3 ms·
I think microsoft is the only large hyperscaler that seems to take this as more than a shallow PR push. Their goal is carbon zero by 2030 - not net zero, but ac
by ohthehugemanate 3y ago
I think microsoft is the only large hyperscaler that seems to take this as more than a shallow PR push. Their goal is carbon zero by 2030 - not net zero, but actually removing as much carbon from the atmosphere as they put in. They pay for actual carbon removal and help develop that tech in order to get there. And their targets are all three classes of emissions (ie including indirect emissions) which no other tech company even talks about. That's recognized within the carbon monitoring industry... I think they're on the CDP A list for carbon for the third year in a row now? (Amzn and goog have never been there)
On the other hand, I don't see people in tech making buying decisions based on this. Why does your company use AWS or GCP, and did the "nothing more than PR" state of their climate commitments even come up in that decision?
Complaining on the internet is fun, but changing buying habits is better.
- drivebycomment 3y agoAlphabet is also on CDP A list for climate in 2022, and they have the similar commitment for zero carbon by 2030. I don't see significant enough difference in climate response regarding between Azure and GCP.
- fomine3 3y agoMicrosoft also bet for nuclear fusion. I wonder are both really work by 2030 or scam.
- jbm 3y agoIf you look at my post history, you will see a lot of angry posts about Teams and other Microsoft products, but after reading this I'm probably going to take it easier on them. Legitimately turned me around on them, thanks for sharing.
- zelphirkalt 3y agoThat is nice and great if true. However, what if I moved the goalpost just tiny bit to include all the emissions, that MS' ever more resource demanding OSes and the bad engineering and unwanted stuff inside them causes? That would include the emissions and environmental harm caused by not too technical people being forced to buy new computers every 3 years, because their old ones become unbearably slow by normal usage or become slow due to being tricked into upgrading to the next Windows version, which is more demanding on the hardware. MS would probably be bankrupt soon, if they paid for repairing that damage to the environment.