- Pierre Delforge, Senior Engineer at Natural Resources
Defense Council (www.nrdc.org)
As a growing number of
businesses consider moving computer applications from on-premise server rooms
to the “cloud,” a groundbreaking analysis released
today by the Natural Resources Defense Council,
in partnership with WSP Environment & Energy, reveals that not all of
Internet-based computing platforms are created equal: some clouds
are “greener” than others.
While mammoth
“cloud” data centers are in the media spotlight for their huge energy appetites, smaller server rooms and closets are
responsible for over half of U.S. server energy consumption – but 50% of
that is wasted due to lack of knowledge or incentives to save, costing
U.S. businesses up to $2 billion in unnecessary electricity bills. Small
server rooms and closets can be found both in small- and medium-organizations
(SMOs), such as services and manufacturing sector companies, hospitals,
government agencies and educational institutions, as well as large enterprises
where they are often spread throughout headquarters and regional branch
locations.
NRDC found
that as much as 30% of a typical small office-based organization’s
electricity bill may be due to powering and cooling
servers running around-the-clock even when performing little or no work.
Cloud computing
is often touted as the most eco-friendly choice. Until today’s report, however,
there had been no independent analysis validating whether these computing
services delivered over the internet are the most sustainable option for SMOs
seeking to improve the energy and carbon efficiency of their Information
Technology operations.
NRDC and WSP’s
analysis found that:
· Cloud data centers using
energy-efficiency best practices and powered by renewable energy or efficient
natural gas power plants can have dramatically lower carbon footprints,
by as much as 97%, than typical server
rooms in small- and medium-sized organizations.
· But “brown” clouds that do not
optimize energy efficiency and use electricity from coal-fired power plants,
can have a larger energy and carbon footprint, by up to a factor of two, than
on-premise server rooms using effective methods to improve energy efficiency
and sustainability.
The report, Is Cloud Computing Always Greener? Finding the Most
Energy and Carbon Efficient Information Technology Solutions for Small- and
Medium-Sized Organizations, demonstrates
that the carbon footprint of business computing is highly dependent on a number
of important variables, including the type of electricitypowering
the data center, the amount of server processing capacity being
effectively utilized, and the efficiency of the
facility’s cooling.
We found that the
factors with the biggest impact on the
environmental footprint of server computing are, in order:
· Server utilization
factor: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates
typical servers operate on average in a range of 5 percent to 15 percent
capacity while drawing 60 percent to 90 percent of their maximum power. Running
more than one application on a server through a process known as
“virtualization,” or having more than one customer share a server as in the
case of cloud computing, can increase server utilization to 50 percent or
higher. Unfortunately, most servers run a single application.
· Electricity carbon emissions
factor: This is the carbon footprint of the type of electricity
used to power the data center (i.e., generating electricity from renewable
energy produces far lower greenhouse gas emissions than coal-fired power
plants).
· Power Usage Effectiveness
(PUE): This measures the efficiency of the facility
housing the servers, including cooling, power distribution, and lighting.
· Hardware efficiency: Upgrading
to newer models can substantially reduce energy consumption by server, data storage
and networking equipment. Computing efficiency of servers is doubling every one and a half years.
Business
Options
Our study
compared the above variables under five of the most common business computing
scenarios: on-premise servers with no virtualization (servers
running a single application); colocation ( servers
hosted in external facilities shared with other companies) with no
virtualization; on-premise with virtualization; private
cloud (servers
consolidated and applications accessed across a company’s intranet); and public clouds. As
illustrated below, a public cloud nearly always produces far less carbon
emissions and on-premise server rooms with machines operating a single
application produce the most.
Fortunately, as
our analysis shows, small- and medium-sized organizations looking to improve
the sustainability of their operations have multiple computing options and
should review all the variables that contribute to the carbon impacts of these
options. When considering the cloud, SMOs should request full disclosure of the
carbon-efficiency of the services. If keeping their computing platform
on-premise, businesses should make sure their servers – and the rooms housing
them – work at optimum efficiency.
Even judging by the carbon footprint alone, the answer is a resounding yes no matter how you cut it. The best part is in some places the shift to green technology has started an equal change in its attached services. I heard the local it support in bristol has also started considering green practices that fit the new Cloud system.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis post is different from what I read on most blog. And it have so many valuable things to learn.
ReplyDelete