This afternoon on Twitter, Reuven Cohen shared a link to a post by Kathrin Winkler, Sr. Director and Chief Sustainability Officer at EMC Corporation, on The Greener Computing Option.  Halfway through the post, Kathrin shares the following on why Cloud Computing is the Greener Computing Option:

“Information technology is estimated to account for 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions.  And the hardware industry is still a far cry from the "cradle-to-cradle" model that avoids the creation of industrial waste and the depletion of non-renewable resources.  On the other hand, IT  is absolutely fundamental to mitigating "the other 98%", optimizing the use of natural resources, and shifting to a low-carbon economy.

Cloud computing holds great promise in both fronts. Granted, it’s not all proven out yet, but here’s where some of the potential lies:

  • Shared resources can eliminate redundancies. It’s simple economy of scale.
  • Dynamically-assigned resource pools means that spare capacity isn’t sitting around drawing power in as many places or as many configurations.
  • Clouds can provide what you might call "overdraft protection"; that is, data centers can run at higher utilization if they know they can draw on "the cloud" in the event of an unexpected peak in demand.
  • Location independence could mean the ability to move services to physical facilities where power is cleaner or used more efficiently. The tyranny of the speed of light will certainly limit "follow the moon" – changing longitudes daily to take advantage of evening cooling . But it could work for some applications; more will be able to "follow the seasons"; shifting biannually by latitude to take advantage of winter cooling.
  • Properly instrumented, clouds will be able to inform consumers of their environmental (energy, carbon, etc.) impact , to enable them to be accountable for their choices.
  • Clouds can provide an elastic infrastructure to enable "retro-commissioning" of more traditional infrastructure. I heard a CIO in NYC the other day say that one of the biggest challenges to keeping up with best practices is that any changes to his data center were like "changing the engine in a car while it’s speeding at 70 MPH down the road". What if that infrastructure could be temporarily extended into the cloud, the applications shifted, the infrastructure upgrade, and the applications shifted "home" again?
  • For C2C (Cradle-to-Cradle) devotees, note that Cloud Computing is a product service model, in which the provider’s financial results are tied to getting more out of the hardware, rather than getting more hardware out of the factory.
  • Clouds hold the potential for rapid connection between disparate sources of people and data to accelerate innovation to address all sorts of environmental challenges. See The Sustainability Potential of Cloud Computing.”

Of this list, the location independence factor can certainly offset some of the impact of organizations increased appetites due to the availability of cloud computing resources.  This conversation will only get more interesting, and precise, as the year progresses.

Posted by brenda michelson at 4:42 pm in Cloud Watch, sustainability | Permalink | Comments(0)
| Trackback URL

Inspired by a Reuven Cohen post, James discusses the paradox of green and cloud computing.  On the surface, cloud computing appears to be environmentally friendly due to the economies of scale offered by cloud computing resources and facilities.  However, the ease of consumption has actually increased total compute, and therefore energy, utilization.  James quoting Reuven’s post:

“We now have the ability to run our applications on thousands of servers, but previously this wasn’t even possible. To say it another way, we can potentially use several years worth of energy in literary a few hours, where previously this wasn’t even an option. So in direct contrast, hypothetically we’re using more resources, not less. On the flip side, if we bought those thousand servers and had them running (underutilized), the power usage would be significantly higher. But then again, buying those servers would have been out reach for most, so it’s not a fair comparison. There we are–back, at where we started. You may use 80 percent less energy per unit, but have 1,000 percent more capacity, which at the end of the day means you’re using more, not less energy.”

After citing observations from Simon Wardley and Krishnan Subramanian, James concludes:

“…the increased efficiency of the hardware components in most cloud data centers and the increased utilization of these components mean that we are almost certainly doing more work per unit of energy consumed than before. However, I think we’ll have to wait awhile before there is evidence of the overall effect of cloud computing on the planet…one way or the other.”

Interesting to consider how efficiency and ease of access are changing behavior.  The next question I suppose, is what’s the outcome (productivity) garnered by the increased consumption?  Is it value-add?  Or, compute-gluttony?

Posted by brenda michelson at 10:42 am in Cloud Watch, sustainability | Permalink | Comments(2)
| Trackback URL