1505
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] krayj@sh.itjust.works 227 points 1 year ago

Corporations should be held responsible for the emissions caused by their employee's commuting.

This would really change the discussion about return to office.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 97 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lol they spent decades doing the opposite, generating the vast majority of emissions with big manufacturing and big livestock, and then successfully shifting blame on poor peasants claiming the planet is heating because they're not sorting their recycling well enough.

[-] Chivera@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Yes and also by telling us to buy expensive electric cars because the environment needs us to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

Companies should be on the hook for all negative externalities. Make them internalities and watch how quick things change

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Yes, but we need to see everyone in person!!!11111 There are intangible benefits and impromptu synergies, etc... /s

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ntzm@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago

In Nottingham, UK they made it so companies have to pay for every parking space per year over a certain amount, and that money gets invested in public transport. Over time congestion has grown much slower in Nottingham than similar cities, I'm amazed that more cities don't do the same.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] ohlaph@lemmy.world 104 points 1 year ago

And time. Instead of commuting, I'll mow my grass, water the plants, do some chores, etc.

My wife commutes and can't work remotely. I try to consider that and do more chores to bring balance.

That extra 20-30 minutes in the morning and 40 minutes in the PM is priceless, actually.

[-] guyrocket@kbin.social 27 points 1 year ago

I agree.

Time truly is our greatest resource as people and getting some back instead of driving is fantastic.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 17 points 1 year ago

Took me an hour to get to work, so now I get an extra hour and a half in bed as I get up at 9:30 for my 9am start.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 86 points 1 year ago

One criticism of WFH is that you'll have increased energy bills since you're home all day. Aside from the obvious reasons that's wrong, this provides hard data showing that WFH is better for the environment in addition to being better for literally everyone except commercial real estate investors.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 54 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I would assume it takes far more energy on heating/cooling/ventilation systems for large buildings in general than it does for a series of small buildings that have classic ventilation systems called "windows that open to let in fresh air." Something that is pretty rare in office buildings.

EDIT: Furthermore, large buildings usually have automated systems that keep it roughly the same temperature throughout the whole building while individuals in their own homes might try to keep heating/cooling bills low by choosing to only heat/cool specific rooms that they're actually physically using. I know I certainly do this at home, no sense in doing temp control in a room no one is occupying (other than making sure it's above freezing for pipes, etc.).

[-] scytale@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

Yeah. Having a laptop and extra monitor on all day at home probably uses less electricity than the fridge.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] _number8_@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago

WFH allowance should be mandated -- anyone that wants it for a job where it's possible must be allowed it. it's such a dramatic quality of life difference.

[-] StThicket@reddthat.com 24 points 1 year ago

I'm privileged to have a boss not caring where we work from, but i prefer to come into the office once in a while because of my social needs. It's depressing to stay home day after day, but it's more productive.

[-] clayj9@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

That's great when it's your choice. The issue is when bosses don't give people the choice.

[-] h_a_r_u_k_i@programming.dev 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

My boss allows people to WFH officially, but also establishes several small office spaces so people can come to hang out if they feel lonely, or want to get to know their colleagues more. I think this is the best of both world.

[-] electrogamerman@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

for literally no cost too. What exactly are companies losing with WFH? Literaly nothing.

[-] Muffi@programming.dev 23 points 1 year ago

Control. And that is a scary thing to lose if you're a bad manager.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Krukenberg@feddit.ch 60 points 1 year ago

Study in US

The difference is likely less in developed countries with functional public transport

[-] newde@feddit.nl 41 points 1 year ago

And if they drive, they drive less ridiculous cars. The fact that the F150 is the most sold car in the US is just mind boggling.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] WhyIDie@kbin.social 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

people who burn less gas and consume less resources burn less gas and consume less resources, more news at 11.

but it's nice they're pinning numbers onto the amounts

[-] Geek_King@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago

As a full time remote worker, I can confirm, I'm driving so much less. My commute prior to the pandemic was 18 minutes (12.7 miles one way), so 25 miles round trip with 36 minutes spent driving each work day. My commute was short compared to a lot of other people I worked with who'd drive 45 minutes one way, some 1 hour one way! That's a lot of driving that can be cut out if the role allows for remote work.

[-] Ryan213@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago

I find I'm less angry too. A lot of bad drivers out there. Lol

[-] steebo_jack@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Ah yah...lots of stupid drivers here just piss me off...lots of traffic compared to last year too...

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 year ago

I also eat at home a lot more which has a far lower ecological cost than going out to eat

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

And healthier, since restaurants tend to go all out on sugar, fat, and salt to make their meals tasty.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.fmhy.net 50 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Um... no fucking shit.

Transporting millions of people dozens of miles twice a day OF COURSE has resource costs, in carbon and pollution and energy consumption. This shouldn't be rocket science. Sadly it is for people who are afraid of change.

It also saves the workers money (as they don't have to pay for fuel or public transit), it saves the company money (as they don't have to pay for office space), it saves the environment (as you don't have pollution from commutes), it reduces traffic (as you don't have as many commuters at rush hour), and it's generally good for just about everybody except commercial real estate developers renting out overpriced office buildings and Starbucks that's paying absurd rents to be in the bottom floor of those overpriced office buildings. And of course middle managers who think that hounding their employees in person somehow accomplishes something.

[-] crackajack@reddthat.com 47 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That much is obvious. And for us commuters of public transport, it is such a relief to notice the traffic is not as bad and heavy as they used to be pre-pandemic, due to people now working from home.

With many businesses now wanting workers to return working on site, I think this shows the true colours of capital-owning class in relation to climate-change. Despite all the shifting of responsibility to make consumers monitor carbon-footprint, and corporate marketing of supposedly environmentally-friendly products, if CEOs and billionaires truly care about the environment, they would not even demand workers to return working on-site 5 days a week. Green-washing indeed.

Edit:clarity

[-] oroboros@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

The blatant disregard there will be of this research, which will be the case, tells you everything about the viability of trusting the captains of industry to navigate us away from climate collapse

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

The office is a total waste. A complete, total loss. Fuck that shit.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

I went from commuting close to 2 hours daily, with much of that spent stuck in traffic, to working fully remotely. I'd have to get gas every week. Now I go weeks at a time before needing to get gas.

Even better, I used to work for a chemical company part of one of the big oil and gas corporations. Now I work for a green energy company. It cracks me up just how different the two situations are.

[-] Throwaway4669332255@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

Just being able to cook at home has reduced our food waste for sure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] astral_avocado@lemm.ee 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I bike to work and turn off my AC/heat and power strips at home before I ride off. I wish everyone could experience how easy this is, I fucking hate driving through traffic.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

I wish I could do that again like I did in college.

But we just had 2 months straight with temperatures over 100 degrees where I'm at, and affordable housing is 30 miles from where people work. So going to work would take forever, be miserable, and require a shower upon arrival.

I just got offered an awesome new job that pays half again more than I make now, but it's further into the city, and a 300sft studio apartment within 15 miles of my new job is $2,500/month.

The cheapest home in the City is 1.8 million dollars, and the median price is 2.6 million.

Paying the car note, gas, and rent on 1200sft where I'm at saves me a thousand dollars a month versus moving closer, AND the new job actually pays a fuel stipend because literally nobody at the company lives within a half-hour drive of the office, so it's even better to live where it's cheaper.

We'd move the office, but we're municipal employees and It's hard to justify moving City Hall out of the city

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] solstice@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

I would ride to work but there's so many reasons not to. I've tried before, and almost died several times because of asshole drivers and half asleep morons still putting on makeup or drinking coffee or whatever. The bike lanes are a joke and people treat them like passing lanes to get one car length ahead in stop-go traffic. I've ridden with pants on once and got a giant oil stain on my leg from the bike chain. Even if none of that happens, it's extremely hot and humid where i live almost year round, and I wear business casual so I'm drenched in sweat before too long. I wish I could make it work but..no..and of course there's no reliable public transportation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] guyrocket@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

I have solar panels on my roof. My employer's building does not.

[-] Grumpy@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago

I've actually started... walking to work. It takes me like 45min. So it's not a short walk, though it's a very short car commute. But the world is so different now that I'm walking. Having lived in car dependency vs walking is so different. And it's healthy for you too. More people should try it, if i's possible.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Well, I've traded burning fuel for burning internet and electricity at my home. My electricity at home is mostly solar (from my roof) and hydro from the grid (I live in Washington State).

Working from home spares me ~20 uncompensated transit hours a week, so the emissions difference (whether I use transit or drive) is substantial and so is the cost savings (in fuel and parking). FWIW, my employer will pay for my transit fares (but not fuel or parking) and that's nice and all, but I'm squeamish about transit during flu/covid season because of all those coughing people going in to jobs that don't encourage them to stay home while sick.

I'm able to work more hours when I do it from home because I'm not constrained by transit schedules/catching the last train out of town, and that way I still come out ahead in terms of having time with my kids, and I have time to take grocery shopping and meal planning and prep off of my wife's plate.

It's better this way, not just in terms of cost and environmental impact and quality of life, but productivity-wise.

[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 20 points 1 year ago

There are so many CEOs putting their own private portfolio over the companies they supposedly run having a high staff attrition, and yet “they command such big salaries because they take on so much risk”.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If the American owner class has taught Americans paying any attention the last century anything about how they operate, it's "Fuck the commons/planet/species/future, burn it all if it makes me a dollar slightly faster!"

Profit in this case being all the corporate park land they own. Propagating human misery at every step for nothing more than to run up their capital ego score, that doesn't even effect their living conditions at all.

Good thing they don't consider their victims, people without significant net worth, human.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Montagge@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

In the two weeks since my work mandated three days in the office I've spent $150 on gas. Awesome.
Granted part of that reason is the car broke down and I had to drive the truck.

[-] yoz@aussie.zone 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

right but the issue is not environment pollution , its the real estate. They all are empty so fuck the environment and bring yo 9-5 ass to office.

[-] jcit878@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

i also think theres an inherent bias that 'leaders' tend to be more extroverted and see more value in people 'being together', and to an extent, at least in my observed experience, are unwilling to acknowledge the fact its not the same for everyone

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] fne8w2ah@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Non-existent public transport much?

[-] DrunkenPirate@feddit.de 11 points 1 year ago

People who live in caves all the time cut emissions by 95%.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
1505 points (98.8% liked)

News

23422 readers
2647 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS