Sustainable IT | Ted Samson » March 2007

March 29, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Warning: Companies may be less green than they appear

TAGS: Sustainable IT

As issues of energy savings and waste reduction float to the forefront of IT leaders' minds, a "greener than thou" attitude is starting to permeate the industry -- but the short-term bottom line still seems to take precedence.

Last week, IBM announced plans to cut greenhouse emissions 7 percent by 2012. Then yesterday, HP unveiled a broad plan to cut its 2005 level of energy usage by 20% come 2010. Notably, it used the announcement as a platform to talk up some of its recent "green" initiatives, such as delivering 33% more energy-efficient business PCs; releasing its Dynamic Smart Cooling energy management software for data centers, which HP says can cut energy consumption by up to 45%; and redesigning print cartridge packaging, which HP says will cut greenhouse gas emissions by about 37 million pounds this year.

While those initiatives are indeed well and good (from a sustainability standpoint), Frank Gillett, a principal analyst at Forrester Research, noted that he was particularly impressed by HP's stated ambition of reducing energy use by 20%, especially considering that the company has plans to grow in the meantime. "The company is going to be 50% bigger by [2010], so we're effectively talking about a 50% increase in energy efficiency ... . They've almost undersold the magnitude of what they're trying to do," he said.

Admirable as HP, IBM, and other companies' purported green aspirations might be, Gillett said he's generally still not seeing a lot of clear forward thinking nor environmental dediction from some companies. Rather, many are "trying to re-characterize the things they do to save money as being green."

I think that's a pretty fair analysis in many cases. True environmental concern isn't the main underlying motivation for companies looking to develop more energy-efficient hardware, push for stricter environmental standards, or implement virtualization projects. Rather, the eco-friendly aspect is a fortunate and healthy by-product of money-saving, waste-reducing efforts.

Not that "being green" really can be a company's primary goal. Gillett noted that the most environmentally-friendly thing people could do is stop having children, which is technically true: fewer people means less consumption and less waste. Similarly, the "greenest" thing HP or IBM or Toyota or Pepsi or any company could do is shut down entirely. Think of the energy savings!

But a company's goal is to grow, to be profitable -- but also to be around 50, or 100, or 200 years from now. Adopting a long-term sustainable strategy is a great way to ensure that. Saving a dollar today means having one tomorrow. Saving a kilowatt today means it's available tomorrow.

But despite all the green talk, there's still a tendency in the business world to take a narrow, short-term approach to business based on today's bottom line, Gillett noted. And that's an important point. For example, if your CFO has a choice to spend an extra $20 per new PC to get 80% efficient power supplies, he or she may say, "Forget it," despite the environmental considerations (as well as the potential long-term power savings).

Similarly, if a PC maker like HP has the choice of making its more energy-efficient power supplies standard features in its newest line of PCs, rather than charging $20 extra for them, that company's CFO might also say, "Forget it," despite the environmental considerations. (This isn't strictly hypothetical: HP's is indeed selling optional 80% efficient power supplies with its PCs for an additional 20 bucks a pop.)

I'll leave the last word with Forrester's Gillett: "Human beings are not good at making the long-term decision. We want to have the hamburger, not the leafy green vegetables. ... What's the right thing to do in the long run is not the obvious thing to do in the short term. We're up against fundamental human behavior."

Posted by Ted Samson on March 29, 2007 03:51 PM

March 26, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Sun joins investors, businesses in call to Feds for climate change

TAGS: Green standards

Businesses have delivered some pretty clear messages to the government of late: We're ready to make some major investments in clean, green technology, and we want your support.

First, TechNet a couple of weeks ago challenged Congress and the president to invest more seed money in sustainable-energy initiatives and offer greater tax incentives to go green.

Then just last week, 65 investors, asset managers, and major corporations -- including just one IT company, Sun Microsystems -- issued a "Climate Call to Action" to the U.S government, an effort orchestrated by Ceresand the Investor Network on Climate Risk. The call to action urged lawmakers to enact strong federal legislation to curb the pollution causing global climate change.

That was their wording, by the way: "curb the pollution causing global climate change." I was immediately stuck by this, because from what I've observed in recent history, companies have tried to shy away from the politically charged topic of global warming.

But these guys clearly take the subject seriously -- or at least the associated investment opportunities (so notes my inner cynic). And to emphasize just how, ahem, important their position is, the group notes that it includes dozens of institutional investors who manage $4 trillion in assets. That's the kind of number (i.e. a large one starting with a dollar sign) that makes politicians perk up, take notice, and on occassion, wet themselves.

Among the group's recommendations, it's asking for "leadership by the U.S. government to achieve sizable, sensible long-term reductions of greenhouse gas emissions"; from 60 to 90% reductions below 1990 levels by 2050. (There's a pretty big difference between 60% and 90%, I'd note.)

The group suggests, as well, mandatory market-based solutions, such as a cap-and-trade system, through which companies could buy and sell their pollution allowance.

Of course, the group doesn't just call on lawmakers' environmentalistic sensibilities: It calls for "a range of policy measures to provide the financial incentives that are needed to stimulate research, development, and deployment of cleaner, more efficient technologies at the scale necessary."

Finally, the group asks for the SEC and other regulatory groups to better define the material issues related to climate change and clarify what companies should disclose on climate change in their regular financial reporting.

As I noted earlier, while many IT companies were involved in TechNet's sustainable-technology call to the government a couple of weeks ago, Sun is the only IT company to appear on the list of signatories for this Climate Call to Action. Here's what Dave Douglas, the company's vice president of eco-responsibility (is that anything like a chief sustainability officer?), had to say about it:

On the call to action: "What we're asking for are clear policies and direction. We're joining together with other corporations to send a clear signal to our lawmakers. We'd like to see a framework in which businesses can take action, set goals and engage in long-term strategies, including taxes, rebates, and long-term costs for companies."

On what what businesses should do rather than simply waiting for the government to lead the green charge: "By measuring and modifying energy usage, a businesses can lower their environmental impact today. Businesses don't need to wait for the government to decide, they can put their own longer term sustainability strategies in play."

On what the government's role should be in spurring "greenovation": "Given its size, we believe its important that the federal government commit to being a good example in its own operations. Beyond legislation, our government has the power to influence innovation and business practices by only procuring products, for example, that are energy efficient. As a major market force, it makes a lot of sense for government to set out its own longer term strategy for energy use."

My own perpsective on this call to action is, it does make sense, but I think the group might have taken a different approach. Much of the up-front emphasis in the call to action pertains to global climate change. While I think that's a very important subject that needs to be addressed, I acknowledge that some people out there -- including lawmakers -- remain skeptical. Thus, I think this group should have put more emphasis on the economic opportunities that the budding green-tech industry offers the nation as a whole, the way TechNet did with its call to action. The promise of green, clean technologies mean not only more jobs, as well as a competitive edge for American businesses; it means we can reduce our dependency on fossil fuels from the tumultuous Middle East.

To see the entire call to action, go here.

Posted by Ted Samson on March 26, 2007 12:03 AM

March 23, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Live chat recap: Swaying CXOs to the green side

TAGS: Sustainable IT

We had an interesting live chat yesterday with Roger Tipley and Colette LaForce, boardmembers of The Green Grid, about sustainable IT. Judging by the questions, it's clear that interest in this budding field runs high. That's a good sign.

One participant (IT Exec-Connect member rakesh17) wanted to know how to get CXOs to take sustainable IT seriously, and that's an excellent question indeed. I'm sure many a CTO or IT manager has spent many a frustrating hour trying to explain the business benefits of, say, investing in new servers or virtualization or, really, any technology project that obviously has value -- at least to the tech-savvy advocate. So advocates of sustainable endeavors, be they technological or otherwise, are very likely suffering similar aggravation trying to make their case.

I think Roger hit the nail on the head with his reply: "CIOs, CFOs, and CEOs obviously care most about their bottom line. By providing a means for the CIO to assess the energy efficiency (measured as work output divided by the energy cost), we can give the CIO a means to show where to invest in the data center to improve real energy efficiency."

In other words, in the business world, money talks. You can talk about eco-friendliness and general energy efficiency until you're blue (or green) in the face. But if you want to really capture your CXO's attention and get him or her to pry open those purse-strings, you need some compelling bottom-line proof that there's money to be saved.

The Green Grid is working on helping you deliver the data you need to make your case, Roger said: "[The group] will provide a means for all of the various green data center technologies to prove how beneficial they are to the data center manager's total cost of ownership (TCO)."

In coming days and weeks, I'm going to provide research as well as case studies about money-saving sustainable IT implementations that I hope will help strengthen your arguments to the CBC (chief bean counter), whomever it may be.

Roger's comment about TCO elicited a nice point from rakesh17: "Instead of looking at it from a cost of ownership perspective, it could be beneficial to employ total economic impact analysis: the financial and soft benefits/risks," (soft benefits referring to how being "greener" effects the image of the company).

Colette concurred, noting that right now, a lot of CXOs still aren't attuned to those soft benefits. "Saving money is paramount for CXOs, but there is also the very noble aspect of helping to save the planet -- and often times that's ignore or felt to be too 'soft' to talk about," she said. "We hope to help change the image of 'green' being too 'soft.' It should just be a given for all companies."

We covered some other interesting topics as well, including what role the government should play in pushing sustainable IT. "We see government's role as providing basic research to help move the state-of-the-art forward. The data center and IT industry is perfectly capable of creating products that meet the needs of customers' energy efficiency goals," Roger said.

"Spot on," Colette agreed. "We want to keep the power of choice in the customers' hands."

Colette and Roger acknowledged that The Green Grid does want to work with the E.U. and U.S. governments, as well as other governmental research entities, to help solve the overall energy problem.

Virginia Hines, InfoWorld.com's VP and general manager, saw the wisdom in The Green Grid's remaining politically neutral: "It's probably smart not to politicize the GG initiative."

"You raise a really important point," Colette replied. "We are not lobbyist, we are not politicos. We are a non-profit industry consortium. So we are being very sensitive to how we work with government bodies on this issue of improving power efficiency."

If you're interested in what other subjects we touched on, check out the transcript of the chat right here.

And if you'd like to see more live chats on sustainable IT down the road, please comment below, or shoot me an e-mail at . Whom would you like to hear from, and what topics are important to you?

For more information about The Green Grid, head over to thegreengrid.org.

Oh, and if anyone has Al Gore's phone number, The Green Grid would like it.

Posted by Ted Samson on March 23, 2007 12:45 PM

March 21, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Chief sustainability officer? I'll second that.

TAGS: Green technology

The Internet Age spawned a new C-level title: CTO, or chief technology officer. The case for hiring a CTO was clear: The business-technology tides were turning quickly and dramatically, and traditional, old-school C-level execs really weren't equipped with the tech savvy to make sure their organizations were keeping pace and staying competitive.

Well, we've entered a new age, the next logical step to follow the Internet Age. Some might call it a Green Age; I prefer referring to it as an Age of Sustainability (hence the name of my blog). We've set up the infrastructure to do "e-business" (which is really, now, just business as usual), but now companies are waking up to realize that they're wasting a lot of money, energy, and valuable real estate keeping, for example, datacenters up and running.

It doesn't stop there, of course. There are numerous ways businesses can cut energy usage and lessen their environmental impact on this little blue planet of ours (Earth) -- from the materials we use to build offices to the energy sources we use to keep the lights on to the vehicles we use in our fleets to distribute goods (hybrid big rigs? Go, Wal-Mart!). We're seeing energy-efficient, renewable innovations cropping up left and right.

And the motivation to think green, er, sustainable, is increasing. Yes, there's money to be saved, and yes, there's eco-considerations, but those, alone, might not be sufficient incentive. Even the government is recognizing the threat of global warming, and companies need to start worrying about environmental-regulation compliance.

So given all these challenges that seem potentially to affect just about every facet of an organization, and all of the potential solutions, I can see the wisdom in a proposal set forth by Rich Walker over at GreenBiz.com. He's suggesting it's time for a new C-level position: CSO, or chief sustainability officer.

Here's a sample of what he says:

"A CSO is an advocate and educator, a visionary, a change manager and a cheerleader, and above all else, a results-driven manager."

"CSOs must serve at least three roles: They must look inward, end-to-end driving business opportunity; they must look outward, walking the talk and communicating with customers and other stakeholders; and they must lead. A CSO must articulate, implement and sustain the organization's vision of sustainability and provide visibility and transparency of that vision both internally and externally."

That sustainable vision, he observes, is critical:

"Lots of innocuous 'feel good' statements exist on corporate web pages, but vision is lacking. And that's okay: We're new at this. But in 5 years we will go from a small handful with a vision to many hundreds with a vision. The organizations that have articulated visions and driven them into their organizations will have the influence to drive innovation that truly will transform their respective industries."

That's an important observation indeed. Many companies are already scrambling to lead the pack in terms of developing sustainable technologies and business practices, as well as influencing the government's environmental policies. Thus, it makes sense to select a point person at your company to lead that charge, lest your company be left scrambling to catch up down the road.

Posted by Ted Samson on March 21, 2007 01:30 PM

March 20, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Live chat about green-tech trends this Thursday

TAGS: Green technology

Update: Here's a recap of the live chat, and here's the transcript in its entirety.

Not long ago, The Green Grid -- a consortium of IT-industry biggies united toward tackling issues of developing energy-efficient practices, standard, and technologies -- officially announced itself.

The roster of founding companies is pretty impressive, too, including AMD, APC, Dell, HP, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Rackable Systems, SprayCool, Sun, and VMware. And the group is determined to work together, taking a holistic view of the entire data-center ecosystem in an effort to address an impending power crisis.

With all that the group's doing, not too mention all the other action taking place in the blooming field of green technology, I've invited a couple of members of The Green Grid to join me in a live chat this coming Thursday, March 22 at 11:00 a.m. Pacific -- and guess what? You're invited!

To participate, you'll simply need to log in to IT Exec-Connect (which is free) and join the chat. I'll start with some questions for our guests (whom I'll tell you about in a moment), then I'll open the floor to participants. So come ready with your own pressing questions about clean, green technology. (If you'd rather, feel free to leave questions in the comment section below.)

Now then, our guests for the chat will be two boardmembers of The Green Grid: Roger Tipley, from HP, and Colette LaForce, from Rackable Systems.

Tipley, an engineering strategist in HP's Enterprise Storage and Servers business unit, is one of the co-authors of the paper "Server Energy Measurement Protocol," which proposes measurement methodologies for creating performance-per-watt metrics. He's also involved with the EPA's efforts to define metrics that can be used to reward energy efficiency in enterprise server products.

LaForce oversees marketing communications, field marketing and product marketing at Rackable Systems, where she's worked since 2003. Prior to that, she her own marketing consultancy for several years, launching products, brands and strategic communications for a range of enterprise software, hardware, and e-commerce clients.

Posted by Ted Samson on March 20, 2007 04:37 PM

March 19, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Update: HP's new Energy Star PCs come with XP, not Vista

TAGS: Green standards, Green technology, Hardware, PCs, Platforms, Power consumption, Windows

Updated March 19 to clarify some of the Energy Star info.

If you go to the business desktop PCs section of HP's Web site, you'll see this phrase prominently displayed at the top: "HP recommends Windows Vista Business."

The company might need to put a temporary parenthetical caveat beside the glowing recommendation: "unless you want a more energy-efficient system."

That's the conclusion I've reached, anyway, after reading about HP's new set of Energy Star 4.0-compliant business desktop computers. The systems -- the Compaq dc5700, dc5750 and dc7700 -- will come loaded with Windows XP Pro, not Vista.

Why not Vista? When I first spoke to a couple of HP reps yesterday, I didn't come away with a clear answer; just a feeling that I'd touched on a hot-button issue. Or perhaps a hot CPU issue?

But in a follow-up e-mail, Todd Kruse, the global desktop product manager at HP, said this:

"We will introduce Windows Vista configurations that are Energy Star 4.0-ready in the near future. Because we were able to begin testing all the components including the 80% efficient power supply with Windows XP earlier, we are much farther ahead in confirming compliance with XP combinations."

"Also, there will be demand for Energy Star on both operating systems as some customers may want to wait for the first Microsoft service pack before they deploy Vista."

When I did speak with Kruse on Thursday, he explained that there are plenty of hardware considerations when developing a PC that meets the more stringent Energy Star 4.0 guidelines, which take effect in July. These guidelines "apply mainly to a PC's efficiency in idle mode, not how well it runs under a maximum workload."

HP told me that the EPA doesn't expect more than 25 percent of PCs to meet that standard, whereas currently 98 percent of the systems on the market meet the current one. It's all about raising that energy-efficiency bar.

There are actually three categories of Energy Star 4.0 PCs. These HP systems are "category B" systems, meaning they "must have multi-core processor(s) or greater than one discrete processor; and a minimum of 1GB of system memory" to meet the new ES 4.0 requirements, plus they can't use more than 65 watts while in idle mode (meaning when the PC is up and running, waiting for input from the user).

According to Kruse, it took some effort to come up with configurations that would meet that standard. "In some configurations, you may not be able to add graphics cards and a network card. You really need to measure [the energy consumption] of every configuration and determine if it's Energy Star compliant."

HP provided some very basic specs of what comes with its new Energy Star 4.0 configurations (again, which come with Windows XP Pro): The highest-end model includes a Core2 Duo E6300 CPU (which has a clock speed of 1.8GHz), an 80GB hard drive, and 1GB of RAM).

Now consider Vista's recommended system requirements for Windows Vista Business: a 1 GHz CPU, 1GB of system memory, and a 40GB hard drive with at least 15GB of available space. (Windows XP Pro, on the other hand, requires at just a 233MHz CPU, plus 128MB of system memory and 1.5GB of hard drive space.)

So based on the aforementioned Vista systems requirements and the basic specs of HP's systems, there shouldn't be a problem, right? Perhaps the problem lies in Vista Business's graphics card requirements, necessary to keep the oh-so pretty Aero GUI so cool and refreshing (pun intended, though perhaps not noticed).

HP's higher-end, Energy Star 4.0-ready dc7700, for example, comes equipped with an Integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 3000, which is a stripped-down version of the GMA 950 (which was created with running Vista in mind.) On the 3000, hardware video acceleration such as IDCT MPEG-2, ProcAmp (video stream independent color correction), and VC-1 decoding are missing.

I'm certainly not trying to knock HP here. I think it's notable that the company is ahead of the game in terms of cranking out systems that meet the new ES 4.0 regs and cut per-PC power consumption by as much as 52 percent. I also like that HP is making 80 percent-efficiency power supplies available (for $20 more) as an option on nearly all of its dc5 and dc7 configurations, whether they meet the other Energy Star criteria or not.

But I do think that companies like HP have their work cut out for them in terms of delivering the higher-efficiency ES 4.0 PCs that can take full advantage of Vista. And it seems the burden is on the shoulders of the hardware makers to carry the processing-hungry load of the new Windows system. Perhaps it's time we see greater coding efficiency, not only out of Microsoft but other app vendors so as to reduce the strain on CPUs.

And I also wonder if the push for more energy-efficient systems will result in a rise in Linux adoption. But that's a topic for another day.

Posted by Ted Samson on March 19, 2007 03:06 PM

March 14, 2007 | Comments: (0)

CEOs urge feds for green-tech funding, support

TAGS: Government, Green business, Green standards, Green technology

Citing the all-important economic case for advancing green technology, TechNet today issued a challenge to Congress and the president to, among other things, invest more seed money in sustainable-energy initiatives and offer greater tax incentives to go green.

TechNet, a political network of CEOs, released its Green Tech Policy Agenda for America, spelling out the familiar and certainly important environmental and national-security-oriented cases for fostering green-tech growth, but also outlining the increasingly recognized business case for weaning the U.S. from its foreign-oil addiction and advancing more energy-efficient technologies such as solar, wind, biofuels, and fuel cell design.

"Clean-energy innovations are positioned to be the next great disruptive technologies with the potential to revolutionize the energy industry, spurring economic growth and creating new industries and jobs," the report says.

Emphasizing the sentiments of the report, John Chambers, chairman and CEO of Cisco and TechNet co-founder, had this to say: "America has a unique opportunity to play a vital role in the world's transition to cleaner energy sources as companies continue to embrace solutions that drive efficiency and environmental improvement -- and make economic sense."

Like Chambers, many business leaders are becoming increasing aware of the issues driving demand for greener, more energy-efficient technology, as evidenced by the growing number of "green" initiatives by companies like HP and Dell, as well as the unification of major IT players like Intel, AMD, Sun, IBM, and Microsoft in forming The Green Grid. "Corporations recognize that clean energy solutions are not only the right thing to do but make sound business sense," the report reads.

Venture capitalists also have jumped on board the green wagon: The TechNet report notes that North American VC funding alone toward green initiatives totaled $2.9 billion in 2006, up from $1.6 billion in 2005.

The federal government, however, has been slower in funding alternative energy initatives. "Overall federal funding for basic energy and applied energy research and development fell 60% in real dollars from 1978 to 2004," the report says.

Compare that to federal funding for life sciences R&D, which has grown by 6.2% annually from 1984 to 2005, engineering R&D which has grown by 2.1%, and physical sciences R&D, up 0.4% per year.

To that end, TechNet is challenging the government to double annual funding for energy research, which is currently less than $2 billion.

Additionally, TechNet is urging the government to be an early adopter of green technology. "As the single largest energy consumer, the federal government's power and influence over the energy sector cannot be overestimated. By harnessing its spending power as an early adopter of promising energy technologies, the federal government can have an immediate impact in bringing companies to wide-scale commercial viability," the reports.

(Interestingly, the report says the government uses a whopping quadrillion BTUs of energy and spends nearly $15 billion annually on energy products and services.)

The report alludes to the reality that energy is the lifeblood of the modern business world and the threat of a power-shortage crisis is looming: "Demand for electricity in the United States alone is predicted to increase by approximately 50 percent in the next 25 years, while rapidly growing population centers in countries such as China and India, home to two-fifths of the world's population, will put substantial additional pressures on conventional world energy sources."

Other items on the TechNet GreenTech Policy Agenda include:

• Designating a lead federal agency to elevate and oversee the energy research and demonstration mission
  
• Funding structured university partnerships and research to generate a pipeline of innovation and talent
  
• Funding public and private partnerships to support energy-efficiency initiatives and education
  
• Increasing the level of incentives to spur new energy technologies
  
• Increasing consumer incentives to change patterns of demand
  
• Encourage technology neutrality enabling the marketplace to pick winners
  
• Promoting standards based on energy demand to provide efficiency incentives
  
• Designing recommendations for a national program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through a market-based system
  
• Developing industry best practices that promote and expand corporate commitments and contributions to clean energy

  The report is available in its entirety here [PDF].
  
  

  Posted by Ted Samson on March 14, 2007 01:50 PM

  
  

  March 09, 2007 | Comments: (0)

  New Daylight Saving may just be "a one-year deal"

  TAGS: Government
  

  
  It's a scenario that would be perfect for InfoWorld's "Off the Record" column (or a "Dilbert" comic): An executive committee dictates a seemingly minor change to the company - but it requires the IT staff to invest hours in tweaking and patching and prepping systems. Shortly thereafter, the higher-ups decide the change isn't worthwhile -- something they might have predicted with a little research -- and all of IT's work ends up being for naught.

  In this case, the executive committee would be the U.S. Congress, and the seemingly minor change is the forthcoming extension to Daylight Saving Time (DST), for which IT folks across the country have been scrambling to prepare. (If you're behind, here are some tips on where to start.)

  An alert reader (to borrow from Dave Barry's vernacular) cited an article on LiveScience.com in which a Department of Energy spokesman is quoting saying that the extended DST "might be a one-year deal" if the energy savings don't prove significant (whatever that means).

  As I noted previously, there's already been one study suggesting that, indeed, energy savings from the longer DST will be, at best, negligible, and at worst, detrimental.

  Of course, at this point, all we can do is hope that all the system-prepping IT's been doing proves successful, and that somehow, the longer Daylight Saving does put a dent in the country's energy consumption.
  
  

  Posted by Ted Samson on March 9, 2007 09:00 AM

  
  

  March 05, 2007 | Comments: (0)

  ColdWatt powers energy-efficient servers

  TAGS: Power supplies
  

  Techies tend to get a little giddy about a blazing, state-of-the art CPU or a sleek, powerful new server -- sort of how an auto enthusiast gets excited about a souped-up V8 engine or a sexy, sleek Italian roadster.

  But for a power supply (or a fuel injector) to elicit that level of excitement, it has to be especially interesting. (They even look boring. Maybe a racing stripe would help.) And these days, anything that can significantly cut the costs of keeping your server room cool and humming is quite interesting indeed.

  A company called ColdWatt, based in Austin, Texas (the pea floating in Guinness), has developed a digital power conversion technology for power supplies, its first offerings being the 650W Power Sub-System and the AC-DC 1U 1200W Power Supply.(Those names might also benefit from racing stripes.)

  These babies can generate 45 percent less heat than traditional power supplies, according to the three-year-old company. The result: 30 percent less overall server-power consumption.

  That's significant. A server that typically needs 200 watts of electricity actually eats up 511 watts: 96 fizzle through power conversion and 193 go toward cooling the machine, according to ColdWatt. Using its power supply, the company says you'd need just 25 watts for power conversion and 106 watts for A/C.

  The potential cost savings: $50,000 a year for a data center running 400 servers.

  ColdWatt's secret sauce, by the way, is its proprietary magnetics technology that increases energy storage and digital control to boost efficiency.

  The power-saving possibilities have piqued the interests of potential customers like AMD. "Power delivery is obviously a critical factor in the data center and AMD is excited about the ColdWatt solution and the positive impact we expect it will have at the system level in combination with the ... Opteron processor with Direct Connect Architecture," said Randy Allen, corporate vice president of the server and workstation division at AMD.

  AMD-rival Intel has also exhibited enthusiasm, having demonstrated their servers that use ColdWatt power supplies at the Intel Developer Forum in last September.

  Open Source Systems has already started packing its hardware with ColdWatt power supplies. "Their solutions were easy to integrate into our systems and enable us to deliver significant operational expenditure savings to our demanding data center customers," said Jared Giles, vice president of product management at OSS.

  The first-gen 650W -- which started shipping last summer -- features 1+1 redundancy with active load-share and hot-swap, as well as communication interfaces including PMBus and PSMII.

  The 1200W includes N+1 redundancy with hot plug-in; built-in fault protection; and support for PSMII and PMBus.

  For more information about ColdWatt, go here.
  
  

  Posted by Ted Samson on March 5, 2007 12:21 PM

  
  

  March 01, 2007 | Comments: (0)

  Austin tops U.S. green-tech incubators

  TAGS: Green business
  

  Green technology. Clean technology. Soy bean technology. Call it what you like, but make no mistake: Venture capitalists and entreprenuers are sowing the seeds for what will be a booming alternative-energy market.

  If you're curious as to just where the green action is, you should check out the list of the country's top five incubator clusters for clean tech, recently compiled by SustainLane, a provider of online sustainability resources for government, business, and consumers.

  Topping the list was none other than Austin, Texas. (Some Texans apparently refer to Austin as a blueberry floating in tomato soup, a reference to the city's traditionally liberal politics within the conservative state. Perhaps they'll start calling it the pea floating in Guinness -- the only oil-colored drink I can think of just now.)

  Why Austin? According to SustainLane, much of it has to do with the city's Clean Energy Incubator (CEI), which was formed back in 1999 by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the Austin Technology Incubator (ATI) in an effort to increase the speed of bringing clean-energy technology to market. Working with utility Austin Energy, the CEI is developing efforts like Internet-controlled irrigation and wind and geothermal energy technologies.

  Not surprisingly, three regions in California -- reputed home to technology titans and tree-huggers alike -- were next on the list. San Jose was second, Berkeley was third, and Pasadena, fourth.

  San Jose earned its distinction for its "long-time leadership in engineering know-how, combined with semi-conductor, nanotechnology and optics R&D, [which give] it a leg up in renewable energy development, particularly in solar energy applications."

  Groovy, funky Berkeley achieved third place in part because it announced a $500 million center for biofuels and energy research last January. Most of its funding is coming from British Petroleum (BP).

  Caltech -- which spawns clean-tech startups -- and non-profit Entretec -- which helps to manage their resources and hook the companies up with investors -- deserve some credit for Pasadena's No. 4 placement.

  Last on the SustainLane list was the Greater Boston area. According to SustainLane, the region, with its ample supply of eager angel investors, is luring many a clean-tech startup, as well as drawing from Cambridge and MIT.

  For more information about SustainLane's top U.S. cities for clean-tech incubation clusters, go here.
  
  

  Posted by Ted Samson on March 1, 2007 09:18 AM