"Amazon would rather shareholders did not look too closely at carbon footprint"

"With its Climate Pledge, Amazon committed to "net-zero carbon emissions by 2040" and match 100 percent of its electricity use with renewable energy by 2030"

(not including Scope 3 emissions of course, and this "100%" on a grid that is not decarbonised means purely offloading of the emissions to someone else, rather than actually decarbonising.)

https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/10/amazon_climate_goals/

#FrugalComputing

Amazon would rather shareholders did not look too closely at carbon footprint

: Investors urged to reject proposal for more disclosure on whether AWS expansion risks climate goals

The Register
Also, I rather suspect that the emissions from transport are not included in Amazon's Scope 1 emissions because e.g. the delivery vans are not owned by Amazon.

@wim_v12e #Amazon could improve the efficiency of some operations in a matter of hours, that would impact them and counterparts across the Internet instantly, but it seemly unbothered, eg my #RSS #podcast hobbyhorse:

https://www.earth.org.uk/RSS-efficiency.html

Though this is small, it seems a litmus test to be for wider intentions/honesty.

RSS Podcast Feed Inefficiency

Climate cost of bad feed handling #RSS #podcast #Podbean #Spotify #Google #Apple

@wim_v12e it’s almost all green washing everywhere. One of my previous employers launched a big net-zero pledge by… putting up a big display in HQ, rewrapping hundreds of vans, and running physical ad campaigns. The actual concrete measures made were things like switching to cardboard boxes for the pointless hardware they were shipping halfway round the world.
@wim_v12e pretty sure if you totted up all the emissions involved in that ad campaign it comes out net-zero in the “nothing was gained” sense of the phrase.
@wim_v12e the wrong amazon is burning