Ecosia is a search engine that aggregates search results from multiple other search engines. The ad revenue from our searches funds the planting of trees worldwide. With over 200 million trees planted so far, Ecosia have learned to be fully transparent about their projects, and financials which are available right on that website. Set it as your default search engine, and start planting trees. They also recently released a Chromium based browser if that’s your thing - TechCrunch article for reference.

  • noodlejetski@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    they’ve added an LLM chatbot recently, so I’m sure the energy required to run the queries will offset all the trees they’ve planted so far in about 4 days.

  • Petter1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    They make less money, if more people use it with ad blocker, since they have to pay Microsoft for search results but in turn get most of ad revenue (ads need to be clicked)

    I guess most people here use ad blocker

  • capital@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I used them for years.

    Kagi search results have been much better for me so I recently switched.

  • Kayn@dormi.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    After switching to Kagi, I see no reason to return to an ad-supported search engine.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’ve read the US has more trees today than 200 years ago.

      Sorry, no source, it’s been probably 20 years since I read it in a science mag.

      Just looking at pics from the US west back then vs today is pretty staggering.

      And the forest service has prevented fires from containing forests for going on 100 years… A problem in its own right (is a major cause of the larger wildfires we see today, which they we warned about in the 80’s by one of their lead researchers).

  • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    There are many legitimate reasons to not use ecosia, and yes, from the ecological perspective.

    Planting trees has shown to be not as effective at curbing the effects of climate change as previously thought. Contrary to popular belief, the oceans have a much larger effect on our climate than our forests, and we aren’t doing nearly enough to clean those up because the task would require us to fundamentally change the way we farm, fish, and obtain oil (i.e. pretty much stop everything we’re currently doing).

    This isn’t to say planting trees doesn’t have some benefit, but there are much better ways to curb your CO² emissions which you can see at the end of this rant/post.

    Sneak peak though, if you eat meat, and actually give a fuck about the forests, perhaps you should stop consuming animals. Eating meat in particular is directly related to deforestation, as often deforestation is done to make room for massive CAFOs, which even if the deforestation didn’t occur, would still significantly contribute to climate change.

    Ecosia’s funding comes from advertisements, which incentivizes consumption, which itself contributes to climate change innately. Every purchase you make, every meal you eat, every time you travel by automobile, airplane, or petroleum powered boat, contributes to the ever growing mass of CO2.

    Advertisements and marketing exacerbate climate change by cultivating a never ending consumerist desire for products that are almost entirely produced using a petroleum derived process and/or packaged in petroleum derived plastic, resulting in the consumerist behavior being inherently responsible for climate change.

    Ecosia is a moldy old band aid on a gushing neck wound that honestly is causing more harm than good by distracting people from the real source of the climate crisis, which is modern capitalism and the resulting consumerism.

    Actually fighting climate change requires more of you than some passive empty gesture. Here’s a bullet point list of things you can do today to make a real difference:

    • Stop eating and utilizing animal based products.
    • Stop eating foods that were grown using petroleum derived fertilizers (i.e. eat Organic).
    • Stop eating foods that had to be trucked in from over 100 miles away (i.e. eat local).
    • Stop buying plastic packaged goods.
    • Stop traveling by any means that require oil.
    • Stop living in or working in places which utilize electricity from the standard fossil fueled grid.
    • Abandon the fast fashion industry.
    • Only buy local goods and services.
    • Stop buying new electronic devices unless absolutely necessary.
    • Stop buying things you don’t absolutely 100% need to survive.
    • Don’t use AI as it utilizes an insane amount of fossil fuel generated electricity and consumes an exorbitant amount of water.
    • Same goes for playing AAA video games on high end GPUs.
    • Same goes for participating in Cryptocurrency mining/trading.
    • Protest the continuation of the exploration of space until Earth’s climate has stabilized, as the utilization of resources required for space exploration greatly contribute to climate change and encourages a techno futurism that “solves” the climate crisis by abandoning Earth, rather than actually creating a future where humans are the stewards of the Earth, not its masters.
    • Get politically involved to pressure your local governments to implement safer spaces for pedestrians and cyclists and generally improve public transportation infrastructure like railways and metros.
    • Spend all your spare time fighting the fossil fuel, plastic, and privatized water industries, because all of the above only makes a difference if those industries are GONE FOR GOOD.
    • Don’t have children (biggest contributor to climate change is more consumerist humans).
    • Don’t leave this problem to the next generation to solve. The moment is now or never. You either care about the future of humanity and their place on Earth, or you don’t.

    There is a reason climate scientists are increasingly becoming climate activists. This is not something you can buy, recycle, or search engine your way out of.

    As I’ve pointed out, there simply are far more impactful ways you can make a difference today than using a search engine that gets in bed with marketers and advertisers all in order to make relatively empty gestures while playing nice with corporations that, I guarantee you, are far more interested in pursuing business as usual than preserving the planet for their own children, let alone you and me.

    • Nakedmole@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think you completely missed the point. The relevant question is not if there are better ways to reduce one’s negative impact (because obviously there are) and also not if Ecosia is perfect (because obviously it is not). The relevant question is how much environmental damage using Ecosia does compared to using other search engines and how good the search results are.

  • 0x0@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    The ad revenue from our searches funds the planting of trees worldwide.

    I call that BS. As Mr Oliver once explained, if all companies were to plant the trees they promise, this planet wouldn’t be enough for so many trees.

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      That assumes all the trees survive. A lot of them apparently don’t.

      • nadram@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        No such assumption is made. Ecosia is clear when an entire project fails, and takes into account tree survival rates when they claim to have planted over 200 million trees. It’s all clarified on their website. Regardless of all of that, they take all ad-revenue to reforest and I’d say that’s a better deal than Google or MS.