We’ve begun adding a .05% surcharge to our contracts to offset the emissions we produce in a client’s name (i.e. $5 for every $10,000 billed).
We all know that computers use electricity, plans are printed on paper, and air travel causes emissions. These are simply the costs of doing business – costs counted in greenhouse gases and resource depletion.
What’s the best way to handle these costs? Would you pay a ‘green’ surcharge?
WSJ’s readers had some interesting comments:
One reader compared it to being charged “every time the toilet gets flushed,” another suggested we just add it to the cost of doing business without creating a separate surcharge.
Do you think it’s more transparent to let clients know we’re incorporating the cost of offsetting our emissions? Or should we simply add it in with the cost of the lights, plumbing, rent and other overhead (including toilets!) on our P&L sheets?
There are lots more interesting comments from readers:
“Only in SF. What arrogance, imposing a extra tax on customers.”
“CO2 is a CRUCIAL plant NUTRIENT!!!….So, why on earth should we REDUCE our emission of this highly beneficial CO2???”
“If businesses truly want to be green, they will put money where their collective mouths are. Do the right thing.”
“Carbon offsets are a sick sick joke.”
“I would be happy to pay such a fee if I can be assured the money is doing what they say it is doing.”
Read the article here, and let us know your thoughts!