Sky UK Achieves its 100% Renewable Electricity Target
Sky (Sky Broadband) has today published their annual environmental impact report (here), which among other things reveals that they’ve met their target to source 100% renewable electricity across its entire business. The report also covers the progress they’ve made toward their ambition to be Net Zero carbon by 2030.
Just for comparison, Zen Internet hopes to achieve net zero carbon by 2028, while BT (EE) expects to achieve this by 2045, Virgin Media (VMO2) hopes to get there by the end of 2025 and Vodafone are targetting 2040.
As for Sky, their offices, retail stores and journalism hubs across the world are now powered by renewable electricity (mostly through on-site generation and buying renewable electricity tariffs with traceable certificates), which has in turn contributed to a 22.7% reduction in emissions across Scopes 1 & 2 from the 2018 baseline.
On top of that, Sky also aims to generate at least 20% of their own electricity on all new buildings and large refurbishments. But reducing carbon covers many more areas than energy generation, such as tackling waste and reusing equipment (e.g. broadband routers and Sky Q TV boxes etc.). Sky provides a useful, if complex, summary table of their progress on these different fronts.
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.
« Ofcom UK Fine BT 42,500 GBP for Inaccurate Broadband USO Data
Judge Blocks Crowdfunded Legal Challenge to UK 5G Rollout »
Latest UK ISP News
- FTTP (5530)
- 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)
Lol at their Diesel vans.
Never heard of a van with a Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) then?
They are in the process of replacing them. Everything will be electric by 2030 at the latest. So lol you.
Wow you guys get triggered easily
Never heard of Dieselgate then?
my car has a DPF. It also lied on it’s emissions. Thanks VW!
I’m not sure what Alf and Pippa is scoffing at but DPF does nothing to reduce carbon output, it just aims to release the output as CO2/CO gas rather than lung damaging soot..
Is it just me or could anyone else not care less about companies doing this and would rather Sky didn’t keep increasing their prices over and again instead.
Given the latest research on the serious problems that seem to be coming our way, I do care.
My guess is that Anthony doesn’t have children or grandchildren so only needs to worry that the earth’s ecosystems don’t collapse in his lifetime.
A functioning planet is pretty important.
You could just take the view that burning a precious feedstock resource like hydrocarbon is pretty stupid.
You could also take the view that pollution levels in cities are unacceptable – OK a lot of that is driven by two bits of greenwash a) diesel oil substitutes creating filthy burn characteristics when engines are cold b) Diesel engine preheaters on Euro 4 vehicles c) stop start engines.
Any of those issue could drive a rational decision to do something g to tackle the problem/
The problem with
a) is well documented and pretty well known that most PM10’s actually have a plant origin – you call tell by isotopic positions.
b) in order to heat engines up faster to reduce CO2 usage most bigger diesels gave a duel burning preheater. On Euro 4 and earlier there was no catalyst or DPF it wasn’t fed into the exhaust system so it didn’t count towards the CO2 footprint
c) stop start means the exhaust catalyst is not as hot as it should be.
All of these measure **appear** to reduce CO2 footprint but increase the immediately very harmful outputs of motoring.
Welcome to single issue politics plus greenwashing.
Yes I actually agree with you Anthony. All the eco bandwagon jumping does is make services cost far more to deliver and that cost is passed on to the consumer, meanwhile the same wealthy people make millions from it.
And before anyone asks yes I do have kids of my own. I however believe if it comes from the planet then it will return to the planet. It may be toxic for life but the planet and trees,the sea and weather will be here a long time after us humans are gone.
Humans have been on this planet somewhere between 0.13% and 0.2% of the time its been here (around 4.5 billion years), there have been multiple ice-ages followed by global warming, followed by ice-ages time and time again. It’s called nature, and a few billion people on planet earth aren’t going to change a thing in the blink of an eye we live here.
That’s one of the more bizarre things I’ve read here.
Climate change happens on Mars.
It’s not due to Carbon emissions. It’s due to changes in the Sun’s output. At the end of WW2, carbon emissions were at their highest level they had EVER been, and global temperature dropped a little bit .. that was it.
Now I know what’s going to happen now, you can call me whatever you want. I know, all the big boys said it’s carbon, therefore it is right? can’t possibly be wrong cough Einstein steady state universe cough. . Watch the global warming swindle and how people can’t get funding to do projects unless they say the magic environment word. Oh I want to study otter’s sexual behaviour: denied. er, I want to study the effects of climate change on otter sexual behaviour: ching ching here’s $500,000.
I used to accept the CO2 theory of climate change but now I am dubious after learning about the many discrepancies in the official narrative unearthed by researchers such as Tony Heller https://realclimatescience.com/.
Yeah they don’t seem to get that not all customers believe in climate change.
Customers have other options if they object so strongly to this.
I would imagine they’re also quite aware that not all customers agree with their position, however evidently enough do that it’s considered a PR win.
Itsallalie – utter nonsense that carbon emissions were higher immediately after WW2. The world’s population has tripled since then and industrialised heavily. China alone generates nearly twice the 1945 worldwide human output.
The great this about science is that it doesn’t change if you disagree or don’t understand it. The science is clear climate change is a thing. The great new is that having a green “bandwagon” this means more innovation, more jobs, more investment. And it gets better especially with electric vehicles as the running costs for EVs are typically drastically lower. My house is all EVs and we have a 10th the running costs of petrol or diesel. This has the potential to result in lower prices for customers (or higher profits for companies). Get with the times guys or you’ll be left behind