"Microsoft will be carbon negative by 2030"
If you missed this headline back in January 2020, you're completely forgiven. Despite the incredible level of ambition in this strategy, it didn't really make the news. Here's a quick recap for you:
The three pillars to the announcement were clear:
1) Become Carbon Negative by 2030
2) Remove our Historical Carbon Emissions by 2050
3) Launch a $1 Billion Climate Innovation Fund
Looking at these three pillars, and it's actually sort of mind blowing that this was approved for external communication. The billion dollar fund, okay, for Microsoft that's easy money, and will likely turn into a money maker. This is straight out of the Bill Gates playbook, so no surprises there.
To also announce Carbon Negative ambitions when you're not in control of most of your supply chain, that's a big step, but 10 years is a long time, and Microsoft isn't exactly a small player, I'm sure they have a lot of leverage.
The thing that blew my mind, was pillar number two, the ambition to undo their entire history of carbon emissions. This is incredible. Think how much plastic and metal has been transported around the world in the PC and floppy disk era of Microsoft! Think how much their data centres have been burning and churning. I don't think I've heard of any other company that has pledged to do this, before or since.
We're now just over three years since that announcement. The Verge decided to do some digging and publish some progress information. The headline doesn't sound promising:
Microsoft’s dirty supply chain is holding back its climate ambitions.
I'm pretty sure you won't be surprised if I summarise their progress as "It's hard and complicated work", leading to a mixed bag of results. For things Microsoft directly controls, they're making steady progress, however, some of their major suppliers aren't able or willing to play ball at the moment. If you have to build massive new factories in, say, China, you're unlikely to be reducing your emissions in the same year.
By the way - I'm creating the book and podcast series for people who want their small or medium business to make more profit and better impact. So if you want more of this, please sign up for more at https://sixtyminutestoimpact.xyz
As for carbon removal, it's really too early to tell. Beyond carbon credits, the technology really isn't there yet to do this effectively, let alone efficiently - but Microsoft is making financial bets on technology that will get us there.
Overall, I'm glad The Verge published this write up, albeit a little too negative for my tastes. I'm not surprised that the work is slow and hard, who expected it to be easy? This scale of work has literally never been done before, there's no playbook - especially not one that would keep shareholders happy.
Which leads me back to the title of this article. Recently Microsoft made the strategic decision of the century by going all in on artificial intelligence and locking up Open AI, but I can't help wondering if sustainability is their blue ocean strategy?
If you missed this headline back in January 2020, you're completely forgiven. Despite the incredible level of ambition in this strategy, it didn't really make the news. Here's a quick recap for you:
The three pillars to the announcement were clear:
1) Become Carbon Negative by 2030
2) Remove our Historical Carbon Emissions by 2050
3) Launch a $1 Billion Climate Innovation Fund
Looking at these three pillars, and it's actually sort of mind blowing that this was approved for external communication. The billion dollar fund, okay, for Microsoft that's easy money, and will likely turn into a money maker. This is straight out of the Bill Gates playbook, so no surprises there.
To also announce Carbon Negative ambitions when you're not in control of most of your supply chain, that's a big step, but 10 years is a long time, and Microsoft isn't exactly a small player, I'm sure they have a lot of leverage.
The thing that blew my mind, was pillar number two, the ambition to undo their entire history of carbon emissions. This is incredible. Think how much plastic and metal has been transported around the world in the PC and floppy disk era of Microsoft! Think how much their data centres have been burning and churning. I don't think I've heard of any other company that has pledged to do this, before or since.
We're now just over three years since that announcement. The Verge decided to do some digging and publish some progress information. The headline doesn't sound promising:
Microsoft’s dirty supply chain is holding back its climate ambitions.
I'm pretty sure you won't be surprised if I summarise their progress as "It's hard and complicated work", leading to a mixed bag of results. For things Microsoft directly controls, they're making steady progress, however, some of their major suppliers aren't able or willing to play ball at the moment. If you have to build massive new factories in, say, China, you're unlikely to be reducing your emissions in the same year.
By the way - I'm creating the book and podcast series for people who want their small or medium business to make more profit and better impact. So if you want more of this, please sign up for more at https://sixtyminutestoimpact.xyz
As for carbon removal, it's really too early to tell. Beyond carbon credits, the technology really isn't there yet to do this effectively, let alone efficiently - but Microsoft is making financial bets on technology that will get us there.
Overall, I'm glad The Verge published this write up, albeit a little too negative for my tastes. I'm not surprised that the work is slow and hard, who expected it to be easy? This scale of work has literally never been done before, there's no playbook - especially not one that would keep shareholders happy.
Which leads me back to the title of this article. Recently Microsoft made the strategic decision of the century by going all in on artificial intelligence and locking up Open AI, but I can't help wondering if sustainability is their blue ocean strategy?
ps. You might like to know, there's zero tracking on this page. I have no idea who or how many people are reading it. If you have read it, I'd love to hear your perspective. Will you drop me a comment on whichever platform you saw it? Twitter thread LinkedIn post