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

[Hesham ElBakoury <[e-mail]>]

Several conferences do not provide remote participation.

Hesham

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 1:21 PM Richard Shockey <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> +1 to you John and Christian on this.  Offsets like Cap and Trade is
> exactly what you expect from the bankers and they are SOOO concerned about
> the environment. <snicker>
>
> The trend is exactly the opposite and I run conferences.
>
>
> https://www.prweb.com/releases/the_sip_forum_announces_conference_lineup_for_2023_kyc_summit_and_sipnoc_2023_dates_set/prweb19208729.htm
>
> People are sick of virtual events. Teams GOTO Zoom etc. Every
> communications industry conference I know is reporting record in person
> attendance. MWC etc.. even 3GPP is creeping back to full in person. They
> are looking at some big plenary thing in Greece shortly.
>
> The USG is slowly but deliberately returning to in person Technical
> Advisory Committee meetings as well. I'm on a couple at the FCC. The DC
> Mayor has been complaining loudly to the Biden Administration that all of
> this virtual stuff is killing downtown DC the office property market,
> restaurants etc.
>
> Make this bovine effluent go away. If you wanted to know why some of us do
> not want to take new work to the IETF you know now.
>
> —
> Richard Shockey
>
> Shockey Consulting LLC
>
> Chairman of the Board SIP Forum
>
> www.shockey.us
>
> www.sipforum.org <http://www.sipforum.org>
> www.sipnoc.org <http://www.sipnoc.org> (2022)
>
> richard<at>shockey.us
>
> Skype-Linkedin-Facebook –Twitter rshockey101
>
> PSTN [phone]
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3/21/23, 1:20 PM, "ietf on behalf of John Levine" <
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> on behalf of
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>
> It appears that Greg Wood <[e-mail] <mailto:
> [e-mail]>> said:
> >While skepticism about carbon offsetting is not unwarranted, I can say
> with confidence that the IETF LLC staff, Secretariat and other people who
> have worked on the project were and are focused on
> >doing what we can to improve the actual situation, and not just
> appearances. IETF participants have fairly consistently indicated they are
> in favor of being more environmentally sustainable, and
> >this seems like a reasonable step towards that goal, while also being in
> scope for the IETF LLC.
>
>
> I don't think anyone doubts your good faith or the LLCs, but I
> also reiterate the point that carbon offsets are for suckers.
>
>
> Earlier this year I virtually sat in on a seminar series at the Yale
> forestry school about how you design forest carbon offsets and it
> became clear that you have to make some extremely optimistic
> assumptions. You have to believe that whoever has sold you the offset
> will be able and willing to prevent logging in some remote forest for
> fifty years, and also that they won't turn around resell the same
> offset to someone else next year and the year after that. They talked
> about how one might audit these things, but it wasn't very persuasive.
>
>
> We can certainly look at ways to decrease the amount of CO2 our
> meetings generate, e.g., by looking for venues that require less air
> travel, but we should not imagine that we can fix the rest of it by
> buying phantom offsets.
>
>
> R's,
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
>