Working from home might be worse for the environment than commuting

Experts say working from home shifted energy use but did not significantly reduce it. Companies are taking this into consideration as they make plans for returning to the office.

An Android statue wearing a mask on Google's campus

Some tech workers are commuting back to the office. Some are wondering about the environmental impact.

Photo: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Tech workers are heading back to the office and so are their carbon footprints, but the negative environmental impact won't be as large as some think. Experts found the increase in people working from home during the pandemic shifted environmental woes in the U.S. Some tech companies are taking this into account as they plan their return to the office.

The pandemic transferred the demand and responsibility for resources from commercial markets to the consumer. Much like the demand for consumer goods like toilet paper and coveted grocery items, the amount of electricity and natural gas used by consumers went up as they spent more time at home.

In a white paper about the shift in energy consumption during the pandemic, Steve Cicala, an associate professor of economics at Tufts University who studies environmental and energy policy, wrote that in 2020, about a third of the U.S. workforce shifted to working from home due to the pandemic. Simultaneously, there was an almost 8% increase in residential consumption of electricity and about a 7% and 8% reduction in usage among commercial and industrial buildings, he wrote.

"It's been an increase in residential consumption at the same time that there's been a reduction in industrial and commercial consumption of both natural gas and electricity," Cicala told Protocol about the shift in energy usage.

More people are at home cooking, doing laundry, opening up their refrigerators and heating and cooling their homes. "You're preheating everybody's individual ovens in their homes instead of the cafeteria having everything on the tray," he said.

Also, as more people moved outside of city centers for more space and bigger homes they increased their carbon footprints and will likely expend more energy on longer commutes on the days that they do decide to come to the office. However, Cicala did find that gas consumption for transportation declined about 16% over the past year, bringing down overall energy consumption in the U.S.

Some Bay Area tech companies will restart their employee shuttle services immediately, while others are easing back into offering such services later in the year. Google told Protocol that it restarted its shuttle operations on July 12, the company's first day back in the office. It's starting with a reduced shuttle schedule with plans to ramp back up as more employees come back. Facebook told Protocol that it would likely start running shuttles again later this fall.

When it comes to emissions from plane travel, Cicala told Protocol that he predicts there will be dramatically less coming from business travel after the pandemic. "It's hugely costly, and the alternative has just spent the last 18 months as the universal, default way of doing business," he said.

Some companies, recognizing the shift, have taken steps to offset the difference.

Autodesk, for example, told Protocol that it has balanced its employees' at-home energy consumption by purchasing offsets during the pandemic, and Square Inc. said in its latest corporate social responsibility report that by allowing employees the option of permanently working from home it's helping to reduce commute emissions and the amount of energy used for workplace construction.

Apple, which is also carbon zero for its corporate emissions, is focused on reducing employees' carbon footprints by targeting commutes. While they will enforce a hybrid back-to-work model, only allowing employees to work from home a couple of days a week, the company said in its 2021 Environmental Progress Report it will continue to encourage commute options like mass transit to cut down on emissions.

Last month, some of Apple's employees pushed back on the company's plan for returning to the office. In a letter addressed to Tim Cook, later obtained by The Verge, workers requested insight into the environmental impact of returning to in-person work.

Estimates from Global Workplace Analytics found that if people who have the ability to work from home were to work remotely half of the time, "the greenhouse gas reduction would be the equivalent to taking the entire New York State workforce off the road," the organization states on its site.

There will certainly be some increase in greenhouse gases as the economy recovers, Kenneth Gillingham told Protocol. Gillingham, a professor of environmental and energy economics at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, cautions that there are much less costly ways of curbing emissions than a global pandemic.

Autodesk has been accounting for its employees' carbon footprints since before the health crisis. The company reached net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in 2021 and its employees only account for 5% of the company's carbon footprint, said Stephen Fukuhara, vice president of workplace and travel at Autodesk.

"We consider environmental impacts with all of our workplace and travel decisions," said Fukuhara. "Our offices have been powered by 100% renewable energy since 2016, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, we purchased additional renewable energy and carbon offsets to account for the greenhouse gas emissions associated with our employees' home office energy consumption. We plan to continue this practice moving forward."

The company chose to go with a flexible workplace program following the pandemic that will allow its workforce to choose from working primarily in the office, a hybrid setup or working completely remote.

"Working from home has benefits but from the environmental perspective work from home is not a panacea," said Gillingham.

Reporter Allison Levitsky contributed to this story.

Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated Steve Cicala's job title. This story was updated on July 13, 2021.


Is it legal to fire someone while they’re on parental leave?

Twitter is in chaos right now. But that’s still not a good reason to fire someone while they’re on parental leave.

Kayvon Beykpour was terminated during his parental leave.

Screenshot: Twitter

This week, Twitter fired the company’s head of Consumer, Kayvon Beykpour, in the latest shakeup related to the Elon Musk deal.

According to Beykpour’s tweet, the senior executive was on paternity leave after welcoming a daughter last month. This brings up a lot of questions around the ethics — and legality — of firing someone while they’re on parental leave.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol, where she writes about management, leadership and workplace issues in tech. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at

Sponsored Content

Foursquare data story: leveraging location data for site selection

We take a closer look at points of interest and foot traffic patterns to demonstrate how location data can be leveraged to inform better site selecti­on strategies.

Imagine: You’re the leader of a real estate team at a restaurant brand looking to open a new location in Manhattan. You have two options you’re evaluating: one site in SoHo, and another site in the Flatiron neighborhood. Which do you choose?

Keep Reading Show less

Crypto is crumbling, and DeFi hacks are getting worse

The amount of crypto stolen in the first quarter of 2022 has already surpassed criminal hackers’ 2021 haul. There aren’t any easy fixes.

The biggest hacks of 2022 were carried out by attackers spotting vulnerabilities in smart contracts and protocols, especially in cross-chain bridges and flash loan protocols.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Until recently, DeFi seemed like it was on an exponential trajectory upwards. With the collective value of crypto peaking near $3 trillion, hackers saw a big opportunity. The only thing that may slow them down is the precipitous drop in the value of the tokens they’re going after.

DeFi hacks have been getting worse and worse, with no clear solutions in sight. According to a recent report by blockchain security firm PeckShield, the amount of money netted from DeFi hacks in the first four months of 2022, $1.57 billion, has already surpassed the amount netted in all of 2021, $1.55 billion. A report by Chainalysis found a similar trend, with the hacker haul in the first three months of 2022 exceeding a record set in the third quarter of 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Lindsey Choo
Lindsey Choo is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. She is a graduate of UC San Diego, where she double majored in communications and political science. She has previously covered healthcare issues for the Center for Healthy Aging and was a senior staff writer for The UCSD Guardian. She can be reached at

Privacy by Design laws will kill your data pipelines

The legislation could make old data pipelines more trouble than they’re worth.

Data pipelines have become so unwieldy that companies might not even know if they are complying with regulations.

Image: Andriy Onufriyenko/Getty Images

A car is totaled when the cost to repair it exceeds its total value. By that logic, Privacy by Design legislation could soon be totaling data pipelines at some of the most powerful tech companies.

Those pipelines were developed well before the advent of more robust user privacy laws, such as the European Union’s GDPR (2018) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (2020). Their foundational architectures were therefore designed without certain privacy-preserving principals in mind, including k-anonymity and differential privacy.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara

Hirsh Chitkara ( @HirshChitkara) is a reporter at Protocol focused on the intersection of politics, technology and society. Before joining Protocol, he helped write a daily newsletter at Insider that covered all things Big Tech. He's based in New York and can be reached at


Why AI-powered ransomware could be 'terrifying'

Hiring AI experts to automate ransomware could be the next step for well-endowed ransomware groups that are seeking to scale up their attacks.

Ransomware gangs don’t have AI ransomware. At least not yet.

Photo: Max Duzij/Unsplash

In the perpetual battle between cybercriminals and defenders, the latter have always had one largely unchallenged advantage: The use of AI and machine learning allows them to automate a lot of what they do, especially around detecting and responding to attacks. This leg-up hasn't been nearly enough to keep ransomware at bay, but it has still been far more than what cybercriminals have ever been able to muster in terms of AI and automation.

That’s because deploying AI-powered ransomware would require AI expertise. And the ransomware gangs don’t have it. At least not yet.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at

Latest Stories