Greenpeace warns of coal-powered cloud
By Reuters
Posted on 30 Mar 2010 at 09:42
The 'cloud' of data that is becoming the heart of the internet is creating an all-too-real cloud of pollution, according to Greenpeace.
A Facebook facility being built in Oregon will be largely fuelled by coal, while Apple is building a data warehouse in North Carolina region that relies mostly on coal, the environmental organisation claims in a new study.
"The last thing we need is for more cloud infrastructure to be built in places where it increases demand for dirty coal-fired power," said Greenpeace, which argues that web companies should be more careful about where they build and should lobby more in Washington for clean energy.
The last thing we need is for more cloud infrastructure to be built in places where it increases demand for dirty coal-fired power
The growing mass of business data, home movies and pictures has ballooned beyond the capabilities of many corporate data centers and PCs, spurring the creation of massive server farms that make up "the cloud".
Data center energy use is already huge, Greenpeace said. If considered as a country, the global telecommunications and data centers behind cloud computing would be ranked fifth in the world for energy use in 2007, behind the US, China, Russia and Japan, it concluded.
The cloud may be the fastest-growing facet of technology infrastructure between now and 2020, Greenpeace added.
The Greenpeace report comes during a global debate on whether to create caps or other measures to cut use of carbon-heavy fuels such as coal, and curb climate change.
Cheap and plentiful, coal is the top fuel for US power plants, and its low cost versus alternative fuels makes it attractive, even in highly energy-efficient data centers. Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo and Google have at least some centers that rely heavily on coal power, said Greenpeace.
Corporate secrets
Most of the companies declined to give details of their data centers. All said, however, they considered the environment in business decisions, and most said they were aggressively pursuing energy efficiency.
Apple, for example, has released its carbon footprint (or how much greenhouse gases it produce), and Facebook said it chose the location for its center to use natural means to cool its machines.
Microsoft said it aimed to maximise efficiency, and Google said it purchased carbon offsets - funding for projects which suck up carbon - for emissions, including at data centers.
Yahoo, which is building a center near Buffalo, New York, that Greenpeace saw as a model, will get energy from hydroelectric facilities. The company said energy-efficiency was its top goal, with a building design that promotes air circulation.
From around the web
What do you expect
Modern cloud data-centers are being designed from the ground up to minimise energy consumption. Consolidation of facilities allow efficiencies that traditional data centers in mixed use buildings could never aspire to. Greenpeace will complain about something -whatever the industry does. How about putting a data center inside a neuclear power site. Then you'll have both low carbon and maximum security.
By milliganp on 30 Mar 2010 ![]()
Does anyone remember the good old days where we used to have limits on what we could store/send?? These limits forced people to be tidy and keep only what they needed. Thanks to our new server at work we have a massive collection of data thats no longer used but is available on the server simply because theres room. If Facebook etc... simply impose some kind of limit they wouldn't have a need to constantly expand and thus save the planet and people would be more clutter free!!! How about an expiry date on uploaded photos? Does anyone really look at that album you posted 3 years ago?!?!
By anthonysjones on 30 Mar 2010 ![]()
Hmm
Its a strange situation at the moment Nuclear looks better from a Greenhouse gas perspective than coal, but that ignores the long term view on waste management.
I would have thought solar collectors, wind and tidal would be more advanced by now, but speaking from local experience the Tidal Generator in Belfast opended with a fanfare and then went suspiciously quiet after developing "issues"
Ever expanding storage and server farms is clearly not the best environmental plan per se, but then again its better to web conference than it is to hit the Boeing 777?
Overall it would be nice to see the Green Parties and Greenpeace reduce the bluster and produce more on the solutions side of things. It's too easy to sit bickering and bitching on the sidelines.
By Gindylow on 31 Mar 2010 ![]()
advertisement
- Laptop bag reviews: nine tested
- Sony VAIO T Series Ultrabook review: first look
- Revealed: the military standards and robots HP uses to test its laptops
- Windows 8: multi-monitors and double standards?
- Why is TalkTalk's year-old porn filter suddenly big news?
- Why are laptop screens so far behind mobiles?
- HP EliteBook Folio review: first look
- The shoebox-sized all-in-one printer
- Forget the Ultrabook: here comes the HP Sleekbook
- HP Spectre XT review: first look
- Why you have to be left in the dark on OS patches
- Is Microsoft mismanaging Windows on ARM?
- Dealing with spam surrogates
- Why 3G broadband can be better and cheaper than ADSL
- Is Twitter bad for business?
- Publishing your email address isn't a security disaster
- Why you'll need a fax machine to develop iOS apps
- Learning to adapt to the mobile web
- Why you shouldn't use WPS on your Wi-Fi network
- Disabled users suffer when software breaks the rules
advertisement
