Microsoft's 2024 Sustainability Report - Massive Efforts Required

Microsoft, one of the larger player in IT and AI, has just released an updated version of its sustainability report. Microsoft is a marketing powerhouse, and it is its number one strength in business. Unfortunately, marketing is the driving force behind this report. Although some efforts are commendable, and I don't want to discard them, but there's far too much hopecasting and technological solutionism that, IMHO, totally discard their efforts. Here are below a set of flaws and instances of potential greenwashing I identified.

Flaws in the Report

1. Increase in Overall Emissions

Microsoft's total emissions (Scope 1, 2, and 3) increased by 29.1% from the 2020 baseline. This rise in emissions contradicts the company's stated goal of reducing their carbon footprint, suggesting that their current strategies are insufficient to meet the Paris Agreement targets.

2. Scope 3 Emissions

The report highlights a significant increase in Scope 3 emissions, which make up over 96% of Microsoft's total emissions. Despite various initiatives, the 30.9% rise in Scope 3 emissions from the 2020 baseline indicates a lack of effective measures to address emissions in their supply chain.

3. Reliance on Carbon Removal

Microsoft's emphasis on carbon removal technologies as a primary strategy to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030 is risky. These technologies, especially direct air capture and enhanced rock weathering, are still in early stages and may not scale up in time to meet the targets.

4. Energy Use in Datacenters

The report mentions efforts to reduce water use and improve energy efficiency in datacenters. However, the overall growth of Microsoft's datacenter operations, driven by AI and cloud computing demands, inherently increases energy and water consumption, which can offset these efficiency gains.

Greenwashing Elements

1. Marketing Language and Vague Commitments

The report is filled with optimistic language and future promises without concrete, immediate actions. Phrases like "we're inspired by the scores of executives and employees" and "technology can be a powerful accelerant" sound positive but lack specificity and immediate impact.

2. Overstating Achievements

Highlighting specific achievements like the 5 million metric tons of carbon removal contracted and the protection of 15,849 acres of land, while significant, does not sufficiently address the overall increase in emissions and the challenges in Scope 3 reduction.

3. Selective Reporting

The report focuses on areas of success while downplaying the areas where Microsoft is not on track. For instance, while the reduction in Scope 1 and 2 emissions is mentioned, the report does not sufficiently address why the more critical Scope 3 emissions have risen significantly.

4. Dependency on Future Technologies

There is a heavy reliance on future technological advancements and market developments to solve current environmental challenges. This includes investments in sustainable aviation fuel, fusion power plants, and various pilot projects, which may not deliver the expected results within the necessary timeframe.

Elements Indicative of Pure Marketing

1. Use of Employee Stories and Photographs

Featuring stories and photographs of employees involved in sustainability projects serves more as a marketing tool to humanize the report rather than provide substantial evidence of impact.

2. Global Partnerships and Community Projects

While global partnerships and community projects like the solar-powered refrigeration in Kenya and the all-female-operated wind farm in Brazil are commendable, they are small-scale and do not significantly impact Microsoft's overall carbon footprint or address systemic issues in their operations and supply chain.

Conclusion

To truly meet the requirements of the Paris Agreement, Microsoft needs to:

• Implement more aggressive measures to reduce Scope 3 emissions.
• Focus on immediate, concrete actions rather than future technologies.
• Increase transparency by providing more detailed data and progress on all fronts, including failures.
• Shift from a marketing-driven narrative to a more action-oriented and accountability-focused approach.

These steps will help ensure that their sustainability efforts are not just perceived as greenwashing but as genuine contributions to combating climate change. Will they do it? I hugely doubt it! For a single reason: Microsoft is driven by profit and profit only.

Next time you use Copilot, scroll through your LinkedIn feed or use an avatar in your Teams conversation, remember you keep emitting a vast amount of CO2eq, and Microsoft (and other providers) will do nothing to mitigate this. So, stand up and have a coffee with your colleague, your spouse or your neighbour. Nothing replaces good old human interaction.

This post has been crafted with the help of ChatGPT-4o and emitted an estimated 0.12 grams of CO2