I agree with Bence. Right now, offsetting is cheap, likely 1-2 percentage points of the cost of travel. Those money could be asked directly in the grant to the WMF, for example, because offsetting several tonnes in bulk is probably cheaper than doing it person by person.
But carbon offsetting is just one strategy. Those money could be also invested in charities that conserve rainforest (and thus native people, and thus native culture > perfectly aligned with Wikimedia goals), or manage to plant new trees and forests. I know for sure that Wikimedia Deutschland has contacts with Ecosia¹, a search engine that plant trees with revenue from web ads. There are surely ways we could partner with them in reforestation projects, or other. And they surely know a lot more than us about carbon offsetting, so we could just ask for suggestions. ¹ https://www.ecosia.org/ On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 10:00 AM Henry Wood <henry.wood.1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Mike > > > Paying for carbon offsets does not further Wikimedia’s goals. > > Not directly, any more than paying for petrol or aviation fuel does. > If you regard it as part of the cost of travel, and that travel does > indeed further the Foundation's goals, then it seems reasonable to pay > for it. > > Henry > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>