Too bad why? You had a counterargument or something?
PatFussy
joined 1 year ago
Yep you got me, I make shit up on the fly.
I don't even know what you are responding toqnd don't care to look
Big dog 2 months... If you knew how companies figure out their pollution metrics you would be very sad.
As for a better metric, I don't know. Everything is tied to cost so it's really dumb
Big dog why are you going back in time 2 months to respond to this
Again, ops teams usually work way overtime. California is special because we don't really have an overlapping working time with Asia or EU. This means we either have to not work a regular 9-5 time zone or the company is going to have to open a bunch of positions to make up for the difference.
Can you imagine being on a global operations team in California? Looks like a bunch of job openings
We should get this guy in a smart car as an option on twisted metal.
Why would the CIA change their mind after 1 year? They were investigating for years and they conclude it's not a weapon, then a year later they say 'nope April fools LOL'
Oh okay, I feel like responding now so I reread.
So the evidence they provided was what I said is carefully curated. I work in sustainability and I see how people mess with numbers. I also know info from China is famous for fudging numbers as well. I don't think CO2 is a good metric as it is difficult to track. The way companies track CO2 now is usually by spend so they convert $$$ to CO2 output through a calculator. It's really not efficient.
You asked me what is an alternative and I said I don't know. I really don't, unless we have a way of tracking what comes in and out of a business and how it is used.