Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Microsoft's New Carbon Plan Neutral by 2030 Negative by 2050

posted by martyb on Saturday January 18 2020, @03:00PM   Printer-friendly

dx3bydt3 writes:

Microsoft Corp said on Thursday it aims to:

By 2030 Microsoft will be carbon negative, and by 2050 Microsoft will remove from the environment all the carbon the company has emitted either directly or by electrical consumption since it was founded in 1975.

Further coverage: from The Verge, BBC, CBC
"direct emissions" but those they may have caused. If they can achieve it though, it will be a positive step.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Microsoft's New Carbon Plan Neutral by 2030 Negative by 2050 | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 19 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by chewbacon on Saturday January 18 2020, @05:27PM (3 children)

    by chewbacon (1032) on Saturday January 18 2020, @05:27PM (#945013)

    If we only knew during the industrial boom that throwing money at this would've negated that whole pollution thing. Also, what the FUCK is going on in LA with all the smog and those rich celebrities? Why aren't they doing their part burning dollar bills to fix that?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @06:03PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @06:03PM (#945022)

    What makes you think they're not? The reason for the smog is that LA is in a basin and air can get trapped, there's insufficient new air carrying the pollution away, like in many other areas. Any pollution that happens in the valley is going to be a lot more obvious than it would be in Kansas where the air is free to move on to the next state rather than being trapped.

    • (Score: 2) by dwilson on Saturday January 18 2020, @09:58PM

      by dwilson (2599) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @09:58PM (#945104) Journal

      The reason for the smog is that LA is in a basin and air can get trapped, there's insufficient new air carrying the pollution away, like in many other areas. Any pollution that happens in the valley is going to be a lot more obvious than it would be in Kansas where the air is free to move on to the next state rather than being trapped.

      You're not wrong, but the fact that the population of the entire state of Kansas is 2.9 million, while the population of LA (just LA-the-city, not the greater LA area and all the other cities in it) is 4 million, has a lot more to do with it.

      Population density is the root of a lot of the problems the world faces today. Fixing the root of the problem without becoming monsters? That's the real problem.

      --
      - D

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @08:14PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @08:14PM (#945450)

    If you think LA in 2020 has “smog” you must be under 35yo, blind, or just staggeringly unaware or all of the above. The improvement in air quality since 1980 in Los Angeles is damn near fucking miraculous to anyone who has resided on this planet for longer than that.