2 ms·

Do you think it is better for the environment for all of Apple's tens of thousands of employees to heat or cool each of their homes individually rather than in

Do you think it is better for the environment for all of Apple's tens of thousands of employees to heat or cool each of their homes individually rather than in one large eco-friendly office? How about everybody preparing their own meals for lunch, using natural gas or electricity, instead of using the company cafeteria? I don't think you can definitively say that remote work is better for the environment given all of the other variables.

Melting_Harps 4y ago
> I don't think you can definitively say that remote work is better for the environment given all of the other variables. If those are your rebuttals, they certainly aren't sufficient: first, people choosing to use X/Y form of energy to make their meals is a personal choice and likely done based on an optimal time preference: most people I know in tech don't even cook, they order out 90% of the time and only have cereal or basic lunch stuff in their homes. Second, cooling/heating could be done in any number of ways for all I know most Apple workers have solar panels, it's unlikely but it is a possibility, or they might not even use either since the Mountain View has rather temperate weather either way. If you are relying on me to concede that remote work is better for the environment based on such vapid criteria, you are sadly mistaken: the kitchens in most places have walk-ins and blast freezers that run 24/7, ovens and and ranges that are at full blast etc... in anticipation of cooking those meals for all of those employees. I can assure from personal experience you their is nothing efficient about running a commercial sized kitchen, and everything is always breaking and requires constant maintenance. Just offsetting the commutes from all over the NorCal would be reduction in GHG that it's worth keeping, their is no real need for it if efficiency has not been lost.

Melting_Harps 4y ago

> I don't think you can definitively say that remote work is better for the environment given all of the other variables. If those are your rebuttals, they certainly aren't sufficient: first, people choosing to use X/Y form of energy to make their meals is a personal choice and likely done based on an optimal time preference: most people I know in tech don't even cook, they order out 90% of the time and only have cereal or basic lunch stuff in their homes. Second, cooling/heating could be done in any number of ways for all I know most Apple workers have solar panels, it's unlikely but it is a possibility, or they might not even use either since the Mountain View has rather temperate weather either way. If you are relying on me to concede that remote work is better for the environment based on such vapid criteria, you are sadly mistaken: the kitchens in most places have walk-ins and blast freezers that run 24/7, ovens and and ranges that are at full blast etc... in anticipation of cooking those meals for all of those employees. I can assure from personal experience you their is nothing efficient about running a commercial sized kitchen, and everything is always breaking and requires constant maintenance. Just offsetting the commutes from all over the NorCal would be reduction in GHG that it's worth keeping, their is no real need for it if efficiency has not been lost.