Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 508 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#11

Post by mcv »

simonmesmith wrote: post #7

Similarly, I often wonder why cities don’t promote local telecommuting over building expensive public transportation infrastructure. Building one kilometre of subway costs anywhere from around $100 million to $1.6 billion ( https://marroninstitute.nyu.edu/events/how-much-does-it-cost... ), and then requires subsidies to run. Why not use this money to provide incentives for people to telecommute? And while some might…

Not all jobs can be done by telecommuting. It's a great solution for office work, but it doesn't work so well for manufacturing, retail or the service industry.

> most public transit currently doesn’t serve those people well because it’s focused on work-related commuting patterns.

Does it? Work-related travel is mostly during morning and late afternoon, but public transit also runs outside those hours. In my experience public transit works quite well for non-commuting travel. Of course this can vary wildly by country, but the claim that public transit only really serves commuters is not universally true.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#12

Post by mcv »

lm28469 wrote: post #10
luminouslow wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>heating an office space with 500+ people is much more efficient than heating 500 individual houses Citation needed. I would argue its very hard to make any general statement about this. In my case the office is much more wasteful than the space I use for remote work for a multitude of reasons.

I said I'm not convinced, it obviously isn't a general thing. A friend of mine spends 500+ euros per month on gas for heating since he works from home, no way on earth his office uses 500 per person and per month on heat

Is that € 500 for just the working hours? Because homes are also generally heated for other uses than work. Those reasons don't go away if you work at the office. If you've got a spouse working from home, or kids coming from school, that house is going to be heated anyway.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#13

Post by paulcole »

I don’t understand who the advertisements are meant to reach as their audience?

The companies? They care about profit not the environment.

The employees? They are either already sold on remote work or don’t like remote work.

Whose mind is changed by being told the environmental benefits of remote work?

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#15

Post by hayst4ck »

luminouslow wrote: post #9
hayst4ck wrote: post #4

What makes you so sure that commuting is more environmentally harmful than datacenters full of hardware and the construction and transport of said hardware and mining of raw materials for the hardware? Additionally, lack of commuting incentivizes un-environmental and inefficient suburban sprawl. I am not saying that's the case, but I don't buy that it's a strictly pro-environment win a-priori. If anything commuting i…

I don't know about you but we still use the internet/zoom etc. in the office so you still need datacenters >lack of commuting incentivizes un-environmental and inefficient suburban sprawl I dont understand this point, IMO commuting leads to more suburban sprawl? Also i think this is a very USA-centric problem.

Sure zoom is still used, but I would be surprised if it's on the same order of magnitude.

I'm not trying to argue that commuting is more environmentally friendly, it's very likely not, only that I need a bit more substantiation than "it's obviously true," and I particularly would want substantiation on the long term. I also would want to understand if electric cars are being accounted for.

The reason not to live in the suburbs is a long commute to your office. Living in the city might make a commute walk-able. So a commute dis-incentivizes suburban sprawl.

Definitely a USA problem. Cars are poison, literally and metaphorically. I don't think the average American has experienced what car-less living is like and how much better it is.

My critique of your original post is that there are many reason's remote work might be better, but environmentalism probably isn't the strongest.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#16

Post by nytesky »

lm28469 wrote: post #6

I'm not convinced it is a net positive in the end. Especially for big companies, heating an office space with 500+ people is probably much more efficient than heating 500 individual houses for example Not everyone commute with an ICE vehicle too

Anecdotally I see many people traveling more enabled by remote work (and a single flight can equal a full year of car commuting). And I feel many people use telework days to run errands or go to lunch more frequently often nearly matching commute miles in a day.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#17

Post by nytesky »

hayst4ck wrote: post #4

What makes you so sure that commuting is more environmentally harmful than datacenters full of hardware and the construction and transport of said hardware and mining of raw materials for the hardware? Additionally, lack of commuting incentivizes un-environmental and inefficient suburban sprawl. I am not saying that's the case, but I don't buy that it's a strictly pro-environment win a-priori. If anything commuting i…

Oh yeah sprawl is induced. If you only have to drive 2x week — you may tolerate a 50 mile commute vs before you aimed for 10 mi. In that scenario no reduction in miles driven (maybe even more if you run errands during telework days) and greater incursion of development beyond the city.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#18

Post by throwaway14356 »

simonmesmith wrote: post #7

Similarly, I often wonder why cities don’t promote local telecommuting over building expensive public transportation infrastructure. Building one kilometre of subway costs anywhere from around $100 million to $1.6 billion ( https://marroninstitute.nyu.edu/events/how-much-does-it-cost... ), and then requires subsidies to run. Why not use this money to provide incentives for people to telecommute? And while some might…

and like driving, you often cant scale to meet demand. Both also need replacements after x km.

giant office buildings also have a giant impact. Those resources could have been homes or extra rooms to work from.

then there is the whole fast food and fast everything along the road and various industries that busy themselves with appearance.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#19

Post by simonmesmith »

mcv wrote: post #11
simonmesmith wrote: post #7

Similarly, I often wonder why cities don’t promote local telecommuting over building expensive public transportation infrastructure. Building one kilometre of subway costs anywhere from around $100 million to $1.6 billion ( https://marroninstitute.nyu.edu/events/how-much-does-it-cost... ), and then requires subsidies to run. Why not use this money to provide incentives for people to telecommute? And while some might…

Not all jobs can be done by telecommuting. It's a great solution for office work, but it doesn't work so well for manufacturing, retail or the service industry. > most public transit currently doesn’t serve those people well because it’s focused on work-related commuting patterns. Does it? Work-related travel is mostly during morning and late afternoon, but public transit also runs outside those hours. In my experien…

I don’t know about universally true, so you may be right that there are exceptions, but as one example, such as linked above, public transit tends to underserve the needs of female caregivers who often need to make multiple short trips rather than two long trips each day.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#20

Post by [deleted] »

simonmesmith wrote: post #7

Similarly, I often wonder why cities don’t promote local telecommuting over building expensive public transportation infrastructure. Building one kilometre of subway costs anywhere from around $100 million to $1.6 billion ( https://marroninstitute.nyu.edu/events/how-much-does-it-cost... ), and then requires subsidies to run. Why not use this money to provide incentives for people to telecommute? And while some might…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN