It makes sense in so many ways

Nov 2, 2023 1:22 PM

Lanhdanan

Views

73633

Likes

1400

Dislikes

8

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/18/people-who-work-from-home-all-the-time-cut-emissions-by-54-against-those-in-office

Makes sense: Less commute emissions, no need to double up on heating during the winter (especially if you're worried the pipes might freeze if you don't leave the heat on), etc.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If you drive less you buy less cars and making and shipping cars is terrible for the environment

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

My boss makes us all come in every day because he doesn't trust WFH, yet due to his incompetence I've wasted many many days sat 10ft away from him when I could gave at least been at home doing the laundry or something useful to one of us.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not from their butt.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

One of the great perks of working from home, you don't have to hold them in, just let er rip.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

ive put 400 miles on my car since july (took a look at my oil change sticker the other day because i knew it's been a while). working from home is the shit, imo

2 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

I bought a car in 2021 and have put ~4000 miles on it total, if I was driving back and forth to work I'd have done ~12-15k miles.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

If you think a corporate suits gives the slightest fuck about your carbon emissions...

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm doing my fifth WFH day in a row tomorrow. Because fuck it. No one checks up on me. Plus I'm trying to grow out my shitty beard at the moment and it is at peak shitty right now.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

That's great if you have a job that allows that. If you don't we need a much more robust and efficient mass transit system nationwide, not just in a few high population cities.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

That'd be good but I also would like other people working from home solely so they don't clog up the roads. I feel like most of the time on the road is being stuck in traffic

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Just a reminder that 71% of green-house gas emissions are caused by 100 companies. Even this is an attempt to shift the blame.

2 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

I'm pretty sure people working from home also look at a ton of porn so their "emissions" would probably be a lot higher.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But what about the commercial real estate valuations? Won't somebody think of the absurdly wealthy?

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

My BIL's job can be done 100% remotely but they require him to go in 2x a week because it's not "fair" to the people that can't work remotely

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I dunno, I emit about the same whether I'm home or at work.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Wfh has no real downside. Its just fking mindboggling that it isnt universally accepted

2 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

I'm doing my part! I also live close to a super market so I just walk my groceries. Need to pop to CBD? Catch a train. Only time I drive is for fun like to go to the beach. I see no good reason why nearly every office job shouldn't be fully remote.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh there are emissions in the home office too. Sometimes I am asked to leave.

1 year ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yep, but middle Management (useless) and HR (even more) are having a tantrum realizing they dont serve a useful purpose. They don't have anyone to check and gossip to hear.

2 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 5

The only people who want everyone in the office are those people who paid for the office and those people who are selling office space. That's it. OH and I guess some middle manager who pretty much has no job if there's nobody to micromanage all damn day long.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

And are more productive, but NOOOOO corporate demands I spend 8 hours a day IN THE OFFICE staring at my computer screen.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I dunno about that. I have a lot more access to nachos and chickpeas at home….

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I feel like 95% of my car use was commuting. And all other uses are probably the same, since I started working from home is 2020. Hopefully, I reduced my car emissions by 95%. As for electric use for my computer, etc, I think that's the same if I am home or the office, and since they sent everyone to,work from home, the just closed the office, so there's much less energy used there, too.

2 years ago | Likes 101 Dislikes 0

A liter of gasoline has 32 MJ of energy, which is circa 8.9 kWh, so about 89 h of a solid desktop computer use (~100W) or at least a month of laptop 24/7 without sleep (~10W).

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

'Had to upgrade my work laptop. The new power supply is 240W. Sucks when I'm travelling, but laptop works nicely. I do find I shut it down more frequently though.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I absolutely know that my commute accounted for over 75% of my vehicle use, because I now work from home 4 days a week, and my car needs gas once a month instead of once a week. The net result is an effective pay raise for me and I put less pollution into the world.

2 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

When the pandemic first sent us home, I saved *so* much money on gas, it was incredible. I was suddenly scraping by a lot less on my paltry wage.

2 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

That reminds me. I need to get out my battery charger. I don’t drive enough now to keep batteries fully charged.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

And they'd all not have to waste 3 to 4 hours of their day on their commute. I'm so fucking tired of traffic. It should only take me an hour tops to get to work, but somehow it takes almost two hours, the same goes for trying to leave. Driving would be great if it wasn't for other people on the road. That was my favorite part about COVID. Less people on the road so I could get around with no traffic. I would have preferred to be one that works from home, but no traffic was also great.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Same here. Plus I don't mind working a bit later if need be as I'm already home. I'd prefer to work than commute to be honest.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This is my stance on the matter. Am I working from home and an incident occurs late in the shift? Sure I'll take care of that. But if I'm working from the office, it's tomorrow's problem.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I work for head office in retail, so a problem could mean lost sales. Sorting the issue there and then makes a much better situation for everyone. Recently an ancient bug in the till software disabled them one by one. Took 5 hours to find, fix and release new software, but we lost £4m in sales. Not sure I could leave it, the fallout the next day would have been horrendous.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

But they'd pay you overtime for that right? It was my mistake for not including, but my job would not pay overtime unless I hit some ungodly hourly total for the week. If they paid me overtime and I wasn't scheduled for something important already in my personal life, then yeah I'd handle it. There are some other exclusions as well, like for example I was gunning for a raise/promo.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The salary sort of reflects the expectation to drop everything when needed. It's not often fortunately, and we can take a bit of time off in lieu if we want.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Gee, it sure was nice to be in better mental health, with a better work/life balance, to not have to deal with a commute through the city AND to have less of an impact on the environment. But I guess it's more important to have "spontaneous interaction" in the office, so oh well.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

(To be fair, I still have a hybrid schedule. It's just nowhere near as satisfying, in any sense at all, as only coming into the office when physically necessary.)

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In a country built on parking spots and highways, who knew?

2 years ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 0

FR though there is so much space wasted by parking lots and office buildings

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Allegedly Will Wright , creator of Sin City , stayed that in their research for the game they found that "to make the game realistic we would have had mostly parking lots "

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

So, Not using cars lowers the amount of pollution from cars? 🤔

2 years ago | Likes 80 Dislikes 1

Office buildings are also vastly less energy efficient than homes.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Interesting hypothesis, we're going to need additional funding to investigate further.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Hey, it took a pandemic and 3 years for them to come this close to saying those words.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's wild, isn't it?

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I think it's also highlighting the fact that most our individual consumer emissions, come from our use of cars. WFH cuts emissions more than buy solar panels...or going vegan.

2 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

We need to require companies to start including employee commutes in their total emissions reporting

2 years ago | Likes 368 Dislikes 1

And taxing the shit out of companies who COULD be 100% remote but choose not to.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ooooh. I like it.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My company actually sent out a survey asking about commutes to do just this!

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Absolutely!

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That and to pay for the time spent commuting. Losing 2-3 hrs a day driving or taking public transportation etc etc.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Scope 3 emissions like this are becoming more standard thankfully. Just need to push it even further and get the USA to not be so far behind the rest of the developed world in requiring reporting :/. https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/2022-12/Chapter7.pdf

2 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

And in their pay. At least $140 from my paycheck goes to just gas to get to work alone.

2 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Before I started working from home 3/5 of the week, I spent 5 hours driving per week.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I am not seeing how that won't have a ton of negative blowback on individual employees or vulnerable jobseekers vs actually forcing top end responsible corporate behavior. i.e. Fred who is coming in from 30 miles out because he has to live-in with frail parents to keep an eye on them.. oh sorry Fred you're having a big effect on our numbers, clear your desk.

2 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Right... I forget you Americans have no rights and can be fired on a whim.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Good point. Make the employers choose between paying for commute time and paying additional salary add-on for cost-of-living/quality-of-life differences. That is, if you're in San Francisco, either you pay for the time spent getting to the office from somewhere affordable or you pay an extra amount for the cost difference (or quality difference) between living in the City and living somewhere else.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The quality-of-life point is important so they don't move the office to somewhere like Fresno and make everyone live there.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Or they just fire you and hire local...

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Which, if they can find qualified employees locally, might not be a bad thing. Hopefully, however, they can realize how much they save (and all the costs they can push onto their employees) by switching to wfh.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Note: cost of office space, electricity, etc. gets paid for by remote workers instead of the company. Still better than paying for gas and having to commute but it's not insignificant to the company.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It also isn't fair to people who are paying far more to live closer and have a shorter commute. Rewarding people for living further away from work will only *increase* commute times.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

Then they can move out to a cheaper place.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Right. Which will *increase* emissions. Because more people will choose to commute. Even now the people with long commutes are mainly doing it because it's cheaper than living near their place of work. So making it even *more* cheap will incent *more* people to commute further.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But if they are 100% WFH I don't see why they would commute.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Freeing up car lanes also make it easier for those who still have to travel and further reduces the pollution

2 years ago | Likes 498 Dislikes 0

The shipping industry would like a word.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

Less idling, traffic, congestion... agreed.

2 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Your welcome

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

In 2020 when so many worked remote and I could get to work (clinic) it was glorious to have no traffic issues

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I started working for my public transport commission. In training, we talked about how fast routes would get done during lockdown, even with less employees. If most people took public transit, public transit would be more efficient because there would be less cars.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It takes less gas to drive a consistent speed Instead of the constant speed up slow down of congested traffic driving.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Not just cars either. A person working at home uses vastly less electricity and resources than a giant office building that has to power the whole place, have industrial-tier AC/heat systems, and an enormous array of other costs and demands people don't usually even consider in the first place. The upkeep required just for offices to exist is insane; offices are a massive waste of resources when the bulk of all work done in them is digital these days and could be done from anywhere.

2 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

Ahhhhh, thank you! I could NOT figure out how that math was working.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Not to mention it's safer because there will be fewer people on the road to get into accidents

2 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

+1 for correct use of "fewer". A lost art.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I see 'fewer' less and less these days. It had had me concerned.

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It's too bad that that is happening.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As well as wear and tear on infrastructure I would think, no?

2 years ago | Likes 73 Dislikes 0

To some extent, but wear on roads is almost entirely environmental and trucks, wear is strongly nonlinear with weight. You'll do a lot better at lifting 1 pound 1000 times than lifting 1000 pounds once.

2 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

Sometimes I know things, and sometimes I don't, thanks dude

2 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

I mean, there would probably less trucks on the road too cuz less need to move fuels, materials, with more people at home.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Also fair, and more in the longer term with less construction of office buildings

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0