Is there little interest in the Fridays for Future online strikes in relation to the climate-damaging enormous electricity consumption?

Apparently only very few are interested in the online strikes by Fridays-for-Future. Some have never heard of it. Nevertheless, tens of thousands of laptops, smartphones, PCs, servers are used for this purpose. Etc. Put into operation, which are harmful to the climate.

BR Facts Fox - Internet climate killer (end of 2019):

How much electricity does the internet use?

The simple answer is: more and more. The nonprofit French organization "The Shift Project" is
https://theshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Lean-ICT-Report_The-Shift-Project_2019.pdf comes to the conclusion: "The use of digital technology is growing and the impact it has on the environment is constantly underestimated." In 2013, digital services were still responsible for 2.5 percent of global greenhouse gases. In 2018 it was 3.7 percent.

The main reason for this is digitization in the large industrialized countries. This also plays an increasingly important role in Germany:
https://www.borderstep.de/publikation/hintemann-r-2018-studie-zur-entwicklung-von-rechenzentren-im-jahr-2017-berlin-borderstep-institut/ use German servers and data centers in about as much electricity as the entire city of Berlin.

https://www.br.de/nachrichten/netzwelt/faktenfuchs-ist-das-internet-ein-klimakiller,Rm98ql1

According to my own survey (yes, I did it) the interest in these online strikes is extremely low.

I mean, every one of us already knows that if the corona crisis is eased further, that the children are "demonstrating" again on the streets… So why put an additional strain on the climate. That is out of proportion, or am I wrong?

Which are harmful to the climate.

The impact of this can't be measured. But we have permafrost (1/3 of the land mass) that is thawing. That can be measured. Reputable sources assume 1,500 gigatons of CO², which put an additional burden on the climate. Unfortunately, you can't pull a plug there either.

It is important for today's kids that they become responsible consumers in the future.

They demonstrate less to change something in the environment now, but more to imprint certain patterns in their brains.

As for power consumption. Yes, as is so often the case. We can't exist completely without influence.

Political activism is effective. The online demonstrators are helping the government to take climate protection seriously and to move closer to the Paris goal. We're talking about billions of tons of CO2. That is not in relation to the few grams for a tweet or YouTube video. Nevertheless, a real life demo and the best strike is the method with the most influence.

Reputable sources

Ah yes🤟

Siberia from 5 p.m.

https://www.zdf.de/dokumentation/terra-x/faszination-erde-sibirien-zurueck-in-die-eiszeit-100.html

"Apparently, very few are interested in the online strikes by Fridays-for-Future."

What makes you think that? Statistical figures are, compared to other demonstrations in public spaces, of course much more difficult to collect. But I refer to various reports from ARD, MDR, Die Zeit, Faz, ZDF or rp-online etc. On this topic. Everything available online or in the media library.

The rest of your question corresponds to the as boring as well-known hater argument: "They should start with themselves first."

It was planned to hold an "online strike" on April 24th, which is a little longer.

There were internal discussions about it, on 24th there was an international livestream and each country got its own time in the stream.

Meanwhile e.g. Internal / small vigils organized.

Describing FFF as children is absurd, every age group takes part in the demos.

The FS is on a private feud campaign against Greta Thunberg and F4F, and has been asking loaded, manipulative or directly rousing "questions" for months full of insinuations, defamation and conspiracy theories.

I know that ^^

Some just need it…