Is that newsy study on spam’s massive carbon footprint much ado about nothing?
An even larger problem with the footprint calculation is that it fails to account for the related large reduction in junk mail. I suppose it’s even possible that the net carbon footprint of spam is distinctly negative.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment *
Name *
Email *
Website
An even larger problem with the footprint calculation is that it fails to account for the related large reduction in junk mail. I suppose it’s even possible that the net carbon footprint of spam is distinctly negative.