Apple's carbon-neutral goal is a giant task, could echo through big tech

Posted:
in General Discussion
An examination into Apple's environmentalism asks whether Apple could truly reach its pledge of making the iPhone carbon neutral, with comments from Apple's executive leadership along with other environmentalists suggesting it is possible, but a very big task.

Solar farm investments are one way Apple is pressing forward with being a carbon-neutral entity, with over 80% of energy used stemming from Apple-invested projects.
Solar farm investments are one way Apple is pressing forward with being a carbon-neutral entity, with over 80% of energy used stemming from Apple-invested projects.


Apple has made numerous strides in its bid to make itself more environmentally friendly, as part of an initiative to become carbon neutral across the entirety of its business by 2030. The lofty goal, which covers everything from the supply chain to the end of a product's life, is being tackled aggressively, but the task is also massive in scale to undertake due to Apple's size.

In a profile of the initiative by British GQ, Apple's VP of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives Lisa Jackson and SVP of Worldwide Marketing Greg Joswiak were questioned about both the scale of the problem and how far Apple is progressing down the path.

These efforts have included transitioning its facilities to run on renewable energy and using recycled materials in its products, but they are only part of the solution. "We set really big goals for ourselves. At one point we were even calling them crazy questions," said Jackson.

Going beyond making its own offices and operations carbon neutral and attempting to tackle the indirect pollution caused by suppliers and other business areas by 2030 is a much loftier goal. One that is considered by Greenpeace to be a demonstration of "what's possible for tech brands and could lead to a mindset shift" for other producers.

Apple's work in the field is important to environmental groups, as they see that changes by Apple are keenly adopted by other vendors in the tech industry. By making sustainability a marketable feature of the iPhone, competitors may try to make their own products have similar credentials to appease customers.

Apple's VP of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives, Lisa Jackson
Apple's VP of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives, Lisa Jackson


Jackson's decision to join Apple wasn't just the size of the problem, but also that Apple wanted to go further. "During my interviews no one said 'What do we have to do to get in front of all these environmental rules and regulations?" Jackson remembers. "They said 'What can we do to lead the world to a better place? And that was really impressive to me. I didn't run across that practically ever."

The deep-grained environmentalism is felt in other areas in the company, as evidenced by Joswiak's comments. "We're always looking at ways to minimize the e-waste from our products, it's a continuous effort and an important one," said Joswiak.

He continued "We're fortunate that people buy a lot of Apple products, so we know that the decisions we make in this regard are going to have an enormous impact. It's our responsibility to minimize packaging and minimize what's in the packaging if it's not something the consumer needs."

Moves such as investing in clean energy projects are thought to be "very significant" for companies like Apple, suggests Greenpeace senior corporate campaigner Elizabeth Jardim. "Because much of its supply chain is in China and Southeast Asia, where there's a huge amount of coal power, this allows them to find cleaner sources of energy in a region that is otherwise dirty and hopefully begin to shift the grid mix in those regions."

The scale of the problem is still tough to swallow for those working on it, with Jackson admitting "It's a really huge goal. Even saying it, I always get a little lump, because I know how much work is involved in doing it, but we have a very detailed plan."

Jackson also brings up how Apple CEO tells employees to "be a ripple in the pond," to try and influence others with its actions. "Not just to change Apple, but to change the world," she clarifies, continuing "Apple is a manufacturer and that is the hardest segment to decarbonize and change to clean energy. When we do that work a lot of those manufacturers will go ahead and use that clean energy for other folks."

"Apple's commitment represents a new model that we want more companies to follow," suggests WWF senior director of corporate engagements for forests. "It's no longer enough for them to simply commit to 'reduced impact.'"
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 32
    Seems all around smart to me. Eventually there will be real business opportunities in this area. Apple is making a long term strategic investment here. 
    watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 2 of 32
    blastdoor said:
    Seems all around smart to me. Eventually there will be real business opportunities in this area. Apple is making a long term strategic investment here. 
    You just don’t get it really do you. 
  • Reply 3 of 32
    Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front. And, it does not shout from the rooftops about it, unlike some other companies (e.g., Microsoft, Amazon). The company is already carbon-neutral for it its direct (Scope 1) emissions, its purchased electricity (Scope 2) emissions, as well as some indirect (Scope 3) emissions such as those associated with employee commuting and employee business travel that Apple believes are under its operational control. Not one other major tech company can say that yet.

    However, the elephant in the room is its supplier Scope 3 emissions, which accounts for 76% of the emissions in its value chain. Apple is making tremendous strides there as well: suppliers have already installed and are using 2.7GW in renewable capacity (think of the equivalent of three full-scale nuclear power plants at work), and they have committed 7.8GW which is well ahead of Apple's goal of 5GW supplier renewable capacity by 2020. This will be more than half of the suppler emissions associated with manufacturing Apple products, a huge achievement.

    Apple still has some ways to go with its supplier emissions, and it has committed to becoming neutral for that, as well as for the emissions associated with consumer use and disposal of their products -- again, a first for any tech company, perhaps any company -- by 2030.

    Lisa Jackson is a superstar.
    edited September 2020 watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 4 of 32
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobraFileMakerFellerjony0
  • Reply 5 of 32
    ciacia Posts: 144member
    Kudos to Apple for doing this.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 32
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    mac_dogwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 32
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 1,714member
    This is fine, but only a first step. Google just commited to going CARBON FREE by 2030.
    https://www.macobserver.com/news/google-carbon-free-2030/
    Not "neutral" which means reducing pollution but playing a shell game with offsets to make it appear you're clean. This is carbon free, all renewable resources. Not net zero, but true zero. Of course as others said, it's easier when all you do is push data and not make things. But this is a major stand.
    The Ball's In Apple's Court.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 8 of 32
    pichael said:
    blastdoor said:
    Seems all around smart to me. Eventually there will be real business opportunities in this area. Apple is making a long term strategic investment here. 
    You just don’t get it really do you. 
    Poseur makes poseur post. 
    watto_cobrarundhvidjony0
  • Reply 9 of 32
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,168member
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    If you meant to be entirely accurate you were not, and that's on all counts @anantksundaram ;.

    AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    edited September 2020 muthuk_vanalingamFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 10 of 32
    DAalseth said:

    The Ball's In Apple's Court.
    I claim I'll be a billionaire by 2030.

    Refute that.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 32

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 32
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,168member

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    edited September 2020 FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 13 of 32
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    edited September 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 32
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,168member
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    edited September 2020
  • Reply 15 of 32
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    Yes, offsets. Read my second comment, #6 above.

    And how about answering my question on Scope 3 supplier emissions? Also, has Google eliminated its employee commuting and business travel emissions? Perhaps they have, but I did not see that.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 32
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,168member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    Yes, offsets. Read my second comment, #6 above.

    And how about answering my question on Scope 3 supplier emissions? Also, has Google eliminated its employee commuting and business travel emissions? Perhaps they have, but I did not see that.
    Apple also purchases offsets (REC's). Look in the footnotes.

    As far as Scope 3 see page 60 in the aforementioned Google 2019 Sustainability Report.

    TBH Anant there was nothing in your post (#6) that was 100% accurate. If you want to disagree point out the specific claim you made in that post and I'll explain why it was incorrect, at least according to what I'm reading. 

    EDIT: In the process of research I came across this easier for the masses to understand explanation of what 100% carbon neutral means and how Google and Apple are able to make that claim. 
    https://onezero.medium.com/what-it-really-means-when-google-and-apple-say-they-run-on-100-renewable-energy-f6d1719fd865
    edited September 2020 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 17 of 32
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    Yes, offsets. Read my second comment, #6 above.

    And how about answering my question on Scope 3 supplier emissions? Also, has Google eliminated its employee commuting and business travel emissions? Perhaps they have, but I did not see that.
    Apple also purchases offsets (REC's). Look in the footnotes.

    As far as Scope 3 see page 60 in the aforementioned Google 2019 Sustainability Report.

    TBH Anant there was nothing in your post (#6) that was 100% accurate. If you want to disagree point out the specific claim you made in that post and I'll explain why it was incorrect, at least according to what I'm reading. 

    EDIT: In the process of research I came across this easier for the masses to understand explanation of what 100% carbon neutral means and how Google and Apple are able to make that claim. 
    https://onezero.medium.com/what-it-really-means-when-google-and-apple-say-they-run-on-100-renewable-energy-f6d1719fd865
    I'll grant you that Google is carbon-free for its operational emissions(Scopes 1+2, and Scope 3 employee travel/commuting) -- it's in page 59 of their 2019 report:



    Can you show me what they've done with the elephant in the room, their supplier Scope 3 emissions, which is a massive number relative to their total carbon footprint (i.e., the 15 million in line 1 above minus 1.21million shown in line 2). Thanks. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 32
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,168member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    Yes, offsets. Read my second comment, #6 above.

    And how about answering my question on Scope 3 supplier emissions? Also, has Google eliminated its employee commuting and business travel emissions? Perhaps they have, but I did not see that.
    Apple also purchases offsets (REC's). Look in the footnotes.

    As far as Scope 3 see page 60 in the aforementioned Google 2019 Sustainability Report.

    TBH Anant there was nothing in your post (#6) that was 100% accurate. If you want to disagree point out the specific claim you made in that post and I'll explain why it was incorrect, at least according to what I'm reading. 

    EDIT: In the process of research I came across this easier for the masses to understand explanation of what 100% carbon neutral means and how Google and Apple are able to make that claim. 
    https://onezero.medium.com/what-it-really-means-when-google-and-apple-say-they-run-on-100-renewable-energy-f6d1719fd865
    I'll grant you that Google is carbon-free for its operational emissions(Scopes 1+2, and Scope 3 employee travel/commuting) -- it's in page 59 of their 2019 report:



    Can you show me what they've done with the elephant in the room, their supplier Scope 3 emissions, which is a massive number relative to their total carbon footprint (i.e., the 15 million in line 1 above minus 1.21million shown in line 2). Thanks. 
    TBH Anant I've already committed a lot more effort to this than is needed. While I didn't mind pointing out some facts you were unaware of the article is really about Apple and its commitments. In my case the only reason Google became part of the discussion is because of your claims in Post 6. At the end of the day Apple is to be commended for their stance on this. 
  • Reply 19 of 32
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    Yes, offsets. Read my second comment, #6 above.

    And how about answering my question on Scope 3 supplier emissions? Also, has Google eliminated its employee commuting and business travel emissions? Perhaps they have, but I did not see that.
    Apple also purchases offsets (REC's). Look in the footnotes.

    As far as Scope 3 see page 60 in the aforementioned Google 2019 Sustainability Report.

    TBH Anant there was nothing in your post (#6) that was 100% accurate. If you want to disagree point out the specific claim you made in that post and I'll explain why it was incorrect, at least according to what I'm reading. 

    EDIT: In the process of research I came across this easier for the masses to understand explanation of what 100% carbon neutral means and how Google and Apple are able to make that claim. 
    https://onezero.medium.com/what-it-really-means-when-google-and-apple-say-they-run-on-100-renewable-energy-f6d1719fd865
    I'll grant you that Google is carbon-free for its operational emissions(Scopes 1+2, and Scope 3 employee travel/commuting) -- it's in page 59 of their 2019 report:



    Can you show me what they've done with the elephant in the room, their supplier Scope 3 emissions, which is a massive number relative to their total carbon footprint (i.e., the 15 million in line 1 above minus 1.21million shown in line 2). Thanks. 
    TBH Anant I've already committed a lot more effort to this than is needed. While I didn't mind pointing out some facts you were unaware of the article is really about Apple and its commitments. In my case the only reason Google became part of the discussion is because of your claims in Post 6. At the end of the day Apple is to be commended for their stance on this. 
    1) So, I am -- as you are -- unable to find anything about 91.9% of the emissions they're responsible for. To say "spent too much time" is a copout, and you know it. Perhaps you should see it through?

    2) I'll stand 100% by my claims ("Apple is head-and-shoulders above"), but give Google credit for reducing or offsetting 8.1% of their total carbon footprint.

    3) To quote @rotateleftbyte above, "[Emissions reduction] is a whole lot easier if you ... only make a little bit of stuff."
    edited September 2020 watto_cobrarotateleftbyte
  • Reply 20 of 32
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,168member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    meanwhile...
    To quote an report on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54141899
    Google says it has wiped out its entire carbon footprint by investing in "high-quality carbon offsets".
    It became carbon-neutral in 2007 and says it has now compensated for all of the carbon it has ever created.

    It is a whole lot easier if you mostly steal information and only make a little bit of stuff.

    What the article doesn't make clear is that it's only Google's Scope 1 emissions, which as you rightly note, is a trivial number given their business model. I find it shocking that they are not even carbon neutral yet for their data centers (Apple became carbon neutral for its data centers in 2018).

    Also, offsets are a bit of a copout. A lot of that could be less-than-authentic. Apple, OTOH, has directly invested in substantial renewable energy capacity.
    I don't think so @anantksundaram ;. AFAICT Google's carbon-neutrality includes both Scope 1 and Scope 2, and 3rd party audited for verification. Read it for yourself including the Appendix and see if you have the same takeaway.
    https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/google_2019-environmental-report.pdf

    Google announced its data centers and MORE were carbon neutral in 2017. Google has also invested more in renewable energy than even Apple BTW.

    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, said in a statement:

    We are committed to doing our part. Sustainability has been a core value for us since Larry and Sergey founded Google two decades ago. We were the first major company to become carbon neutral in 2007. We were the first major company to match our energy use with 100 percent renewable energy in 2017. We operate the cleanest global cloud in the industry, and we're the world's largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. 


     A clip from last years sustainability report:
    Google is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy. Since 2010, we’ve signed 34 agreements to purchase a total of more than 3.75 GW of renewable energy that is new to the grid.  On July 27, 2015, as part of the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, Google committed to tripling our purchases of renewable energy from 1.1 GW to 3.4 GW by 2025. We surpassed this in 2018, exceeding our target seven years early. 

    In 2012, we set a long-term goal to purchase enough renewable energy to match all the electricity we consume globally on an annual basis. In 2017, we achieved it for the first time: Google’s total purchase of energy from sources like wind and solar matched the amount of electricity used by our operations around the world, including our offices and data centers. And in 2018, we again matched 100% of our annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy (see Figure 6). This amounted to more than 10 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of energy—more electricity than is used annually by the state of Hawaii.

    To date, we’ve purchased a total of nearly 26 million MWh of renewable energy. We’re the first company of our size to achieve 100% renewable energy two years running.
    Explain this figure then from their just-published carbon report (their latest data -- as with Apple -- is for 2019, so no need to look for anything newer):


    Google explains what it means beginning on page 6.

    As a closely related aside I think you'd have to agree at this point that your initial claim "Apple is head-and-shoulders ahead of other tech companies on the carbon mitigation front" may have been more than a bit overstated. :)
    I know they do. But I asked for your interpretation/explanation. In the meantime, you can also tell me what they've done with the supplier emissions. I gave you those numbers for Apple. I'll wait.

    In the meantime, I'll stand by what I said.
    Ok, so just to put your Doubting Thomas tendency to bed this is from page 30 of the 2019 Sustainability Report I suggested you should read earlier.

    "In 2018, our gross Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions were 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2 e), but because of our renewable energy purchases, our net GHG emissions were reduced by 3.7 million tons to 750 thousand tCO2 e (see Figures 7 and 8). Due to growth in our business, our operational emissions increased 30% over the past year. After accounting for our carbon offset purchases, our net operational carbon emissions were zero"

    Scope 1 AND Scope 2.
    Yes, offsets. Read my second comment, #6 above.

    And how about answering my question on Scope 3 supplier emissions? Also, has Google eliminated its employee commuting and business travel emissions? Perhaps they have, but I did not see that.
    Apple also purchases offsets (REC's). Look in the footnotes.

    As far as Scope 3 see page 60 in the aforementioned Google 2019 Sustainability Report.

    TBH Anant there was nothing in your post (#6) that was 100% accurate. If you want to disagree point out the specific claim you made in that post and I'll explain why it was incorrect, at least according to what I'm reading. 

    EDIT: In the process of research I came across this easier for the masses to understand explanation of what 100% carbon neutral means and how Google and Apple are able to make that claim. 
    https://onezero.medium.com/what-it-really-means-when-google-and-apple-say-they-run-on-100-renewable-energy-f6d1719fd865
    I'll grant you that Google is carbon-free for its operational emissions(Scopes 1+2, and Scope 3 employee travel/commuting) -- it's in page 59 of their 2019 report:



    Can you show me what they've done with the elephant in the room, their supplier Scope 3 emissions, which is a massive number relative to their total carbon footprint (i.e., the 15 million in line 1 above minus 1.21million shown in line 2). Thanks. 
    TBH Anant I've already committed a lot more effort to this than is needed. While I didn't mind pointing out some facts you were unaware of the article is really about Apple and its commitments. In my case the only reason Google became part of the discussion is because of your claims in Post 6. At the end of the day Apple is to be commended for their stance on this. 
    1) So, I am -- as you are -- unable to find anything about 91.9% of the emissions they're responsible for. To say "spent too much time" is a copout, and you know it. Perhaps you should see it through?

    2) I'll stand 100% by my claims ("Apple is head-and-shoulders above"), but give Google credit for reducing or offsetting 8.1% of their total carbon footprint.

    3) To quote @rotateleftbyte above, "[Emissions reduction] is a whole lot easier if you ... only make a little bit of stuff."
    What?? Oh geez Anant. You are so off-base but I refuse to turn the thread into a Google one. Focus on Apple and stop overreaching.

    Even tho Google directly uses a heck of a lot more energy than Apple does Google has matched or exceeded Apple's efforts in energy sustainability so far across the board other than in PR.  Google has never been good at tooting their own horn, so I gave you the benefit of the doubt you just didn't know better. Don't make me think you'd be a less-than-honest poster now that you do.

    Be satisfied that Apple is to be commended for their very public position on it and the time, effort, and money that they've invested in making it a major priority for other businesses around the globe. They've accomplished something on the environment that Google cannot: A loud and ringing voice for change. 
    edited September 2020 muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.