/
Before everything got disrupted by the attempt on President Trump’s life, I had written a post last week titled “Big Tech On The Path To Net Zero.” That post looked at the most recently issued “sustainability” reports from Google, Microsoft and Meta, and noted that all three admit to going rapidly in the opposite direction from “net zero.” As their businesses grow in the direction of power-hungry data centers and AI, they inevitably require large incremental amounts of always-available electricity — the kind of electricity that wind and sun cannot provide. Lacking viable alternatives to fossil fuels, their “emissions” rise.
But, you might ask, how about Amazon and Apple? They too put out annual “sustainability” reports. Here is the “2023 Amazon Sustainability Report” (that appears to have just been issued); and here is the “Apple Environmental Report covering fiscal year 2023,” that came out in April. Unlike the similar Reports issued by Google, Microsoft and Meta, these Amazon and Apple Reports do not admit to lack of progress (let alone negative progress) on the “net zero” goal. Are they being honest?
The answer is that these Reports from Amazon and Apple are substantially less honest than the efforts of Google, Microsoft and Meta. Amazon’s Report follows the general pattern of the Google, Facebook and Meta Reports, with happy talk in the introduction and summaries and then some potentially real information buried deep in the interior. Apple’s Report is the worst of the lot, and can best be described as an effort at deception and misdirection. Let’s take a look.
From Amazon’s Report, the introductory letter from Chief Sustainability Officer Kara Hurst:
On renewable energy, we set an ambitious goal to match 100% of the electricity consumed by our global operations with renewable energy by 2030, and we reached that goal in 2023—seven years early. As we look to the future, we are steadfast in our Climate Pledge commitment to be net-zero carbon across our operations by 2040. We will continue to lead and invest in creating carbon-free energy around the world at scale, including through solar, wind, nuclear, and other emerging energy technologies.
What does it mean to “match 100% of electricity consumed . . . with renewable energy”? It sounds like it has something to do with actually using wind and solar electricity for operations, but does it? You won’t find any real answer in this Report. What you know is that Amazon demands and uses electricity at all hours of the day and night, and expects the power to be available when they need it. Wind and solar don’t and can’t deliver that. Clearly, they are drawing electricity from the grid at times of overcast days and calm nights. Are they paying some fee to utilities to get the utilities to say that they have allocated some solar power from a sunny afternoon to “match” the power that Amazon bought on a calm night? That would be my inference. If that’s what they are doing, I would call it a pure scam.
If you should make it as far as page 11 in the body of the Report, you will come to a chart headed “Amazon’s Carbon Footprint”:
Over at Apple, here’s the key quote from the introductory letter:
Apple 2030 is our commitment to be carbon neutral for our entire footprint by the end of the decade. We’ll get there by innovating at every stage of the product lifecycle — from how they’re made, to what they’re made from. That starts with bringing new clean energy online across our supply chain. Today, more than 320 suppliers have committed to using renewable electricity for Apple production. With over 16 gigawatts already online, they’re avoiding more than 18 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions.
The letter comes from Lisa Jackson, Apple’s VP of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives. Do you recognize the name? Jackson was EPA Administrator back in the Obama Administration.
But where is the real information on “emissions”? I can’t find it. The closest I can find is an incomprehensible chart on page 14, accompanied by this text:
In 2023, we estimate that our environmental programs avoided 31 million metric tons of emissions across all scopes. Initiatives that we’ve been growing for years continue to yield clear results, including sourcing 100 percent renewable energy for our facilities, transitioning suppliers to renewable energy, and using low-carbon materials in products. While our revenue has grown by more than 64 percent since 2015, our gross emissions have decreased by more than 55 percent.
There is no clue as to the methodology of how they came up with that line that emissions “decreased by more than 55%.” Sure they may have found some efficiencies, or maybe they are using some lighter materials. But the only way they could come up with a number as large as a 55% decrease is by buying supposed carbon offsets and credits. In other words, scams. And they provide no information sufficient to evaluate the legitimacy of how they derive this figure.
There is no real possibility that any of Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon or Apple can operate its business without large-scale carbon emissions, at least until there has been a massive build-out of nuclear power that as of now has not even gotten started. Likely these Reports pledging adherence to the carbon neutrality creed are just so many words intended to buy time until the whole climate change mania blows over. When that happens, all these programs will be quietly scrapped. Along the same lines, note this piece from the New York Post today, reporting that Microsoft has just quietly scrapped its DEI program.
No comments:
Post a Comment