Skip to content
https://scanracer.com

Sustainability

· 7 checks — CO2 emissions, green hosting, repeat-visit weight, carbon budget, and transfer efficiency rolled into one auditable list.
SCORE
90
GRADE
A
FIX
0
REVIEW
3
PASS
4
INFO
0
Checks
7
4 PASS 3 REVIEW
B
Transfer Efficiency
88% efficient
REVIEW
88% efficient
Info::
Transfer efficiency: 88%
An estimated 149 KB (12%) could be eliminated: 0 KB via better compression, 0 KB via modern image formats, 149 KB of unused JavaScript. This wasted data produces 0.03g of unnecessary CO2 per page view.
88% efficient

Total waste: 149 KB (12% of page weight)

Unused JS 149 KB

0.03g unnecessary CO2 per visit

Actual transfer 1216 KB
Theoretical minimum 1066 KB
Potential savings 149 KB (0.03g CO2)

See Deep Analysis sections above for specific optimizations.

B
Web Font Weight Variants
No detectable Google Fonts weights
REVIEW
No detectable Google Fonts weights
Info::
No detectable Google Fonts weights
The analyzer detects font weights via Google Fonts URL parameters (~70% of font-using sites). Self-hosted fonts and non-Google CDN fonts aren't visible to URL-based detection. If you self-host fonts, manually audit how many @font-face weights you ship -- 2-3 weights per family is typically enough; 5+ is usually unused payload.
C
Green Hosting
Action
Whether the site is served from green-energy infrastructure
REVIEW

Green Hosting

No green hosting detected

A
CO2 Per Page Load
0.28g CO2 per view
PASS
0.28g CO2 per view
Info::
0.28g CO2 per page view
This page transfers 1.2 MB, producing an estimated 0.28g of CO2 per visit using the Sustainable Web Design model (v4). Breakdown: data center 0.01g, network 0.06g, end-user device 0.22g.
Got: 0.28g CO2 Expected: < 0.50g (sustainability target)
Info::
At 10,000 monthly views: 33.7 kg CO2/year
With 10,000 page views per month, this page would generate approximately 33.7 kg of CO2 annually — equivalent to charging 4218 smartphones.
Info::
Green hosting reduces data center emissions

0.28g

Carbon Footprint per page view

Below sustainability target (0.50g)

Cleaner than 82% of websites

Sustainable Web Design model v4 · Page size: 1.2 MB

Your site
0.28g
Top 10%
0.20g
Target
0.50g
Median website
0.60g

Energy Breakdown

Data center
0.01g
Network
0.06g
End-user device
0.22g
At 10,000 monthly views: Monthly: 2.8 kg · Annual: 33.7 kg · ≈ 4218 smartphone charges
A+
Green Hosting
Green (both)
PASS
Green (both)
Info::
Both hosting and CDN use renewable energy
Got: Hosting: Vercel, CDN: Vercel
Info::
Vercel: Hosted on AWS/Google Cloud with renewable energy commitments
Info::
Vercel: Hosted on AWS/Google Cloud with renewable energy commitments
Info::
Green hosting status based on known provider commitments
Green hosting detection uses a curated database of provider renewable energy commitments. This is not a real-time verification. For authoritative checks, visit thegreenwebfoundation.org.
Green Hosting Green Hosted
Hosting VercelCDN Vercel

Vercel: Hosted on AWS/Google Cloud with renewable energy commitments

Vercel: Hosted on AWS/Google Cloud with renewable energy commitments

Based on known provider commitments. Verify at thegreenwebfoundation.org

A+
Repeat Visit Weight
96% cached
PASS
96% cached
Info::
96% reduction on repeat visits
Returning visitors download only 50 KB (vs 1216 KB first visit). 44 of 46 resources are served from browser cache, saving 0.27g CO2 per repeat visit.
Info::
Repeat visit: 0.01g CO2 (first visit: 0.28g)
First visit
1216 KB
Repeat visit
50 KB

96% reduction on repeat visits

Saving 0.27g CO2 per returning visitor

44 resources served from cache · 2 resources re-downloaded

A
Carbon Budget
18th percentile
PASS
18th percentile
Info::
0.28g CO2 — below the sustainability target of 0.50g
Cleaner than an estimated 82% of websites analyzed. This page meets the Web Sustainability Guidelines target.
Info::
Estimated 18th percentile
Compared to: top 10% = 0.20g, target = 0.50g, median = 0.60g per page view.
Top 10%
Target
Median website

0.28g

18th percentile

Cleaner than 82% of websites

Below the Web Sustainability Guidelines target

vs Median 53% cleaner ✓
vs Target 44% cleaner ✓
All checks on this page are automated. Results are estimates - run targeted manual reviews when the score affects a release decision.

Send Feedback