131–140 of 335 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> emissions from their commute Isn't stuff like this kind of out of their hand unless the state itself tries to fix this.
No, they choose their location, and some tech companies provide transportation. Facebook is even building their own employee housing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> emissions from their commute Isn't stuff like this kind of out of their hand unless the state itself tries to fix this.
No, they choose their location, and some tech companies provide transportation. Facebook is even building their own employee housing.
> Facebook even builds their own employee housing.
I wasn't aware about this, where are they building these?
Here's a wild, crazy, dangerous idea for discussion: how about we start curtailing globalism, and encourage people to live less carbon intensive lives by building economies based around what's available nearby?
The problem with that is - it requires people to either migrate away from areas that are not great at producing food without massive resource investment (or bringing it in from somewhere else), or to splinter basic things like hygiene and nutrition based on region.
For example - for the last 5 years my family has exclusively eaten locally. Either something we can produce from seed/start locally, animals harvested at our own farm (or hunted), or other items purchased from hyper-local areas (we defined this as within a comfortable bike ride from our home).
We immediately noticed that we would need vitamin supplements to make up for the lack of certain nutrients. For example - vitamin C is in short supply in the food profile in our part of the world. We didn't want to drink pine-needle tea, because it's gross, so we had to purchase supplements.
What about the people who have neither the time nor energy to devote to finding local food and/or identifying nutrition gaps in their diets? If it wasn't a hobby of mine (via low-grade prepping), we never would've known until the scurvy set in, or something else. Rickets maybe. Who knows.
There's a really good explanation of different loopholes in calculating carbon emissions in the Microsoft carbon target announcement from last year[1]. Eg do you count secondary services your employees use, like food services or emissions from their commute? Do you count partner services, like shipping providers for physical product? These, along with your direct emissions, are categorized into three "scopes" of emis…
> emissions from their commute Isn't stuff like this kind of out of their hand unless the state itself tries to fix this.
This is like rich countries moving factories to third-world countries where industry emits more CO2. They pretend to be responsible for less and less greenhouse gases even though they consume more physical goods, with larger carbon footprint. Worst, they feel fine flying and buying SUV because their not that dirty compared to people in undeveloped countries whose carbon footprint keeps increasing.
Very well said. I wonder (actually I really dont - it is clear that it doesnt) if 0 emission include also creation of silicon resin, PCBs, wiring, electricity,... And to back up parent claim - where where they produced? I am not saying it is nothing - surely better than nothing - but it is "a tad" spitting into the sea. The major footprint comes from heavy industry that is creating the materials so google can actuall…
Compare: a company dedicated to nothing but planting trees can reduce its carbon emissions extremely quickly, well past the point where they're at net negative carbon emission, even though it probably took gasoline to drive the trees out to the planting site, the laborers eat food, the truck was made in a factory, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's why offsets are bullshit. Imagine that I go and plant trees every weekend, because I like them and because I don't want to see my world burn. I'm planting trees, everyone is happy. One day, someone contact me and say "I like your work! Would you like to receive 50 cents for every next tree you plant? I want to support you. Just print a paper certifying that I'm supporting your work". I can't refuse that offer,…
Your analogy misses a critical component: Your 50 cent stipend is typically attached to doing more than you were doing before. And while the point of your analogy is clear, your neighbor could only travel the world without remorse if they fund a huge number of new trees. Offsets are not as illogical as you make them sound.
I'd love to read the details.
Here [0], Easyjet pretend to be offsetting 100% carbon emitted during their flights: https://www.easyjet.com/fr/developpement-durable
Where are the huge Easyjet forests? Planted just so the rich can fly?
I'm sure they have some kind of contract, somewhere, but I can't verify that. And of course any "new" tree can be attached to an offset, that isn't the problem. How can a third-party says that this tree wouldn't have been planted otherwise, when whole world has no choice but go greener/cleaner? All those who make genuine efforts would be stupid not to take the cash (prisoner dilemma). Carbon offsetting is buying time to slow down changes in devastating behaviors.
This is quite impressive, but it is also somewhat meaningless. I suppose I'd draw an analogy to a cake shop boasting that it had achieved net-no industrial accidents over its existence - a great record, but also not really a particular stretch to achieve. Carbon emissions aren't about servers. They are about, in order of priority: * How do we feed people cheaply without fossil fuels (both as fertiliser & for crop tra…
Agriculture (even without fossil fuels) has a far greater impact on the environment than all fossil fuel use combined. Why the focus on fossil fuels for all your points?
[0] https://nltimes.nl/2019/04/08/shell-charge-customers-extra-c...
There's a really good explanation of different loopholes in calculating carbon emissions in the Microsoft carbon target announcement from last year[1]. Eg do you count secondary services your employees use, like food services or emissions from their commute? Do you count partner services, like shipping providers for physical product? These, along with your direct emissions, are categorized into three "scopes" of emis…
> emissions from their commute Isn't stuff like this kind of out of their hand unless the state itself tries to fix this.
[0] https://www.kxan.com/news/downtown-austin-business-leaders-s...