fluidrazor

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by fluidrazor 18y ago

   pg, let's ask a different question. Measurements aside, is what they are offering really reducing the carbon footprint of a website? I would argue no, it does not. And here's why: They are buying credits which make clean energy cheaper. The
2. 2.▲
   by fluidrazor 18y ago

   Putting the global warming debate aside, I totally agree with you. However, I don't see them being transparent. Furthermore, I think given the complexity of determining what they claim, the simplicity of their model is almost certainly not
3. 3.▲
   by fluidrazor 18y ago

   People pay them to offset the carbon footprint of their site. Except if they are paying them an amount based on an inaccurately calculated footprint, that's a problem. If you wish to continue drinking the Kool-Aid, go ahead! It sure is tast
4. 4.▲
   by fluidrazor 18y ago

   I understand what they are trying to do. But the sheer inaccuracy of what they provide clearly negates the supposed benefits. Would you donate to a charity that mismanaged or wasted most of your money, if only just because donating to chari
5. 5.▲
   by fluidrazor 18y ago

   There is no way they could account for the types and brands of the monitor, the efficiency of the individual computers, etc. They also cannot make an accurate assumption about where the power is coming from because there is such a thing as