Photo credit tipiro
Cloud computing may not be as Green as you think.
I mentioned previously that I gave a keynote presentation at the Green IT Summit in Dublin last week.
In the question and answers session after the talk, Sean Baker asked about cloud computing and whether I thought companies using cloud computing weren’t simply outsourcing their emissions.
As Gordon Smith picked up in a piece for SiliconRepublic.com, I replied that I
was “quite sceptical” about this issue. “None of the cloud providers such as Amazon, Microsoft or IBM are publishing metrics at all. Intuitively you have to think that because you’re outsourcing that to someone of that scale that they’re being more efficient but we’ve no way of knowing. Frankly, that’s worrisome. I don’t know why they’re not publishing it and I wish they would,”
This is no sudden realisation on my part. In fact, I have been concerned about Cloud Computing’s Green credentials for some time now as you can see from a series of Tweets (here, here and here, for instance) I posted on this issue in early to mid 2009.
It is vital that cloud providers start publishing their energy metrics for a number of reasons. For one, it is a competitive differentiator. But perhaps more importantly, in the absence of any provider numbers, one has to start wondering if cloud computing is in fact Green at all.
IBM, for example, are not known for being shy when given an opportunity to talk up their Green initiatives. However, on cloud, they are conspicuously silent. The same is true for Amazon, Microsoft, SalesForce and Google.
I’m not sure why cloud providers are not publishing their energy metrics but if I had to guess I would say it is related to concerns around competitive intelligence. However this is not a sustainable position (if you’ll pardon the pun).
As the regulatory landscape around emissions reporting alters and as organisations RFP’s are tending to demand more details on emissions, cloud providers who refuse to provide energy-related numbers will find themselves increasingly marginalised.
So is cloud computing Green?
I put that question toSimon Wardley, cloud strategist for Canonical in this video I recorded with him last year and he said no, cloud computing is very definitely not Green.
To be honest, until cloud providers start becoming more transparent around their utilisation and consumption numbers there is really no way of knowing whether cloud computing is in any way Green at all.
You should follow me on twitter here.
Just how green is cloud computing? http://j.mp/dtVlFF /Anyone fancy raising this at #vmforce?
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Just how green is cloud computing?:
Photo credit tipiro
Cloud computing may not be as Green as you think.
I ment… http://bit.ly/dcc9Sh
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
It’s reasonable to assume, until proven otherwise, that ‘cloud computing’ is not very energy-efficient at all. Virtualisation can be, of course, but ‘cloud computing’ tends to entail keeping many computers running (albeit in low power mode), doing nothing, waiting for someone to use them. I can’t really see how it would usually be more energy-efficient for most applications.
#Cloud #Blogs Just how green is cloud computing? — GreenMonk: the blog: In fact, I have been concerned about C… http://bit.ly/dcc9Sh #TCN
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Just how green is #CloudComputing? — GreenMonk: the blog: In fact, I have been concerned about C… http://bit.ly/dcc9Sh #TCN
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Why Google et al’s cloud offerings are not Green http://j.mp/dtVlFF
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
It’s not that cloud computing is or isn’t green. The real problem is that we have no easy way to prove or dis-prove it other than a gut feeling . In most cases the cloud is probably more environmentally friendly compared to that of under-utilized data center alternatives.
So is cloud computing green-er than the thousands of servers sitting idle in data centers our the globe? Probably. Is it green-er than turning off your computing and doing nothing, probably not.
Save yourself 10 minutes: The argument in the video goes “It’s not green because more people will use it to do more stuff which will over-compensate for the savings” rather than “It’s less green than dedicated servers or VPS” since the latter is patently false.
On that basis you could argues that “electric cars are not green” because people will drive more often if it costs less. Right?
Just how green is cloud computing? — GreenMonk: the blog http://bit.ly/bPaeT1
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Just how green is cloud computing? — GreenMonk: the blog: In fact, I have been concerned about Cloud Computing’s G… http://bit.ly/dcc9Sh
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Why Google et al’s cloud offerings are not Green http://j.mp/dtVlFF
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Reading -> Why Google et al’s cloud offerings are not Green http://j.mp/dtVlFF (by @TomRaftery )
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Just how green is cloud computing? A call for transparency/ standards on energy usage http://monk.ly/cAuvLE @joebaguley @samj @swardley
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
.@jdrumgoole Hey Joe – love your thoughts on my cloud offerings are not Green post http://j.mp/dtVlFF
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
I just assumed (mother of all) cloud computing would be efficient and “green.” Turns out we don’t know. http://bit.ly/cmHo4s via @tomraftery
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Its not that Cloud Computing isn’t green, its that computing isn’t green. For Cloud vendors to produce these stats they need support from the OS vendors. For OS vendors to produce this information they need support from the hardware vendors.
However cloud vendors are highly motivated to provide this information for several reasons. Firstly carbon tax will hit them hardest and just about every jurisdiction I know of is going to wallop a carbon tax on computing (or indirectly through electricity) at some point in the future. Secondly from a CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) perspective they know being green is good. It would certainly influence my choice of hosting vendor to know they were “greener” than the competition.
Cloud Computing vendors have the buying power to influence the hardware and software vendors to support carbon counting initiatives and their ability to pass on these costs to their customers (in the same way as they charge for transactions, bandwidth and storage) can clearly influence their customers behaviour as well.
In short when carbon measurement capabilities start appearing as standard on Dell, Sun, HP and IBM hardware expect it to appear on IaaS dashboards shortly thereafter.
The darknet consumes energy/carbon more than the public cloud by several orders of magnitude. All the financial services companies I have ever worked for keep their services running 24×7 despite most of them being on average less than 1% utilised.
Don’t even get me started on what happens on the desktop.
Like I said before, take out the cloud part to really start understanding the problem.
The Cloud guys know carbon counting is coming and they are likely to be the first out the door with a solution. My bet is Amazon will have it on a bill before the end of 2011.
This will not solve the problem. IDC estimates that cloud computing represented just 4% of the overal spend on IT in 2008. (http://blogs.idc.com/ie/?p=224)
So focusing on cloud computing is missing the opportunity. Instead beat up the hardware vendors to offer a way to measure power consumption and beat up the OS vendors to expose it as an API (boy that would be a nice API for the standards guys).
This comment was originally posted on Greenmonk: the blog
Based on my research, google eats hydro-power and impacts rivers due to dams while amazon eats coal and impacts out mercury intake. Having been inside IBM from 1984-2009, they don’t give a hoot.
In my opinion, the vendors will all fake their way into greeness and claim the prize. Ultimately, real green is USD. But, I think the opportunity to make a difference rests with the systems management vendors. The power consumption data is indeed there. The apis should be a requirement for vendor selection. Then, the “green” systems management vendor will rise out of the cloud of smoke.
This comment was originally posted on Greenmonk: the blog
Joe – absolutely. i have heard rumours for a while that AWS would pull the trigger on carbon reporting sooner rather than later. I don’t give IDC estimates a great deal of credence to be honest, especially given they’re focusing on “IT spend”. when it comes to google search and twitter there is no “IT spend”. But the really key point is WE CAN INSTRUMENT the cloud…. its doable. The darknet, as you call it, not so much. Cloud is the growth area. Why wait until later when we can push for transparency now. The web is different from the status quo. It offers us new opportunities in terms of instrumentation and telemetry. We talk about an internet of things, but we haven’t even instrumented the internet for power consumption yet. And finally – what are you talking about in terms of beating up? Its hardly beating them up to call for more engagement with energy transparency, is it?
This comment was originally posted on Greenmonk: the blog
Maybe we could get Alex Wissner Gross to write another provocative and wildly inaccurate story about the carbon costs of cloud computing? Would the cloud vendors be embarrassed/outraged into responding with more realistic numbers?
Anyone got his @?
This comment was originally posted on Greenmonk: the blog
@ian: not quite.
I’ll try not to ramble so much, next time.
On one side of the argument you have efficiency of resource usage and on the other you have componentisation, co-evolution and price elasticity effects. Your electric car analogy simply refers to price elasticity and ignores the more powerful componentisation consequences.
There is a worrying trend towards outsourcing emissions generally. Businesses are unintentionally doing it when they move any business process to outside service organisation. They then report their scope 1 & 2 emissions as being incorrectly reducing as a result of their tremendous efforts to be sustainable.
Specifically regarding the move to the cloud. The move is “probably” resulting in a reduction in emissions due to the “economies of scale” of managing a huge virtualised data centre over managing many small computer rooms. So, although the cloud operators aren’t doing enough in terms of transparency, they are “probably” having a positive impact on emissions.
It will be interesting to see Microsoft’s emissions next year. They have been excellent at publicly disclosing emissions for all their operations globally since 2004. Next year we should be able to see the impact their AZURE platform has had on their emissions and at least get some indication of the “greenness” of their cloud platform.
Unfortunately Amazon has refused each request from the Carbon Disclosure Project since 2003 to publish their emissions so it will not be possible to perform any decent comparison.
That said, the moves by Tesco, Wal-Mart and other retail giants will eventually force the hand of the cloud providers if they are to deliver services to global enterprises.
With regards to your “Call to Action” – There is no technical reason stopping cloud providers exposing their emissions data now. IBM, DELL or HP don’t need to even be involved. The Hardware vendors only become relevant when the cloud providers try to reduce their emissions – by selecting the most efficient hardware vendor.
This comment was originally posted on Greenmonk: the blog
@ian – The Electric Car comparison is unfortunate I think. If people drive more because it is cheaper in Electric Cars, as long as they source their power from renewable sources, there is limited environmental impact.
@Simon – I think you may have gone to the other extreme with the above response
Perhaps you could say another few explanatory words around componentisation, co-evolution and price elasticity effects for the uninitiated…
Google Search and Twitter have no IT spend, shurely shome mishtake? They don’t magic all that compute power out of the ether.
Beat up is too strong, I agree, but ignoring the darknet because its “too hard” is weak.
IDC reflects macro economic trends in technology as well as anyone so I buy their ratios. They are within an order of magnitude of the real number which in turn speaks to the idea that having the cloud vendors getting their act together will barely move the carbon cost needle on a global scale.
This comment was originally posted on Greenmonk: the blog
Just how #green is #cloud computing? http://ow.ly/1EIf3 GreenMonk: the blog
This comment was originally posted on Twitter