Including investments seems a bit disingenuous. I'm sure their personal carbon footprint is already huge without having to include that.
kambusha
joined 6 months ago
Based on that picture alone, there are 24 pods. So 24 x $700 = $168k per mo or over $2m a year.
Edit: oops! Tried to math too late at night.
24 x $700 = $16.8k per mo or over $200k per year
It really ties the room together.
Because your friends don't suck
For those that wish to donate & help Valencia amid the damages from the Dana storm, you can do so via Spanish red cross (Cruz Roja). Feel free to search "Cruz Roja donation" or simply "Valencia Dana donation", but here's also a direct link:
https://cercadeti.cruzroja.es/ayudaafectadosinundacionesdana
I'm only a racist when I'm sleepy.
Woop-woop-woopwooopwoop-wooop
Have you tried a 20-hour gaming break?
Just subscribed. Thanks!
Perhaps, but think of it this way: you likely have money invested or money that is invested on your behalf, whether that's personal, 401k, IRA, or government pension. Those are likely investments spread across many companies - so should your carbon footprint take into account what those companies are doing?
I'd suggest that companies should be responsible for their carbon footprint, and legislated accordingly. Pushing it to investors, or on their customers, just seems like passing the buck.