Beyond Facebook's Big Coal Fail

How's Facebook's environmental track record looking these days? Well, Facebook has a whopping 21,541 causes in their Environment category, and it's helped provide a platform for nonprofits to fundraise -- for example, $350,161 for the Nature Conservancy (the number-two cause on Facebook, at least in terms of dollars raised). Not bad, huh?

Except for the fact that the company's also facing one fat, glaring environmental problem in its business practices. Facebook is planning to open its first-ever data center in Oregon, using what kind of energy source? You guessed it: the center will be fueled primarily by coal, a resource responsible for 40% of carbon dioxide emissions among fossil fuels. What a Facebook fail.

By contrast, I'd like to introduce you to Sally Green. (If you haven't heard of her, it's because she's fictional.) Sally has worked for an environmental organization for 20 years. Every year, she donates about $700 a year to environmental causes and spends about 60 hours a year volunteering to plant trees. Oh yes, and she uses a utility company that primarily gets their power from coal. While it's unfortunate that Sally has to rely on coal, does that make her a less good person?

No, and we shouldn't judge her that way. After all, companies ought to be held to a higher standard than individuals -- they do have a greater monopoly on the money and power that allow them to affect the economy, especially in terms of their fuel choices. Over on Change.org's environment blog, Tara Lohan is urging readers to sign a petition asking Facebook to make a smarter choice, and I'd urge you to do the same, too.

On the other hand, though, I also have mixed feelings about the Sally Green/Facebook comparison. Sure, I don't have a soft spot in my heart for big companies, but in an ideal world, we'd all be held to the same standards. After all, individual consumers have choices, too (to some extent). While Sally Green doesn't make as big of a carbon footprint as Facebook's new facility, maybe a thousand Sally Greens would. How many of us are out protesting against dirty coal and going back home to pay our utility bill without even questioning the sources of our own power?

I am a firm believer that it's up to the people to hold companies accountable, but to be honest, much of that also needs to come from consumers, and I'm not sure we always rise to the occasion. For example: do I think Facebook should use cleaner energy? Of course. Am I willing to pay for Facebook's services so they can afford to use cleaner energy? Maybe. Do I want more ads and more privacy issues to deal with so Facebook can afford to buy more expensive but cleaner power? Definitely not. Would I use a greener Facebook competitor if it existed? Yes, but not if I had to sacrifice functionality.

I would love it if Facebook took the lead, bit the bullet, and paid more for cleaner power for the good of humanity. And I think we should pressure big companies -- especially companies as visible as Facebook -- when they disappoint in their principles. But I also think that we often ask companies to do things that we aren't willing to do ourselves. When it comes down to it, if we're going to ask companies like Facebook to change their ways, we have to be able to do so ourselves, too.

Photo Credit: James Jordan