REDs Environmental Policy

[Nick Holmes]

So, Scarlet looks buuuullshit, and I've been saving for one for 3 whole days. There's one thing I'd like clarified by someone at RED though before I commit..

Does RED have an environmental policy, and if so, can we see it? I mean, with such a intensive production schedule, it wouldn't surprise me if the environment was being royally boned to get the products out the door faster. That's, unfortunately, how big biz rolls these days..

So RED, are you considering your carbon footprint, the efficiency of your product design and materials, energy efficiency, and do you employ recycling where possible? I hope so, because I cannot support you otherwise. Surprise me..

 

[Martin Weiss]

Buuuuulshit, last time I checked, was fully biodegradeble. So no worries there.

RED is very environmental friendly in their packaging.

And the fact that their cameras are modular/upgradeable also saves the environment from you having to buy a new camera every few years.

 

[Jarred Land]

We love the earth and we do our best to preserve it... from manufacturing, to shipping materials, to having an energy efficient operation at HQ ( Solar lighting, automatic light switches, A/C zones etc. )

 

[Nick Holmes]

We love the earth and we do our best to preserve it... from manufacturing, to shipping materials, to having an energy efficient operation at HQ ( Solar lighting, automatic light switches, A/C zones etc. )

Good to hear. But I guess thats a no on the existence of a policy/plan...?

 

[Nick Holmes]

ah yeh maybe thats because those animals and plants are within an interconnected ecosystem? Power plants and automobiles don't produce oxygen, like phytoplankton (up to 90% of total global) and terrestrial plants do... key word buddy - symbiosis. Look it up.

 

[Mark Thorpe]

I'm just saying you could solve the problem by killing off a few species. And were making things worse by creating an endangered species list. Can't have it both ways... save the animals, or save the atmosphere. Not to mention CO2 content in the atmosphere is only .04%. There's more Argon in the atmosphere then CO2. And of course my numbers above don't include CO2 released from volcanic activity, which would decrease each of those precentages above (probably be 2-4%).

So are primary focus on reducing artificially created CO2 should be on Power plants.... Automobiles don't even really matter.

Wow, thats quite a grasp you have there on the solution for our species........now if everyone thought that way we would surely be damned. Thankfully more, let's say, balanced thinking is becoming increasingly pervasive in our society, and for the better I would say.

Cheers,
Mark.

 

[Nick Holmes]

Andrew you have some serious research to do mate!

Argon isn't a global warming gas. It doesn't trap heat in the atmosphere. Argon does not contain any ozone depleting chemicals and is not listed as a marine pollutant by Department of Transportation, USA.

Hey plants release CO2 through respiration at night, does that mean we should kill all the plants to save the atmosphere?

I'm not here to preach or argue. I'd simply like to be aware of REDs environmental policies to I can make an informed consumer choice. It is not enough these days to 'assume' that these companies are sustainable, you need to know.

Modularity is amazing, and veeery good foresight by RED to reducing their impact through redundant technologies. I'd like to know a little more though..

 

[Andrew McCarrick]

Argon isn't a global warming gas. It doesn't trap heat in the atmosphere. Argon does not contain any ozone depleting chemicals and is not listed as a marine pollutant by Department of Transportation, USA.

I never said it was... just made a point there's more of it in the atmosphere. Did you know that Water Vapor is a greenhouse gas? And that's over 1%, and it traps heat 4 times more than CO2.... make so much sense to replace Gasoline with Hydrogen.