I agree with Bence.
Right now, offsetting is cheap, likely 1-2 percentage points of the cost of
travel.
Those money could be asked directly in the grant to the WMF, for example,
because offsetting several tonnes in bulk is probably cheaper than doing it
person by person.
But carbon offsetting is just one strategy. Those money could be also
invested in charities that conserve rainforest (and thus native people, and
thus native culture > perfectly aligned with Wikimedia goals), or manage to
plant new trees and forests.
I know for sure that Wikimedia Deutschland has contacts with Ecosia¹, a
search engine that plant trees with revenue from web ads. There are surely
ways we could partner with them in reforestation projects, or other. And
they surely know a lot more than us about carbon offsetting, so we could
just ask for suggestions.
¹
https://www.ecosia.org/
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 10:00 AM Henry Wood <henry.wood.1869(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Mike
Paying for carbon offsets does not further
Wikimedia’s goals.
Not directly, any more than paying for petrol or aviation fuel does.
If you regard it as part of the cost of travel, and that travel does
indeed further the Foundation's goals, then it seems reasonable to pay
for it.
Henry
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>