 |
|
|
|||||
After two years of reducing its overall carbon footprint, Amazon now reports that its emissions increased in 2024. The companys surge in data center construction and electricity use to support an increased use of AI helped fuel that rise, as did expanded delivery operations. Amazons total carbon emissions in 2024 reached 68.25 million metric tons, according to the companys latest sustainability report. Thats a 6% increase from the year priorand a 33% increase from 2019, when the company launched its Climate Pledge commitment to reach net-zero emissions across its operations by 2040. Amazon breaks down its carbon footprint into direct emissions, indirect emissions from purchased electricity, and indirect emissions from other sources. All three of these categories saw an increase in 2024. Direct emissions, primarily from its delivery services, grew 6% compared to 2023; the company cites supply constraints for EVs and low-carbon fuels. Direct emissions in total account for 15.13 million metric tons of carbon. Indirect emissions from purchased energy grew 1%, in part due to the higher electricity usage required to support advanced technologies like AI, according to the report. These emissions account for the smallest slice of Amazons overall footprint at 2.8 million metric tons. Indirect emissions from other sources also grew 6%, and these emissions make up 74% of Amazons total carbon footprint. That increase was driven primarily from data center construction and fuel consumption by third-party delivery service providers, per the report, which states that the company is using generative AI in virtually every corner of its business. Amazon says it’s continuing to work toward its 2040 net-zero goal, and that its progress will not be linear. It also claims it continues to match 100% of its electricity consumed in data center regions with renewable energy sources. But Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, an organization of workers at the tech giant pushing for more climate action, argues the numbers are misleading. The group says that in areas of the U.S. that are home to more than 70% of Amazon data centers, electricity comes primarily from gas or coal. Utility companies are also building out new fossil fuel infrastructure to support these data centers. To match its electricity consumption with renewables, Amazon uses mostly renewable energy creditswhich have faced criticisms of greenwashing. In some cases, Amazon Employees for Climate Justice says, the company has simply purchased the credit for existing renewables, which would have been used anyway. Bloomberg reported that if these credits werent counted, Amazons 2022 emissions would have actually been three times higher than what the company disclosed. Amazon isn’t the only tech company building out data centers to support AI. A Meta data center in Louisiana will require three new gas plants for power. Google’s 2023 emissions grew 13% compared to the year prior because of AI and data center growth. Microsoft’s emissions are up 23% since 2020 for the same reason. But Business Insider recently reported that Amazon’s data centers “are on pace to command the highest electricity demand” from all the tech companies it examined. Im frustrated that nobody talks about what AI is doing to the environment, an Amazon software engineer said in a statement from Amazon Employees for Climate Justice. They want people to think that AI is this magical tool that lives in the cloud, but what they dont tell us is that AI literally uses coal and fracked gas for its power. Our CEOs want to dupe us into focusing on how efficient shiny new AI features are, as if we dont know well be killing the planet with the few hours were saving on code. And in a year, I might not even have a job.
Category:
E-Commerce
If youve ever walked into a meeting expecting support, and instead found yourself under fire, youre not alone. Amid rising pressure to deliver more with less, leaders often find themselves defending critical initiatives, budgets, or even their own credibility in front of skeptical peers and executives. And while thoughtful debate can sharpen decisions, some meetings turn into something more damaging: an ambush. Its a uniquely disorienting moment, one where your pulse quickens, your prepared remarks fall flat, and the room feels suddenly less like a meeting and more like a trial. For Cora, the head of product at a fast-growing tech company, her annual budget presentation was supposed to be a formality. She had aligned her proposal with the companys growth strategy, benchmarked costs against those of her peers, and prepared a detailed slide deck. But when she began her presentation, everything shifted. One colleague questioned her departments ROI in the first five minutes. Another proposed reallocating her budget to fund their own priorities. Soon, a chorus of voices piled on, pointing out minor flaws and casting doubt on her entire proposal. It became clear they had compared notes beforehand. Caught off guard and on the defensive, Cora struggled to regain control and left with her credibility bruised and her budget slashed. Coras story is all too common. High-stakes meetings where influence, resources, or reputations are on the line are often battlegrounds for competing agendas. Without the right preparation, even the most capable leaders can be outmaneuvered and unprepared to handle resistance. Through our work advising dozens of companies facing similar dynamicsKathryn, as an executive coach and keynote speaker, and Jenny, as an executive advisor and Learning & Development expertweve identified six core strategies that help senior leaders show up prepared, persuasive, and grounded, even when others are working against them. 1. Clarify the Stakes Before you can persuade others, you need clarity for yourself. Start by defining whats truly at risk for you, your team, and the organization, along with what you want to achieve. Is this about getting a yes on a specific proposal? Strengthening your position? Building support for a long-term initiative? Ask yourself: What is the desired outcome of this meeting? Who are the key decision-makers and influencers? What do they care about? What happens if I win, and what happens if I dont? Pro tip: Write down the one sentence you want them to say after you leave the room: We should move forward with her proposal, or He made a strong case. Lets back him. Holding that sentence in mind helps you stay focused if others try to derail the conversation. 2. Research Your Audience Coras biggest mistake wasnt her numbers. It was not anticipating her colleagues competing agendas. In high-stakes meetings, knowing your audience is just as important as knowing your content. Do your homework: Understand their priorities, pain points, and pressures. Identify possible objections and who is likely to raise them. Map out the room: who is likely to support you, who is skeptical, and who might stay silent. As Sun Tzu wrote: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. 3. Prepare Your Content Once you have mapped the dynamics, craft your case accordingly. Start with your key message and back it up with 23 compelling, business-aligned points. Support your position with data, examples, and even stories that make your message memorable. We recommend the SUCCESs framework to structure your message: make it Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, and Story-driven. And dont forget to end with a clear ask. Ambiguity creates space for dissent. 4. Rehearse and Refine Cora had the facts, but she wasnt ready for the friction. Rehearsing isnt just about polishing your presentation. Its about building resilience for tough questions and interruptions. Consider these steps: Practice your opening and closing lines out loudthey stick most due to recency and primacy bias. Anticipate tough questions and rehearse concise, confident responses. Role-play with a trusted colleague who can throw curveballs and help you adjust. Pro tip: Prepare a short pause phrase to give yourself a moment: Thats a great point. Let me address that specifically. 5. Build Support Before You Walk In And even with strong content, your meeting can fall flat without political groundwork. The most effective meeting performance often begins well before you step into the room. Smart leaders dont just prepare content; they build coalitions. Pre-aligning with key stakeholders to identify and address objections and build support. Socialize your idea informally to shape how your message is received. Securing a meeting sponsor, someone influential who can help frame your proposal positively and reinforce its credibility in the room Influence starts in the quiet conversations, not just the formal ones. In hindsight, Cora realized she had focused so much on refining her proposal that she hadnt spoken with peers in advance or gauged where their support stood. A few informal touchpoints might have revealed the coordinated pushback, or even helped prevent it. 6. Manage Your Mindset Once your strategy is solid, the final variable is you. Your mindset, not your slide deck, determines how effectively you show up. High-stakes settings amplify stress, which is why composure is your secret advantage. Visualize a positive outcome and anchor yourself in your credibility. Arrive grounded and focused; small rituals, such as deep breathing, can help. Prepare a few confident, neutral phrases if things get heated: Let me clarfy that . . . or Thats a fair point; heres how were addressing it . . . If power dynamics make direct confrontation risky, consider influencing laterally or enlisting a trusted intermediary. Preparation doesnt mean going it aloneit means understanding your leverage points and using them wisely. Too often, leaders over-index on content and underprepare for resistance. But in high-stakes meetings, your ability to anticipate dynamics, tailor your message, and manage your mindset is what sets you apart. You may not control the room, but with the right preparation, you can control how you show up in it. After her experience, Cora changed how she approached every high-stakes meeting. She now pre-aligns with key stakeholders, rehearses tough questions with a trusted peer, and walks in knowing not just her content, but the political terrain. She still faces resistance sometimes, but shes no longer surprised by it. And that shift has helped her win more buy-in, not just battles. Because real leadership presence isnt forged in easy moments. Its revealed when the room turns against you, and you stay steady anyway.
Category:
E-Commerce
Imagine that you own a small, 20-acre farm in Californias Central Valley. You and your family have cultivated this land for decades, but drought, increasing costs, and decreasing water availability are making each year more difficult. Now imagine that a solar-electricity developer approaches you and presents three options: You can lease the developer 10 acres of otherwise productive cropland, on which the developer will build an array of solar panels and sell electricity to the local power company. You can select 1 or 2 acres of your land on which to build and operate your own solar array, using some electricity for your farm and selling the rest to the utility. Or you can keep going as you have been, hoping your farm can somehow survive. Thousands of farmers across the country, including in Californias Central Valley, are choosing one of the first two options. A 2022 survey by the U.S. Department of Agriculture found that roughly 117,000 U.S. farm operations have some type of solar device. Our own work has identified more than 6,500 solar arrays currently located on U.S. farmland. Our study of nearly 1,000 solar arrays built on 10,000 acres of the Central Valley over the past two decades found that solar power and farming are complementing each other in farmers business operations. As a result, farmers are making and saving more money while using less waterhelping them keep their land and livelihood. A hotter, drier, and more built-up future Perhaps nowhere in the U.S. is farmland more valuable or more productive than Californias Central Valley. The region grows a vast array of crops, including nearly all of the nations production of almonds, olives, and sweet rice. Using less than 1% of all farmland in the country, the Central Valley supplies a quarter of the nations food, including 40% of its fruits, nuts, and other fresh foods. The food, fuel, and fiber that these farms produce are a bedrock of the nations economy, food system, and way of life. But decades of intense cultivation, urban development, and climate change are squeezing farmers. Water is limited, and getting more so: A state law passed in 2014 requires farmers to further reduce their water usage by the mid-2040s. The trade-offs of installing solar on agricultural land When the solar arrays we studied were installed, California state solar energy policy and incentives gave farm landowners new ways to diversify their income by either leasing their land for solar arrays or building their own. There was an obvious trade-off: Turning land used for crops to land used for solar usually means losing agricultural production. We estimated that over the 25-year life of the solar arrays, this land would have produced enough food to feed 86,000 people a year, assuming they eat 2,000 calories a day. There was an obvious benefit, too, of clean energy: These arrays produced enough renewable electricity to power 470,000 U.S. households every year. But the result we were hoping to identify and measure was the economic effect of shifting that land from agricultural farming to solar farming. We found that farmers who installed solar were dramatically better off than those who did not. They were better off in two ways, the first being financially. All the farmers, whether they owned their own arrays or leased their land to others, saved money on seeds, fertilizer, and other costs associated with growing and harvesting crops. They also earned money from leasing the land, offsetting farm energy bills, and selling their excess electricity. Farmers who owned their own arrays had to pay for the panels, equipment and installation, and maintenance. But even after covering those costs, their savings and earnings added up to $50,000 per acre of profits every year, 25 times the amount they would have earned by planting that acre. Farmers who leased their land made much less money but still avoided costs for irrigation water and operations on that part of their farm, gaining $1,100 per acre per yearwith no up-front costs. The farmers also conserved water, which in turn supported compliance with the states Sustainable Groundwater Management Act water use reduction requirements. Most of the solar arrays were installed on land that had previously been irrigated. We calculated that turning off irrigation on this land saved enough water every year to supply about 27 million people with drinking water or irrigate 7,500 acres of orchards. Following solar array installation, some farmers also followed surrounding land, perhaps enabled by the new stable income stream, which further reduced water use. Changes to food and energy production Farmers in the Central Valley and elsewhere are now cultivating both food and energy. This shift can offer long-term security for farmland owners, particularly for those who install and run their own arrays. Recent estimates suggest that converting between 1.1% and 2.4% of the countrys farmland to solar arrays would, along with other clean energy sources, generate enough electricity to eliminate the nations need for fossil fuel power plants. Though many crops are part of a global market that can adjust to changes in supply, losing this farmland could affect the availability of some crops. Fortunately, farmers and landowners are finding new ways to protect farmland and food security while supporting clean energy. One such approach is agrivoltaics, where farmers install solar designed for grazing livestock or growing crops beneath the panels. Solar can also be sited on less-productive farmland or on farmland that is used for biofuels rather than food production. Even in these areas, arrays can be designed and managed to benefit local agriculture and natural ecosystems. With thoughtful design, siting, and management, solar can give back to the land and the ecosystems it touches. Farms are much more than the land they occupy and the goods they produce. Farms are run by people with families, whose well-being depends on essential and variable resources such as water, fertilizer, fuel, electricity, and crop sales. Farmers often borrow money during the planting season in hopes of making enough at harvest time to pay off the debt and keep a little profit. Installing solar on their land can give farmers a diversified income, help them save water, and reduce the risk of bad years. That can make solar an asset to farming, not a threat to the food supply. Jacob Stid is a PhD student in hydrogeology at Michigan State University. Annick Anctil is an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Michigan State University. Anthony Kendall is a professor of Earth and environmental sciences at Michigan State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||