Alpine Linux sustainability score: 32/100

Joint 34th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No formal emissions data has been published by the Alpine Linux project. There is no sustainability report, no BEGES filing, no SECR disclosure, and no CDP submission identifiable for this entity. However, Alpine Linux is a non-commercial, volunteer-run open-source project with a small core team and no payroll employees. Its direct physical infrastructure consists of a small number of sponsored servers (previously hosted pro bono by Equinix Metal, now migrated to i3D.net, Cloudon, and Scaleway per the January 2026 announcement) plus ~800TB/month of bandwidth. There are no offices, no company vehicles, and no manufacturing. Mark based on the company's size and sector. Scoring 3 reflects: no formal emissions calculation exists, but the estimated physical footprint is so small that the planet barely notices these operations.

Joint 30th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No Scope 3 data has been published. The supply chain for Alpine Linux as a software project is extremely short: it consists of volunteer developer time (remote, distributed globally), donated or sponsored server hardware and bandwidth, and event costs. There are no manufactured goods, no physical retail, no agriculture, and no logistics chain. The Open Collective page confirms all funds go to infrastructure hardware/services, bandwidth, and events. The inherently minimal, digital supply chain means that even without formal Scope 3 quantification, the physical impact is negligible. Score 3 reflects: no formal supply chain data, but demonstrably short and low-impact supply chain with basic awareness of its composition.

Joint 15th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No multi-year emissions data exists, so formal trajectory cannot be established. However, Alpine Linux is a stable, non-growing organisation in structural terms: no new offices, no expanding physical manufacturing, and its infrastructure footprint has remained similarly small-scale for years (hosted on a handful of donated servers). The 2025 infrastructure migration from Equinix Metal to new sponsors did not materially expand the server count. For a project of this size with a stable or declining physical footprint, a score of 3 reflects reasonable inference of stable or negligible emissions trajectory, consistent with the rubric guidance for small, stable organisations without evidence of emissions growth.

Joint 36th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No formal energy strategy or renewable energy policy has been published by the Alpine Linux project. The project's servers are hosted by third-party sponsors (i3D.net, Cloudon, Scaleway as of January 2026) and previously by Equinix Metal. The project has no direct control over the energy mix used at these data centres, and has published no green energy requirements for sponsors. However, the project is an extremely minimal energy consumer — a small number of servers and bandwidth-only infrastructure. For a distributed volunteer project with negligible energy consumption and no evidence of active energy strategy, score 3 reflects the rubric guidance: minimal energy consumer with some environmental awareness, even without formal energy strategy.

Joint 13th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No TNFD disclosure, no biodiversity policy, and no deforestation commitments have been published. Alpine Linux is a pure software project with no physical land use, no agricultural supply chain, no timber or commodity sourcing, and no construction activity. Its nature exposure is effectively zero: it produces no physical goods, operates no facilities, and sources no land-based commodities. For a company with genuinely negligible nature impact and an inherent awareness of that fact (it is a digital project), score 4 is appropriate per the rubric — negligible nature impact is correctly valued, even without formal TNFD disclosure.

Joint 31st of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No waste strategy, circular economy targets, or resource use data has been published. As a purely digital, volunteer-run project, Alpine Linux produces minimal physical waste: there are no offices generating office waste, no manufacturing, and no retail packaging. Hardware procurement (servers, storage) is managed by sponsors, not the project itself — meaning the project has limited direct control over hardware lifecycle. No evidence of e-waste policy or hardware procurement sustainability requirements for sponsors. Score 3 reflects basic awareness appropriate to a non-commercial digital project with minimal material footprint, without formal resource management documentation.

Joint 17th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No water data has been published, and no water stewardship programme exists. However, Alpine Linux is a fully digital project with no manufacturing, no agriculture, no chemical processes, and no operational premises. Water consumption attributable to the project is negligible — limited to the fractional water use of sponsored data centres. For a SaaS/digital project with genuinely low water impact and no chemical discharge risk, score 4 is appropriate per the rubric guidance for service companies with minimal material water footprint.

Joint 38th of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No emissions targets, no SBTi commitment, no net-zero pledge, and no offset strategy have been published. The project has no formal sustainability commitments of any kind. While the project's negligible footprint means it does not need offsets, the rubric requires specific, measurable targets with timelines for higher scores. The project's Open Collective page and governance documents contain no environmental targets. Score 2 reflects: informal awareness of sustainability in the sense of software efficiency (Alpine is explicitly designed for resource efficiency), but no documented environmental targets, timelines, or reduction commitments.

Joint 42nd of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

Alpine Linux has no formal sustainability governance, no dedicated sustainability role, no TCFD or CSRD disclosure, and no environmental reporting. However, the project does maintain transparent financial reporting through Open Collective (public ledger of donations and expenditures since January 2025), a public governance document on its wiki, and open-source code with public development processes. The project is led by a core team with documented governance (lazy consensus model, member nomination process). For a non-commercial open-source project, score 3 reflects: sustainability is not a documented business priority, but the project has transparent operational governance and financial accountability through Open Collective.

Joint 3rd of 69 in SaaS / Digital Services on this question

No environmental controversies, no greenwashing complaints, no regulatory actions, no lobbying activity, and no fossil fuel exposure have been identified. Searches of InfluenceMap, general controversy databases, and specialist NGO trackers returned no results relating to Alpine Linux. The project has no clients in the fossil sector, makes no environmental marketing claims, and does not engage in policy lobbying. The product — a lightweight, resource-efficient Linux distribution — has an indirect positive environmental externality by reducing compute resource requirements across millions of deployments. Starting score of 8; no deductions apply. Score 8 is appropriate (not 9–10 as there is no proactive climate disclosure or verified positive climate advocacy).