by these visits using PowerAPI.

02

Crawl with an ad blocker

We reproduce the previous visits (same websites, same behavior) measuring the energy consumption again, this time blocking ads and tracking. For example, we leverage uBlock Origin as a browser extension, or AdGuard Home as a blocking DNS server.

03

Compare

We compare the energy consumption from the baseline crawl with the crawl using an ad-blocker, website-to-website (e.g., google.com vs google.com).

8
crawl variants
4
Real desktop+laptops
5,000
Websites Crawled
724K
Website visits in total
03 — Main Results

Saving energy through ad-blocking

uBlock Origin LiteuBlock OriginAdGuard DNS0−50+50−100+100Functional cookies onlyAccept all cookies
Energy consumption per ad-blocking technique vs. baseline
(less = more energy saved)
Ad Blocking

Ad blockers save more energy than they spend

Despite consuming CPU cycles for their own filtering, ad blockers generally reduce energy consumption for the end-user. The legacy uBlock Origin browser extension offers a median -9.62% saving when accepting functional cookies.

Google's forced migration from Manifest V2 → V3 (uBlock Origin → uBlock Origin Lite) reduces the energy benefits of blocking ads and tracking.

Energy consumption actually increases on specific websites due to behavior changes when ads and tracking are blocked.

0−50+50−100+100Functional cookies onlyAccept all cookies
Zoom on the impact of cookie consent while using uBlock Origin Lite (less = more energy saved)
Cookie Consent

Consent has an impact on energy consumption

Consenting to tracking via cookie banners increases median energy consumption by 2.57% compared to accepting only cookies required for websites to work. Accepting all cookies triggers a median 8.5 extra requests, 2 of which are detected as advertising and tracking.

This is a conservative lower-bound: some sites track users regardless of consent, and tracking scripts often begin loading before any banner interaction takes place.

By Category

The impact of blocking ads and tracking depends on the website category

Websites relying on ads for their economic model (e.g., online news) show the biggest energy consumption benefits when blocking ads and tracking.

CategoryAd Request RatioMedian Energy Reduction
News41.94%-17.67%
Shopping26.05%-10.52%
Business / Economy30.11%-7.53%
Entertainment35.05%-6.77%
Technology / Internet26.97%-4.91%
Government / Legal17.75%-2.66%

For more results and discussions, see the full paper.

04 — Implications & Limitations

Further study is always necessary

  • Results represent a lower-bound estimate of the actual energy consumption impact of ads & tracking: ad blockers themselves consume CPU for filtering, and some tracking scripts slip through imperfect filter lists.
  • Measurements focus on client-side CPU energy only; the server-side and network-infrastructure energy costs of ad delivery are excluded.
  • Since users visit nearly unique sets of websites, ad-blocking software may potentially increase energy consumption for some individuals.
  • Due to technical limitations, measurements were done on only four consumer-grade computers from 2017 - 2019 running Linux; newer hardware, dedicated GPUs, and other operating systems were not tested.
  • All crawls were conducted exclusively in France; energy mixes, regulatory environments, and ad ecosystems differ significantly across regions, which affects both ad prevalence and associated carbon impact.