Sky UK Unveils Plan to Become Net Zero Carbon by 2030
Sky (Sky Broadband, Sky TV etc.) has today announced plans to transform its business and cut emissions in order to achieve net zero carbon by 2030. By comparison the UK telecoms giant BT expects to achieve the same target by 2045 and Virgin Media appears to have aligned itself with the RE100 initiative’s 2050 target.
Sky has a generally positive history on this front and have been a carbon neutral company (at least in terms of their direct emissions) since 2006, although reaching net zero carbon (i.e. removing as many emissions as they produce) is an altogether more challenging goal.
As part of this Sky has also promised to ensure that its efforts will be properly validated, not least by having any targets they set checked by the SBTi (Science-Based Target Initiative), which will then publicly report on its carbon footprint. The plans are aligned with limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5°C.
Short Summary of Sky’s Plan
* Make all of its tech products more energy efficient.
* Develop the world’s most sustainable film and TV studios.
* Making every Sky original production, TV channel, show and film net zero carbon.
* Transforming its 5,000 vehicles to create a zero emissions fleet (i.e. adopting EVs).
* Helping the 11,000 companies that work with Sky, whether they’re making Sky boxes, broadband routers or producing the next hit TV series, on their path to net zero carbon.
* Planting trees, mangroves and seagrass to absorb the carbon it can’t cut… yet.
Sky will also use its channels and programming to encourage others to #GoZero.
Jeremy Darroch, Sky Group CEO, said:
“We are entering a critical decade on the long road to climate recovery, and all businesses have the opportunity to accelerate progress and become part of the solution.
Every business depends on and is fundamentally connected to the environment, and we have a responsibility to protect it. We need to take action now – because the world can’t wait.
We’re on the journey, and we want to bring everyone with us. Sky Zero will transform our business, advocate for change and inspire our 24 million customers to go zero.”
End.
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook and Linkedin.
« EE Awarded Top UK Mobile Network for H2 2019 by RootMetrics
Latest UK ISP News
- FTTP (5532)
- BT (3518)
- Politics (2542)
- Openreach (2298)
- Business (2266)
- Building Digital UK (2247)
- FTTC (2045)
- Mobile Broadband (1977)
- Statistics (1790)
- 4G (1668)
- Virgin Media (1621)
- Ofcom Regulation (1465)
- Fibre Optic (1396)
- Wireless Internet (1391)
- FTTH (1382)
Instead of making a pledge sky can’t clearly keep. Maybe sorting out the HDR delay for UHD signal’s, The FTTP package announcement, Address the sport coverage your losing, And the outrageous prices you charge for Standard definition content when HD has been the standard since 2007 should take top priority.
You have got to be kidding right? Environment comes first, I applaud Sky for this initiative. The more high profile companies/organisations that adopt this viewpoint, the more the general public will think about their actions and make conscious decisions on the products and services they procure.
Yes they may have some issues, but this is positive news. I am sure Sky address both the environment and your issues at the same time.
Instead of writing a comment on here no-one from Sky who actually matters can read maybe sort your grammar and punctuation out? No comment on the spelling as clearly auto-correct and/or spell checking sorted those.
Is it relevant to the topic? Nope. It’s about as relevant to the topic as your comment was.
This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any of the issues you describe. Strangely enough Sky have more than one employee working on multiple workflows with multiple budgets.
Delighted to see where your priorities lie though. Stuff the environment where’s my HDR, FTTP, sports content and lower prices for standard definition?
I actually just thought more about the content.
Can you actually get FTTP, Marty?
Why would anyone complain about both lack of HDR on UHD and about pricing of standard definition? Do you have separate subscriptions for UHD/HD and SD?
I can be irritated about the lack of FTTP as it is impinging on my options, even more frustrating as I have ballpark estimate of when it’ll be released. I’m not sure why anyone not covered by FTTP would be fussed.
@Big Jay
You need to remember that not everyone believes in Climate Change and therefore won’t appreciate what Sky is doing.
Sadly not unlike how some people believe the earth is flat. There is an unfortunate but growing rejection of scientific fact in this world, however repugnant that may be.. it does exist. I wouldn’t worry so much if the negative impacts only ever fell on those people, but sadly it hurts us all. Anyway.. who’s up for burning witches this afternoon? I hear that’ll solve it and my neighbour’s annoying, so she’s totally going on the fire 🙂 .
Did someone mention a good old classic witch burning? That’s a regular pastime around these parts. I’m in! 🙂
… and the really sad part Marty is that you get to vote too …
@MarkJ
Well the good thing about witch burning is that no fossil fuels are usually involved, just some good old fashioned bits of wood, so not too much in the way of emissions etc. 😉
Given the lack of belief of some in science (anti-vaxxers, climate change deniers, 5G objectors etc), perhaps we could classify them as the modern-day witches? Just a thought ….
I’m not a climate denier and the fact you think sky will make a credible difference by themselves is laughable. They are a business and like any other business they believe in making a profit more then caring for the environment. Doesn’t matter how many tree’s they plant can the replace an entire forest? Can they acquire such resources and funding as governments can? If that’s the case I retract my previous statement. Fact is they can’t. It’s a governmental problem now To me I see it as a politically correct move to attract more customers rather then THEM giving two hoot’s about the environment.
:Ray I’m sorry Ray but the fact you don’t agree with me mean’s I shouldn’t be allowed to vote in any way is really pedantic. Sad part really is your twisted logic that I shouldn’t have that right to vote because somebody say’s something that you don’t agree with.
CarlT : My priorities are just fine. Though grammar could do with some work at times.
Mark “There is an unfortunate but growing rejection of scientific fact in this world”
Thank God I am not one those people then. I believe apples fall to the ground. And Cobalt is very good for batteries.
@Marty
Of course individual businesses can make a difference, and for that matter so can individuals. When a lot of people make changes the result is a big impact. If nobody started to make changes then nothing would ever change. I totally agree that governments can do much more but in reality they are lagging behind in many ways. In the US private sector companies are actually doing far more than the government (who are making matters worse). You are correct that their primary objective is shareholder return. However, some businesses are starting to wise up the fact that there is a market for sustainable products and services and the worst polluters are starting to become financially toxic. It really does not matter at the end of the day what their motive is though – I really don’t care if they give a hoot about the environment, the important thing is that they are having a good go at reducing their carbon footprint. Quite frankly, if we sit around waiting for governments to lead the way out of this mess then are children are doomed. At the end of the day, the real power lies with you and me. If we prioritise buying sustainable products and services then businesses will sell them. If we elect politicians with sustainable goals and hold them to account then we can change politics. You are in a way a denier, not a denier in the science, but a denier in our ability to bring about change. If we want to bring about change we should applaud those taking a stance and reward them.
Well, I for one think this is great news! Well done Sky for setting the standard. As for those who don’t believe human induced climate change is real, there is overwhelming scientific evidence to this fact. In reality though it is an ideological debate for most people, not really about the science. A lot of people are happy to keep consuming and making money at any cost as long as they can offload the blame onto somebody else who says it is ‘all going to be alright’. As for HDR vs destruction of the planet, tough choice but I think I will go for the planet, if not for my sake then for our children. I suspect Marty was just trolling, trying to get a rise, I really do hope so…..