While I also dislike bloated websites, I suspect the climate impact is rather neglible. The internet as a whole needs a few percent of global power, and the vast majority of that is going to be (video) streaming. Most heavy JS is going to be static and running on very efficient end devices.
The worst case estimates seem to be 7kWh/GiG (2012) (the best case much less than a 0.1 kWh/Gig, but only including network), which is ~60 km in electrical cars or 15 km in petrol cars. (The latter two only including the incremental energy usage).
The additionally induced trips by AirBnB (especially flying) are going to be so much worse than their website could ever be.
Energy usage data is from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jiec.12630 (with very old & high estimates disregarded). In 2022 the internet will probably be more efficient, the study estimates a halving every 2 years. So naively (very naively) extrapolating the 7kWh/Gig figure from 2012 to now is less than half a kWh/Gig.
The worst case estimates seem to be 7kWh/GiG (2012) (the best case much less than a 0.1 kWh/Gig, but only including network), which is ~60 km in electrical cars or 15 km in petrol cars. (The latter two only including the incremental energy usage).
The additionally induced trips by AirBnB (especially flying) are going to be so much worse than their website could ever be.
Energy usage data is from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jiec.12630 (with very old & high estimates disregarded). In 2022 the internet will probably be more efficient, the study estimates a halving every 2 years. So naively (very naively) extrapolating the 7kWh/Gig figure from 2012 to now is less than half a kWh/Gig.