Remote-first companies encounter this problem all the time.
Do they? I feel like remote-first companies seem to enjoy having an excuse to travel to exciting destinations as a recruitment/retention perk. “We’re meeting in Kansas City because that minimizes emissions” likely doesn’t spark joy in the same way that “we’re meeting in the Bahamas because we’re cool and fun!” would.
I refuse to fly to corporate meetings due to climate impact, and I have a few colleagues that do the same, so I don’t think this is universally true. I would respect a company that didn’t.
I like the way this instantly produces PDFs. Very slick.
I'm not sold on the math because it doesn't seem to take into account connecting flights. At least, it does not seem clear that me in SFO and my colleague in KEF should meet in Yellowknife, NT, Canada. It's an airport neither of us could reach directly on commercial flights. Considering they would need to fly the wrong way to FRA first, it seems like MSP or YUL make way more sense.
Do they? I feel like remote-first companies seem to enjoy having an excuse to travel to exciting destinations as a recruitment/retention perk. “We’re meeting in Kansas City because that minimizes emissions” likely doesn’t spark joy in the same way that “we’re meeting in the Bahamas because we’re cool and fun!” would.
I refuse to fly to corporate meetings due to climate impact, and I have a few colleagues that do the same, so I don’t think this is universally true. I would respect a company that didn’t.
Depending on how you measure it, aircraft account for 1.9-3.5% of greenhouse gas emissions.[1] The biggest source is electricity and heating, followed by ground transportation.[2] Compared to almost all other sources, air travel is a rounding error.
This is a really neat tool, but I'm having a hard time imagining situations where it'd be all that useful, where people from substantially different locations all need to meet in person, but don't care where they're meeting. How often does that happen? Am I missing something?
How many times is it acceptable to post the same Show HN? (Genuine question)
> You can post a new release as a Show HN only if the new version is significantly different. It shouldn't just be an incremental upgrade. If you do repost, add a comment linking to the previous Show HN and explaining what is different from last time. This should probably only happen once or twice a year—more starts to be excessive.
It's certainly not always the case. In planar Euclidean geometry, for any three points, if the triangle formed by those three points has all its angles less than 120 degrees, then the sum of the distances from the three points to certain points inside the triangle will be smaller than the sum of the shortest two sides. Only if one of the angles exceeds 120 degrees will one of the three points always have the shortest…
The carbon cost of a flight isn't a linear function of its distance, though — takeoff is much more expensive than cruise, and on long flights there's the cost of hauling the fuel itself, rocket-equation style. (Presumably the data underlying this website accounts for all that.)
Indeed; furthermore, some air traffic control regions have adopted a direct routing strategy, replacing the conventional routing strategy of published airways. This means that a flight from, say, Prague to Bucharest should be ever so slightly more efficient than the equivalent distance from London to Venice because of the direct routing.