Hull-based network builder MS3, which is working to roll out a 10Gbps capable full fibre (FTTP) broadband ISP network to cover 500,000 premises across the North of England by the end of 2025 (here), has today announced a partnership with Carbon Neutral Britain (CNB) to help them “offset their carbon footprints“.
In order to establish the amount of carbon to be offset, CNB spent time measuring MS3’s carbon emissions through a carbon audit, completed via the ISO 14064 and GHG Emissions Protocol Accounting standards. Then, in alignment with science-based targets and UK Government sustainability goals for carbon reduction, MS3 implemented a reduction plan that sets out a roadmap to reduce its emissions and ultimately become Net Zero (i.e. removing as many carbon emissions as they produce).
The operator has now moved to offset its carbon production by investing in two carbon offsetting projects — the Climate Fund™ and Woodland Fund™ – both are regulated through the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), the Voluntary Emission Reductions (VER), and the UN’s – Certified Emission Reductions (CER) programmes.
The Climate Fund™ focuses on supporting renewable projects worldwide, including wind, solar and hydro initiatives. Meanwhile, the Woodland Fund™ supports reforestation and woodland management projects.
Rachel Brooks, Compliance Officer (ESG) at MS3, said:
“At MS3 Networks, we recognise that all businesses have a responsibility to protect the environment and build a sustainable future. Partnering with Carbon Neutral Britain and achieving certification as a Carbon Neutral Business is a significant milestone for us in the path towards net zero.”
Despite the positives, it’s worth noting that the announcement doesn’t actually state a date for when they aim to achieve Net Zero. In the meantime, consumers covered by their network should look toward supporting ISPs, such as Hull Fibre, Octaplus, Link Broadband, OpenFibre, FiberZone, Direct Save Telecom, Zone Broadband, Infinics and Squirrel.
Nonsense. Carbon is life
These ESG funds are anti life but these company bosses will sell their souls for a bit more money
Carbon is indeed essential to life on Earth, but your lungs prefer a mix of air dominated by oxygen (ideally without an excess of pollutants) and the atmosphere doesn’t like an excess of carbon as it blocks the infrared wavelength of light (heat) that’s trying to escape Earth, so the planet gets hotter.
CO2 is part of air
We live in times where the percentage of CO2 is actually very low
“The planet is getting hotter” is a false statement unless you are really cherry picking the timeframe
Venus, atmosphere about 96% carbon dioxide, disagrees.
Best let nature manage the climate with as little interference from us as possible.
Uh-oh – can we get a tinfoil hat for Phil pls
After this UK summer we clearly need more CO2 in the atmosphere.
The atmospheric CO2 concentration was indeed higher in Earth’s more distant past (many millions of years ago). But at those times the palaeoclimatic and geological data indicate that temperatures and sea levels were also higher than they are today, which is obviously what people would like to avoid happening again, since we kind of live here now, as an advanced intelligent species (some of the time).
According to the Royal Society, measurements of air in ice cores show that for the past 800,000 years up until the 20th century, the atmospheric CO2 concentration stayed within the range 170 to 300 parts per million (ppm), making the recent rapid rise to more than 400 ppm over 200 years particularly remarkable.
CO2 last approached 400 ppm about 3 to 5 million years ago, a period when global average surface temperature is estimated to have been about 2 to 3.5°C higher than in the pre-industrial period. At 50 million years ago, CO2 may have reached 1000 ppm, and global average temperature was probably about 10°C warmer than today. Under those conditions, Earth had little ice, and sea level was at least 60 metres higher than current levels.
Sea levels have changed over time, but go look up photos of Plymouth Rock and how the sea level has not moved in hundreds of years. Or lookup the elites telling peasants about the sea levels, yet bought insanely expensive seaside estates like Obama and Bill Gates
Greenland ice has been growing, not shrinking
The great barrier reef has experienced record growth
The weather right now is far colder than during Roman times
Tin foil are the ones believing that the weather can be controlled. And because of them we are paying tons of taxes
The Earth has had what, eleven glaciations in the past 800k years. The average global temperature was perhaps 4-5C lower across that time compared to today (ie much, much colder) and the current temperature rise started 25k years ago at the end of the last ice age. So the temperature record shows we’ve been on a rising trajectory for global temperatures for thousands of years before humans even had clothing or language, never mind cars. And it had done that repeatedly before there were humans.
What that cyclical data implies is that (1) the earth has been warming and probably will continue to do so for another few hundred or few thousand years (2) we’re likely approaching a peak, (3) heating appears to accelerate near the peak, (4) after the peak the earth cools rapidly and will enter a new ice age.
As we spend the overwhelming majority of our science budget looking for something, and focusing on largely the period since 1880 (before which the DETAIL data is scant and unreliable) then when we don’t directly find it, all the evidence is evaluated to support the theory that the funders approve of. Climate science is a rickety construction. Mankind may be making a contribution to warming, but in the grand scheme, if we stopped using all fossil fuels now, global temperatures would be likely to continue to climb, and in a few thousand years the real challenge will be how to keep the climate warm, and today’s Chicken Little approach to climate change is not really going to have helped anyone. As much as anything, modern thinking on climate change seems to think that somehow we can and should revert to some idealised world of the 1880s.
Whether you believe in climate change or not the best way to handle it over the long term it is the free market which drives efficiency/innovation, not through repressive taxes/regulation and money printing.
A lot of the comments are spot on but anon is wrong on the time, they do not want to revert to 1880, they just want people as poor as possible. Tons of councils are nearing bankruptcy yet they still insist on rolling out LTNs and punitive taxes against the people and then claiming it’s for their own good.
There is no free market for them, these communists in disguise hate the free market, that’s why they are rolling out car bans. Inflation is a tax on the poor, not the elites which have their assets grossly inflated. You will own nothing and be happy
Why is Broadband Network in capitals?
Sounds like give some money to a company and then feel better. Any links to these funds?
Do you mean in the news title? That’s normal for all articles and is just how some of us format article titles, which is fairly common.
Made it look like a company. Please delete comment!
offset the carbon produced from their work but what about the carbon being used to repair their shoddy workmanship. Are they going to offset that produced by the local councils when having to make good what they’ve messed up.