Rank a Brand

How sustainable is Bing ?

Bing & sustainability


Bing
First milestones, should be better Click here for score rapport: 4 out of 16

Sustainability summary

Bing has achieved the D-label. Brand owner Microsoft has started to take sustainability into account. Still, a lot more can be done.

Brand owner: Microsoft Corporation
Head office: Redmond, WA, USA
Sector: Websites
Categories : Search
Free Tags: Microsoft

What's your sustainability news about Bing?

Bing sustainability score report

Last edited: 10 January 2017 by Pia H.
Last reviewed: 10 January 2017 by Mario

Questions about Climate Change/ Carbon Emissions

2 out of 9
1. Is there a policy for the brand (company) to minimize, reduce or compensate carbon emissions ? Microsoft (brand owner of Bing), implements several measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as energy efficiency measures for its devices, office buildings or data centres. Source
2. Has the brand (company) disclosed the annual absolute carbon footprint of its 'own operations' (Scope 1 & 2) and has the brand already reduced or compensated 10% of these emissions in the last 5 years? Microsoft increased its climate footprint (Scope 1&2) of own operations from 1.606 million tons of CO2e in FY14 to 1.728 million tons of CO2e in FY15. In FY15, 244.341 tons of CO2e were offset however. This represents a decrease of around 7,6% (see link, page 2 & 3). Source
3. Has the brand (company) set a target to reduce the carbon footprint of its 'own operations' by at least 20% within the next 5 years? Microsoft does not communicate concrete information on actual target reductions for its greenhouse gas emissions, but refers to carbon neutrality through e.g. carbon offsetting only. Source
4. Is at least 10% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? For FY15, Microsoft reports to have used 100% renewable energy on total electricity consumption. But, only about 0,02% were generated onsite (solar), and about 4,5% were wind energy purchases (Keechi Wind project) (see also link, next question, page 3). Source
5. Is at least 25% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 4. The remaining renewable energy for electricity is RECs certified, with no specification in terms of additionality of supply (see link, page 3). Source
6. Is at least 50% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 5. Source
7. Is 100% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 5. Source
8. Is the overall average Power Usage Efficiency (PUE) of the data center(s) below 1,5? Microsoft gives a PUE value of 1.4 and declares that this is applicable to overall use of data centres (see link, page 64). Source
9. Is the overall average Power Usage Efficiency (PUE) of the data center(s) below 1,25? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 8. Source

Questions about Environmental Policy

2 out of 5
1. Does the brand (company) publish a water and/or land use footprint and is there a policy to minimize, reduce or compensate this footprint? Microsoft publishes its annual water footprint, which was at 3,006,894 cubic meters in FY15 (reduced by about 21% compared to FY14), and implements several measures to reduce the impact of its water use, such as using municipal wastewater in water-scarce locations (see link, next question, page 67). Source
2. Does the brand (company) have clear objectives to minimize waste, by reducing, re-using and recycling, and does the brand annually report the results? Microsoft publishes its annual waste materials footprint, which was at 30,410 metric tonnes in FY15 (reduced by about 15% compared to FY14) (see link, previous question, page 3), and implements several measures to reduce the impact of its waste creation, such as office supply reuse, recycling, and composting programs (see link, page 67). Source
3. Does the brand (company) have a corporate policy for environmentally responsible disposal of e-waste? Microsoft implements measure to reuse, refurbish, or recycle used computers and electronics from its own operations in an environmentally responsible way. Concrete requirements and annual outcomes of these measures are not specified however (see link, page 62 & 67). Source
4. Does the brand have a policy to seek out suppliers and/or service providers that conduct their business in environmentally responsible ways and does the brand provide concrete examples of this policy? Microsoft implements a sourcing policy for its own devices suppliers / manufacturers that includes environmental criteria, but does not clearly specify respective measures for product suppliers / service providers for its own operations (see link, page 47-57). Source
5. Does the brand have a concrete environmental procurement policy for all electronics used - including servers? See remark for environmental policy question 4. In addition, also for its purchased electronic devices and servers for own operations respective environmental policy requirements are not specified clear enough. Source

Questions about Labour Conditions/ Fair Trade

0 out of 2
1. Does the brand have a policy to seek out suppliers and/or service providers who conduct their business in more socially responsible ways and does the brand provide concrete examples of this policy? Microsoft implements a sourcing policy for its own devices suppliers / manufacturers that includes social criteria, but does not clearly specify respective measures for product suppliers / service providers for its own operations (see link, page 47-57). Source
2. Does the brand have a concrete socially responsible procurement policy for all electronics used - including servers? See remark for social policy question 2. In addition, also for its purchased electronic devices and servers for own operations respective social policy requirements are not specified clear enough. Source