For starters, growing numbers of companies are required to report on their own emissions, which includes software - and therefore having agreed standards on how to measure this would seem a good way forward to me?
> carbon emissions are also proportional to energy
Reducing energy usage reduces carbon emissions, but they are not proportional. Highly dependent on the grid composition, time of day you draw the energy, and any behind-the-meter infrastructure.
> and all large operators do catalog and reduce GHG emissions.
To take AWS as an example, they still do not report scope 3 emissions for customers (due 'early 2024') - without which, these 'catalogued' numbers are essentially meaningless given how understated they are.
Just be careful not to double-count hardware and software emissions.
And what about technology which is controversial, causing a lot of discussions online (all those people spending energy to post comments…)?
I think cost has nothing to do with it.
Well...
I'm strongly against inefficient software for different reasons, but if stuff like this can have an effect beyond the virtue-signaling bureaucracy it's likely to become instead, maybe it's a good thing.