Sustainable IT | Ted Samson » The definition of green

January 03, 2008 | Comments: (0)

The definition of green

TAGS: Green technology

One of my blog readers, the author of the "Green" Supply Chain Analyst Weblog, posed an interesting question in one of my previous posts. Essentially he asked, What defines a green product or service?

Not only is it an interesting question, it's an important one. Vendors and their marketing departments are, of course, keenly aware that organizations have green in their sights and are thus cranking out products and unveiling services touted as being eco-friendly. But how do you know whether an offering is a victim of a vendor's green-washing scheme or if it really is "green"? And that goes back the original question: What defines a green product or service?

Well, I find it difficult to devise a simple and succinct definition on which everyone can agree. On the most extreme end of the spectrum, one might argue that any product or service you can buy off the shelf, via the Internet, or over the phone isn't technically green. The process of transforming a natural resource into something else requires the use of additional materials and energy and, even in a minute way, detracts from the environment. In that realm of thought, a soybean growing in the wild would be green whereas tofu wouldn't.

Now, if businesses were to exercise that level of discrimination in their ambition to invest only in green products, they wouldn't accomplish much. Hence, that definition is pretty useless in the context of commerce or generally going about one's day-to-day life, unless one happens to live in the forest naked, scrounging bark and berries fallen off of trees and bushes.

But here's what I consider a more practical definition that companies might employ to gauge a product or service's "greenness": A green product or service is one that delivers comparable or superior performance, utility, or other benefits to an alternative one while utilizing fewer resources, containing fewer toxic materials, and/or boasting a longer lifecycle.

So, for example: Suppose the fictitious company SustainoTech (not a registered trademark as far as I can tell, so snag it quick) were to roll out a blade server that used 25 percent less energy and produced 30 percent less heat than the average comparable blade server on the market. Moreover, it would be ROHS-compliant and designed such that individual components could easily be swapped in and out -- plus, the system as a whole could be efficiently dismantled for refurbishing or recycling. That, in my book, would be a mighty green server. (I expect to see at least one major vendor roll out a server that meet most of those criteria -- if not all -- within the next year, a prediction you may add to my list.)

No, SustainoTech's server wouldn't be made of a renewable resource such as bamboo. Yes, it would still use electricity and create heat. It would still require the usage and alteration of natural as well as hazardous resources. It would contribute to your company's carbon footprint. But it would deliver comparable performance to the competition with a lower drain on the environment. Hence, it's green. Or at least greener. The bar will inevitably rise as companies come up with new technologies.

There are other examples of products out there that I'd readily categorize as being green, such as telepresence. I haven't drilled down into the relative energy requirements of the various telepresence solutions on the market today, but I'd file the category under "G" for "green." My reasoning is, employing telepresence as an alternative to using planes, trains, and automobiles means less fuel consumption. Further, telepresence, unlike videoconferencing, delivers a meeting experience that is comparable to an in-person meeting. (Admittedly, that's based on plenty of secondhand accounts; I've not yet experienced telepresence.)

What about systems management software that lets admins ensure that a server is using just as much electricity as it needs to in order to run effectively? So long as it performs as well as other management software, yeah, that's green. Virtualization, which lets you wring the same amount of work out of fewer machines? Again, green. Electronic document management outgreens paper-based systems. Solar power beats coal power. And the list goes on.

A couple of final thoughts on this subject: First, if a vendor comes to your door hawking what it deems a green product, be sure to ask just what makes it so green.

Second, bear in mind that a product deemed green today will be considered wasteful and eco-unfriendly tomorrow. Technological advancement coupled with relativity is funny that way.

Finally -- and this is a point I'll keep making until my fingers ooze (the blogging equivalent to the expression "talking until I'm blue in the face"): Green products alone simply can't make your company green. A blueprint for long-term sustainability is a must, and the products you employ are but a piece of the puzzle. Deploying virtualization in your datacenter may very well help you make better use of your resources in the short- or midterm. It may also reduce your company's carbon footprint. But you most certainly need to plan beyond that for the sake of your organization's future prosperity -- as well as for the sake of the environment, if that is, indeed, a concern for your company.

How would you define a green product or service?

Ted Samson is a senior analyst at InfoWorld and author of the Sustainable IT blog. Subscribe to his free weekly Green Tech newsletter.

Posted by Ted Samson on January 3, 2008 03:00 AM

RATE THIS ARTICLE: