Green IT Blog!!!

Since the 1990s there has been a greater move toward eco-consciousness across the world thanks to pacts like the Kyoto Protocol, while in India multiple agencies and ministries driving green initiatives are making things slow and complex

It is often said that there are two Indias that live side-by-side; the antiquated and the avant-garde. On one hand there is an India that is ancient and archaic, with millions of individuals flocking to the Ganges every 12 years to wash their mortal sins. And on the other there is the modern India that is sending Chandrayan to the moon, building nuclear reactors, winning Olympic medals or even corporate scandals. The disparity between the two is ironic if not depressing.

And this stark incongruity between the India of Lord Rama and that of Ramalinga Raju is most evident in the law and order structure of the nation, while the nation grapples with the troubles of the 21st century, most of the laws that are in use were framed in 20th century, leading to a stark gap between what needs to be achieved and what is really done. The green movement in India to a great extent suffers from this laxity.

Climate Change Challenge
There is little doubt now that mankind faces an uphill battle in terms of the climatic disaster that awaits us. With every passing day, we come closer and closer to the cataclysmic point of disaster, wherein things would change irreparably for the worse. While much of this damage has been wrought by the greed and gluttony of the advanced nations, the developing world is also no less behind. India for instance is the fourth largest polluter in the world in terms of CO2 emissions, yet the Indian government, quite like the Emperor Nero from ancient Rome is doing precious little.

Since the 1990s there has been a greater move toward eco-consciousness across the world thanks to pacts like the Kyoto Protocol, which have enforced certain binding conditions on the advanced countries to curtail CO2 emissions in a phased manner. In fact the European Union has been quite sensitive about the whole issue of climate change and has over the last few years passed strict legislations against the use of toxic materials in the manufacturing process. Waste Electronics and Electrical Equipment (WEEE) Directive and Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive are two legislations that have set the ball rolling on that front.
Read more…

If Dr. Alex Wissner-Gross is to be believed (and there is little reason not to, considering his antecedents), our innocuous habit of ‘Googling’ on anything and everything on the Web has a detrimental impact on the environment. The Harvard University Physicist has worked out the carbon footprint of every search performed on the Web and that includes, Google, Yahoo and the rest.

Thus according to Dr. Wissner-Gross, a typical search generates about 7g of CO2. The newspaper that quoted him also worked out a stat that, boiling a kettle generates about 15g (http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5489134.ece). Hence, two searches on the Google is equivalent to boiling a kettle of water, in terms of the CO2 released.

No sooner was the story out, there was a lot of hue and cry around the environmental impact of performing a Web search, or rather Googling for most of us. The environmental equation comes from the fact that Google (and the likes) maintain humongous datacenter farms to be able to serve the need for people like me. Now, each of these farms consume enormous amount of energy, both in terms of equipment and cooling. So is Google red?

Apparently not. Over the years, Google has been talking a lot about its ‘green avatar’. While, it won’t divulge its carbon footprint, the company claims to have the ‘most efficient datacenter on the planet’. There is also a lot of preening about the recycling and sustainability initiatives at the Google Campus in California. So even though Google won’t share any specifics about its energy consumption or climate footprint, it would very much like us to believe that it indeed ‘does no evil’ when it comes to environment.

So no sooner did Time UK publish the story, it was picked up by almost all the magazines and media that matter, and Dr. Wissner-Gross became a celebrity of sorts being inundated with requests for interviews from across the globe (mine included). The communication team at Google also scurried into action, and almost on cue, a post appeared on the Google blog refuting the claim. The blog post goes on to say that:

“Google’s data center’s are carbon neutral, so it is only the client end you do have to worry about. However, breathing generates about 6g of Carbon every 10 minutes. Or about as much as they estimate computers do. Together with other work performed before your search even starts (such as building the search index) this amounts to 0.0003 kWh of energy per search, or 1 kJ. For comparison, the average adult needs about 8000 kJ a day of energy from food, so a Google search uses just about the same amount of energy that your body burns in ten seconds.” Read more…

Carbon neutrality is a term that really flummoxes me these days. With much concerns over climate change issues, anything to do with environment becomes a hot topic. While the hype and hoopla that surrounds such green is much welcome, but at times there is the danger of going overboard and losing relevance. Carbon neutrality is one such thing.

Let me just list what really is carbon neutrality. In our mundane modern day existence, we as individuals are responsible for lot of direct and indirect carbon (to be more precise CO2) emissions in the atmosphere. Right from the toothpaste that we use (after all its manufacturing and transportation must have cost much energy), to the food we consume (oranges from Nagpur, apples from Shimla, mangoes from Raigad, Kellogs from the US, chocolates from Switzerland, tea from Assam, rice from Orissa, etc.) and other similar things are what constitute indirect emissions. Now, coming to the direct ones, namely, our commuting, the electricity that we consume directly namely the air conditioners, the PCs, even the food that we consume, for instance meat and non-vegetarian stuff is considered to have a high carbon footprint.

Essentially, the difference between direct and indirect boils down to one simple things, things that can be changed by individual choices (direct) and things that be influenced in a round about way (indirect). The first step towards leading a more eco-friendly life is to first measure these emissions; the sum of all is referred to as a carbon footprint. Expressed in CO2 tonnes, for instance my personal carbon footprint is 4.85 tonnes per year (courtesy: http://calculator.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx).

(Digressing a bit, according the same calculator:

* The average footprint for people in India is 1.20 tonnes
* The average for the industrial nations is about 11 tonnes
* The average worldwide carbon footprint is about 4 tonnes
* The worldwide target to combat climate change is 2 tonne) Read more…

Whenever we talk of environmental consciousness, we often talk about how advanced countries in Europe and the US have brought about legislations that compel or incentivize environmental friendly practices. EU has been the most active when it comes to environmental awareness and has put in place strictures like the RoHS (Reduction of Hazardous Substances), WEEE (Waste Electric and Electronic Equipment). Meanwhile, in the US the popular Energy Star Ratings is quite a hit, in addition to the numerous laws put in place by different states like California, etc.

Many people feel that such rules and strictures are a big reason why companies and enterprises in the US and Europe function in an eco-sensitive manner. And more often than not I come across arguments wherein it is stated that the reason why companies in India function with impunity is due to the lack of any formal structures or guidelines for the same. Come to think of it, lack of eco-friendly rules could be a part of the problem it is certainly not the sole or even the biggest one.

A big reason why governments and administrations across the west have adopted these rules are because of the high awareness levels of the end users. And this has been brought about by scores of NGOs that have taken green activism to newer levels. Thanks to the numerous NGOs not only the governments, even the companies have been forced to come clean on the way they function. Take the case of the US, there are scores of activists that have organized themselves into pressure groups, for instance the Climate Savers Computing Initiative (CSCI) or the Green Computing Impact Organization (GCIO) and the immensely successful Green Electronics Council that came out with the Electronic Products Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) to assist in the purchase of “green” computing systems. Even the industry players, to show that they are not all that bad as they are made out to be, have organized themselves into a action group called as Green Grid that advocates energy efficiency in datacenters and computing ecosystems.

To top it all, the dare devil Green Peace has jumped into the fray and now comes out with a quarterly report titled, Greener Electronics Guide, that ranks companies based on their environmental practices. Most of these are hardware vendors, and with every report the companies go up and down the rankings.

Such pressure groups shape the public opinion and there are lot of instances of customers and companies making their purchase decisions based on the reports and standards that these organizations publish. For instance there is a lot of support for EPEAT, the state of California has mandated that all the purchase decision for hardware must be made keeping in mind the guideline. Thus, much of the credit for green consciousness is due to green activism that is rampant here.

Coming back to India. While it is true that there is not much push from the government side, it is also a fact that there is almost zilch consciousness in the consumers mind. A customer here would not make a purchase decision based on the companies eco-track record, solely because he or she has not been sensitized to the need for it. This sensitization is usually done by such NGOs or pressure groups. Since there is not many of them in India, even the corporates are not that keen to go green. Green Peace to some extent has been doing that, talking about the use of toxic substances in HCL and HP products, but it has not really touched emotional chords because of the limited reach. Read more…

Theres legislation in the offing. And its not only nations that are gearing up for stricter emission standards: even companies have started looking at their carbon footprint.

Climatologists Jack Hall and Jason Evans are huddled together inside a tent, with the weather outside plummeting quite many notches below zero. Hall is on his way from Washington DC to New York, to save his son from the cataclysmic climate conditions. When Evans strikes up a rather gloomy conversation.

Evans: Whats going to happen to us?

Hall: What do you mean?

Evans: I mean us. Civilization. Everyone.

Hall: Mankind survived the last ice age. Were certainly capable of surviving this one. The only question is, will we be able to learn from our mistakes?

Agreed we goofed up, but are we doing anything about it? The Day After Tomorrow, the big budget Hollywood movie, raised this pertinent question. In some 124 minutes, the film depicted the horrors of global warming. For the first time people got talking about these issues, about how the earth was getting warmer each passing year, how the polar ice cap was melting, how the seas were rising, how the Himalayas were dissipating, how there were more hurricanes in Gulf of Mexico or why there was record rainfall in Mumbai on July 26, 2005. There were so many questions, but not many answers.

That was till February last year, when the chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, made a rather dour prediction, that the average temperature could rise as much as 4C by the end of this century. He also predicted an increase in heat waves and the tropical storm intensity. And for once he settled the matter, as to who was to be blamed for all; Human, he said.

In the pursuit of plenty, we have cared little for the ill effects. From more cars on the streets to more transistors on the chip, humanity, in their immense greed for more, has done little for environment. But there seems to be a shift, a small but a sure shift. Finally, we begin to examine, what needs to be done vis–vis what should be done.

From Kyoto to Bali
The first definitive move was made in 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol was agreed upon. The protocol specifically spoke of reducing greenhouse gases that cause climate change. Till November 2007, 174 Countries have ratified the protocol. Of these, thirty-six developed countries (plus the EU as a party in its own right) are required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the levels specified for each of them in the treaty. One hundred and thirty-seven developing countries have ratified the protocol, including Brazil, China, and India, but have no obligation beyond monitoring and reporting emissions. But, since the US was not a signatory to the same, there were many issues about effectivity of the treaty.

The next big step was the United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Bali, Indonesia, in December 2007. Herein, the participating nations adopted the Bali roadmap as a two-year process to finalizing a binding agreement in 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark. Bali is meant to be a stepping-stone for the final step when all nations would commit themselves to binding agreements on greenhouse gas reduction targets.

The IT Angle
So, what does Kyoto, Bali, or for that matter Copenhagen portend for the IT industry? A lot, if you read the asterisks. So far, much of the talk on emissions and carbon credits has centered on pollution and aviation. But then, the IT data center and the computer in general is no less a culprit. According to a study by the UK government, companies can save up to $100 per PC per year in energy costs by simply seeing to that they are switched off when not in use. The data center consolidation can save quite much more. For instance, a Butler Group report found that by consolidating 250 dual-core servers on to 25 more powerful dual-core servers, an organization could save close to $280,000 per year in energy costs alone.

There have been talks that in the near future, there will be carbon emissions cap on organizations, thereby calling for a detailed study on the carbon footprint of each company. As a precautionary measure, companies need to consider the power and cooling impact that IT data centers have, and adopt new technologies that can significantly reduce their use of energy, and hence the carbon footprint. According to experts, virtualization is one such technology that both a CIO and a CEO should take an active interest in.

Markets are abuzz with the speculation that government regulation on power saving is on the way. Many speculate that the same will come from EU, which is seen most active when it comes to environmental best practices. Once such legislations are in place, companies would have to chart their own carbon footprint and look at ways of reducing the costs.

Eco-friendly IT
In such a scenario, IT departments can take the lead within organizations, and create a new role for themselves in the process, by enabling organizations to be proactive in reducing energy consumption, and hence reduce their carbon footprint.

Also, much of the Indian IT industry is export oriented, hence going green can be a way to distinguish self in front of the clients, especially the American ones. Companies in the US have become very conscious to green issues due to a high level of public interest or out of social responsibility. Hence, an Indian IT firm could opt for green PR and showcase itself as an eco-friendly company.

When the Kyoto Protocol had come into play, countries like China and India were exempt from making any commitment in terms of carbon dioxide emissions. But by the time the talks shift to Copenhagen in two years, both the economic giants will be under pressure to do something substantial. The best option for Indian companies would be to start now itself. When Pachauri had presented the IPCC report last year, he had warned that, what we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. Time is running out on us, and the earlier we start doing something about it the better. Remember, every small thing counts, be it using the CFL bulb, or saving through a power-efficient server. Nothing is too big or small, when it comes to saving our earth.

(Shashwat DC, published in Dataquest)