15 ms·
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
by rcMgD2BwE72F 6y ago
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.
- what_ever 6y agoI don't get the analogy - could you explain more? Disc: Googler.
- iamgopal 6y agoGoogle's energy consumption to make goods is zero. Achieving similar zero carbon foot print is next to impossible for lower profit margin fertilizer production. ( i.e. third world countries, as a whole, are working at quite less profit margins, and because of that, have trouble achieving similar zero carbon footprint. Ultimately All the profits are moving to west.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 6y agoI rephrased my comment (hopes it help). Another mediocre analogy on the subject that you may find both relevant and funny: "I spread germs all over town today but I bought coronavirus offsets so we’re all good". via https://twitter.com/WeiZhangAtmos/status/1245890907511181312 https://twitter.com/WeiZhangAtmos/status/1245890907511181312
- ZeroGravitas 6y agoIsnt this effectively what all governments are doing? Paying people to stay home so that other people with essential roles can carry on with less chance of spreading covid?
- rcMgD2BwE72F 6y agoNo. That would be the case only if essential workers were using their government-issued permit to go to night clubs without mask nor physical distancing, and pretend to not spread germs because others are staying at home.
- dariusj18 6y agoHrm, that's not a bad idea. Perhaps if we use the market to fix the pandemic. The Invisible Hand covering your mouth when you sneeze.
- throwaway894345 6y agoAs far as I can tell the only problem with offsets is that it's difficult to account for. If you buy offsets for 1 ton of carbon, it's difficult to ensure that the offsets represent carbon that would actually be added to the atmosphere if not for that funding. Is your comment just extreme pessimism about the efficacy of the auditors or are you remarking that one can't offset their carbon (i.e., co2 isn't fungible)?
- jefftk 6y agoI don't think the analogy works; what would a coronavirus offset be?
- rcMgD2BwE72F 6y agoHere'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, right? I'm getting paid to plant trees! My new treelover friend is happy too: he's saving the world, and he can travel all over the world without remorse, since he's offsetting his flights.
- unethical_ban 6y agoYour 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.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 6y ago>typically attached to doing more than you were doing before. 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 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.
- throwaway894345 6y agoAre you being willfully obtuse or do you seriously believe the only way (or even the most effective way) to lower carbon emissions is by planting trees?
- lowiqengineer 6y agoWeird time to flex, right?
- Aunche 6y agoThey aren't displacing factories to third world countries. They're displacing dirty power with cleaner power. Obviously this won't be sustainable forever, but it's a good start.
- barney54 6y agoNot necessarily. They are buying renewable power, however, the actually generation that power their data enters come from the grid and includes coal and natural gas. When the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining, they are powered by coal, nukes, hydro, and natural gas.
- MattGaiser 6y agoGoogle would need to build its own grid to have it only use its own wind and solar. That is not reasonable.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 6y agoPretending to have an "all-time carbon footprint" to be "zero" isn't reasonable either.
- codetrotter 6y ago> they are powered by [...] nukes [...] Dear diary, Today HN taught me that nuclear power comes from atomic bombs. What a time to be alive. codetrotter
- oauea 6y agoPowered by nukes? That is not how nuclear reactors work.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 6y agoDisplacing dirty power with clean power cannot bring your carbon footprint to zero. Your cleanest power cannot not emit. Google may become cleaner but that isn't the point.
- stiray 6y agoVery 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 actually operate and if I would be sarcastic - they actually create a greater need for materials where its production produce large amount of emissions. I would even claim, that they would do far more if they would stop showing ads. The electricity footprint on world wide scale must be enormous - not from google serving them but actually reaching destination and browsers processing them - and not all electricity is coming from "green" sources. I can claim 0 emission for myself except from (sorry, I just had to say it :D), farting and breathing. But once I start to count in how my food was produced, how the goods I am using were produced etc. this is just not true. Anyway as a decades long vegetarian, strictly driven on public transport or bicycle (:D) I do my best here. This is just publicity stunt from google PR and it doesn't really mean anything. But looks like it worked. BBC cached it and is doing an article about it.
- samvher 6y agoYour 0 emission statement suffers from exactly the same criticism you're firing at Google. How was your bike built? How was your bus/train built? What's powering your bus/train? Also the assumption that a vegetarian diet is 0 emission is wrong - you're relying on a massive (oil-fueled) production system that emits a lot, to provide you with the food you buy. Sure, it's less than would be necessary if you ate meat but it's certainly not 0 emission. Edit - I need to read more carefully, OP already went into this, apologies.
- stiray 6y agoI think that I have explained it very well and I have put it there as an example why the claim from google is a fallacy. > once I start to count in how my food was produced, how the goods I am using were produced etc. this is just not true. I wasnt clear enough?
- danmg 6y agoReminder: Tesla is only profitable because it sell carbon tax credits to makes of ICE vehicles so they in turn can produce the less efficient cars which are basically just status symbols.
- dathinab 6y agoI have heard about similar things about hybrid car sails in the EU. But I wasn't able to find any articles wrt. that anymore, so it might be wrong or outdated.