Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study explores the attitudes and practices of 134 professional developers regarding software energy consumption, revealing that energy considerations are often overlooked in favor of optimizing performance metrics like execution time and CPU utilization. The findings indicate that only a minority of projects explicitly account for energy use, with many developers unaware of the potential negative impact of performance improvements on energy efficiency. Key barriers to integrating energy-aware practices include organizational disincentives, inadequate tooling, and a lack of education on energy-performance trade-offs.
Developers often prioritize performance over energy efficiency, leading to unintended consequences that could waste resources and increase costs.
Context: Software significantly influences the efficiency with which hardware resources are utilized, yet software energy consumption is seldom treated as a first-class concern in day-to-day development practice. Objective: This study investigates professional developers' attitudes, decision-making, and development practices related to software energy consumption, with particular emphasis on how energy considerations are recognized, assessed, and acted upon during software development. Method: To this end, we conduct an online survey with 134 software developers. Our study combines quantitative analyses with a qualitative open-card sorting of free-text responses to characterize perceptions, practices, and reasoning patterns around energy consumption. Findings: Energy consumption is explicitly considered in only a minority of projects. More commonly, developers influence energy use indirectly by optimizing proxy properties such as execution time and CPU utilization. Responses to scenario-based questions reveal systematic blind spots in this mental model, including cases in which performance improvements increase energy consumption or exhibit no correlation. We also identify organizational disincentives, limited tooling, and educational gaps as major barriers to adoption. Implications: (1) Institutionalize energy-aware approaches through visible flagship deployments that demonstrate value, (2) expand research and education on energy-performance trade-offs, and (3) develop practical, developer-oriented measurement and feedback tools that lower adoption barriers.