A Guinness Book Nod for Greenpeace [Video]

Who has the most Facebook comments in a 24-hour period, ever? That’d be global watchdog, Greenpeace. Their recent campaign to garner comments on the Greenpeace fan page to raise awareness of Facebook’s uncleanliness logged over 50,000 comments in just over 11 hours–a number which is, according to the folks at Guinness Book of World Records, a new high.

The organization is challenging Facebook to replace coal-powered data centers with a better, cleaner energy source. According to a press release issued by Greenpeace, Facebook uses “about 55% coal power while Google uses 34% and Yahoo uses just 12.7%.” Despite Facebook’s recent attempts to clean up their footprint, Greenpeace says it’s simply not enough. Their proposed five-step plan for Facebook?

Five steps for Facebook (PDF):
1. Come clean: Disclosure of energy and carbon footprint
2. Infrastructure siting policy — make it a priority to place data centers where renewable energy is plentiful.
3. Increase the supply of clean energy through power purchase agreements or renewable energy credits; investing in clean energy programs directly; or generating their own clean energy on-site
4. Become clean energy advocates
5. Educate Facebook users about clean energy and how we can all sign up for using clean energy.

Though the plan seems viable, only time will tell if Zuckerberg’s army decides it’s worth the effort.

[via treehugger]

Advertisements
Advertisement




6 Responses to A Guinness Book Nod for Greenpeace [Video]

  1. It would seem to me that the efforts put forth to create awareness left its own carbon footprint, as commenting on FB or querying on google has its own small, but existent, footprint. So by generating all this social awareness, they have struck the earth in the form that they are asking FB not to. How does an organization find it even remotely logical to use this medium as a way to get FB to change? Does an anti-gun activist hold the executive board of, say, Smith & Wesson?

    • Following your logic, everyone who wants to minimise their carbon footprints would immediately have to kill themselves. But there's a fundamental difference between having an overall goal and a momentary goal. Now how about you spend some time thinking about which of both Greenpeace is aiming at instead?

    • Following your logic, everyone who wants to minimise their carbon footprints would immediately have to kill themselves. But there’s a fundamental difference between having an overall goal and a momentary goal. Now how about you spend some time thinking about which of both Greenpeace is aiming at instead?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.