IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [admin-discuss] Next steps towards a net zero IETF

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Tue, 21 March 2023 22:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE37C1524DC; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eVQ1GD-CH262; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf2e.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA853C1524A3; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf2e.google.com with SMTP id x8so10828145qvr.9; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1679437768; h=to:references:message-id:cc:date:in-reply-to:from:subject :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5szYeyevpcbT02LoAe0F8DenG01dADUjC+HGnt0VZwk=; b=IO//wnzE0zYiiYVwvKaUaAz5k/3RSSskA3hHCEFig3rhvvH6gmphFvIyelpLvNLHlK gPUo30ED0Hkcda4ZH7kpHdsn5Fas3pPtjHhHr1Xc1MXi/FAR2g1oUEZ+xpG3lZuy43PG Kdzo7W4FCd4daFz1oo3SnV4TJk26WXX/N56NjmweDQ9O6XtX1u3zB3PO6Pg8bSEjOVpH WkcuAuL+jPEnchMKoaTY18H5qW7HPlbXgLxJekRxxJxCR5FT0uR8Lks9+wcGWwzUz2Cj HvSqgfbVrMRkyG15siDn+Jn748dAWpvQ9ew1UJMdlsOgleISBRR1DG4ZD68bu7xRn1r1 A6vA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679437768; h=to:references:message-id:cc:date:in-reply-to:from:subject :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=5szYeyevpcbT02LoAe0F8DenG01dADUjC+HGnt0VZwk=; b=dsxW1tKwnKyWxS/Uwmr8rNdCcd1zxr1lFQh1zkmV+rEacxG+p9T9RAhZWtLqdOOmhq n5+ao+MKc+eJUGrEgqeEyCgNIpEoGr2R9HV89UhbxTanrEK/CVjQX71j8+7bbr5UFJRK ziOfza21oaFMbpmGZmJfm7cVADY13FsoINJYl0e2JZrHhPe+bfQiduwaRcujjKnn1YqG HPUwDBXY1Fjh77e6WY2hhI6Hah6LNRkrA+MeSxvKo6wUL50xY8/8p65pyuzSarJZAaaP kwHDguLDAMePavJMVtJ+ywF7rZunloCtUACcaWpp1FCH0HST//2YmFWurbSEGOpj+Vwq iPCA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUjJLejgqyMwPK5DRFWifyh01eWBGc5/qbH6UQ4X5M5V+JQ0ZDK xE31lrUGvMcYYF8I8oydNZ3gagJ046A=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9e2yOoZe9eLDSLex+lQr9UikfohBsQXq2r17x1An+sz/BUW22XSigPzWXtRQwHec0IiXbbmQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2461:b0:5a2:e3e4:59b0 with SMTP id im1-20020a056214246100b005a2e3e459b0mr2845906qvb.44.1679437768210; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2600:1700:4383:c05f:2c87:6952:e479:8f23]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j9-20020a05620a288900b0070648cf78bdsm10060927qkp.54.2023.03.21.15.29.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_73D79745-71C6-4614-AC6B-FD04AA0ADD49"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.2\))
Subject: Re: [admin-discuss] Next steps towards a net zero IETF
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230321220809.1E3DAB43AB7D@ary.qy>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:29:25 -0700
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <F9DDFFC4-F145-4A3D-86D9-9DB4240F3445@gmail.com>
References: <20230321220809.1E3DAB43AB7D@ary.qy>
To: admin-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/IOqXM6WsQ-rkYT4DumjNInkgims>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF-Discussion. This is the most general IETF mailing list, intended for discussion of technical, procedural, operational, and other topics for which no dedicated mailing lists exist." <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 22:29:30 -0000

John,

> On Mar 21, 2023, at 3:08 PM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
> It appears that Andrew Sullivan  <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> said:
>> To begin with, of course, actually building in some cost from carbon emissions requires two things: (1) an analysis of how much carbon an
>> activity creates and (2) a commitment to spending that additional money. ...
> 
> In case it wasn't clear, I think it is a fine plan to figure out what
> the IETF's carbon budget is, and to look at the costs of changing that
> budget by possible changes to the way we work.

I tend to agree, but thought that Alexander Pelov’s comment was interesting.   If we decide to not have a face to face meeting, is there any actual saving in carbon emissions.   The same planes fly, the same hotels have meeting, etc.    I am sure there is a theoretical saving on paper, but it’s not clear that any actual emissions are reduced.

> But barring implausibly large improvements in the quality and
> reliability of offsets, I don't think it is a good idea to spend money
> on them.

I also agree.

Bob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email