On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 07:20:40AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote:
> According to IETF figures, the air travel emissions for a meeting in the U.K
> was 3,508 metric tons of CO2 while the air travel emissions for a meeting in
> Thailand was 5,328. The reduction in carbon footprint is not listed as an
> objective in BCP 226. Such an objective might be perceived as a push for
> less meetings in Asia.
As long as equal opportunity for participation from whereever the participant is
ranked as a higher goal, reduction goals should be fine, because the number you
cite do reflect the bias in participationship from EU/US. Instead of penalizing
asien participants by doing less IETF in Asia, the conclusion could/should
rather be "attend remotely if you can and the IETF meeting is not on your
continent".
Or maybe what i was suggesting: "Tell IETF that it can waive to account
for your fligth travel because you just dropped in locally before/after your
personal vacation or other business travel that you would have done even without IETF (even
if maybe not at exactly these dates). Not arguing for "creative" accounting, but
creative actual reduction in CO2 by each participant relative to non-IETF
consumption by the individual.
Cheers
Toerless
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
