Category Archives: Energy

BioPlastics – Another Easy Way to Conserve Petroleum Supply

There are two easy ways to conserve petroleum supply by over 10% annually in the US (and higher still in countries where petroleum is used as a major energy source for electricity production). The first is to stop burning oil for electricity. There is just no need to be using petroleum (products) for electricity production given the plethora of alternate options available, including natural gas, (clean) coal, nuclear, wind, hydro, and waste. If we didn’t burn oil for electricity production, oil refinement, process heat, and heat for industrial buildings, a good 13% of annual usage could be conserved.

The second way is a full-out switch to bioplastics. Right now, plastics consume at least 1 of every 10 barrels of oil in the US every day. That’s a lot. And considering that we can now produce a 100% plant-based PET product made from fully renewable sources that has a molecular structure identical to petroleum-based PET products, there is no reason not to switch to bioplastics. The only reason they are currently more expensive than petroleum based plastics is economy of scale. If everyone started investing in them, the costs would come down as the resulting investment would fuel R&D which would, in turn, create better materials that can be synthesized quicker, easier, and more cost effectively.

But it’s not going to happen until, as the author of this recent article in Environmental Leader on turning plants into plastics hints at, one of two things happen:

  • Supply Chain Sustainability Catches On in a Big Way
    And the leaders decide to move to bioplastics en-masse before oil-based plastics become prohibitively expensive. Or
  • Government Mandates the Move to BioPlastics
    The tax credits suggested by the author won’t be enough. The government has to mandate it, because, unless the tax credits make bioplastics significantly cheaper, the average organization will hold off on the switch.

Personally, I’d like to see the government ban non-bioplastics for all common uses in industry and retail. Just like I’d like to see them ban the use of oil for electricity production. Reserving oil for transportation (where electricity still isn’t an option most of the time), agricultural and construction machinery, and (family) home heating, where it would cost too much to retrofit millions of homes, would decrease petroleum need by about 25%. That’s 1 in 4 barrels saved for future use. This would not only extend the life-span of our oil supply, but keep costs down as well.

You Know Your Country is Falling Behind On Sustainability When …

The dirtiest country, energy wise, on the planet will almost equal you in Wind Energy Production per capita within five years. Sustainability is a big part of China’s new five year plan, and the goal is to increase wind energy production to 90 Gigawatts (GW) of power by 2016 from current production level of 40 GW. (Source: The Next Five Years) Currently, the US, the world leader in wind power production, produces a meare 35 GW of electricity from wind.

But more important is China’s commitment to reduce energy intensity per unit of GDP by 16%, cut carbon intensity per unit of GDP by 17%, and have non fossil fuels increase to 11.4% of primary energy mix by 2015. For a country that currently relies on dirty coal (whch is 70% of the energy mix), this is an aggressive goal. And even more aggressive are its 2020 goals of reducing carbon intensity per unit of GDP by 40% and increasing sustainable energy production to 15%. Considering that China tends to accomplish tasks it puts its minds to, this is an impressive start to a sustainability effort, which it has been in dire need of.

Think Energy Efficiency Investments are Costly? Think Again!

A recent article in Industry Week on Sustaining a Green Strategy, which described Dow Chemical’s pursuits to become more energy efficient and further reduce its energy footprint another 25% by 2015, had a very telling number buried in the article. A very significant number. To some, a very shocking number.

Dow has saved 7 Billion with investments into energy efficiency. SEVEN BILLION!

Think about that while also thinking about how many deals you have to negotiate to get that kind of savings in an average Fortune 500. Considering that, on a large direct spend category, 3% is the average savings an organization will find as it negotiates the same hundred-million dollar category again and again, if the average deal size is 100 Million, that’s 2,334 negotiations to get the same savings. (Well, not exactly, as some deals will save 10%, but since other deals will only save 1% due to skyrocketing prices, it’s not far off.)

It’s true that Dow has made 2 Billion in energy efficiency investments to date, but Dow also avoided 9 Billion in energy expenditures from these investments, giving it a net savings of 7 Billion to date — with more savings accruing every day as energy prices continue to rise. And when you consider the constant demands for power from lighting, heating, cooling, and computing that a modern organization is subjected to, it doesn’t take long for an investment to pay off — and it will keep paying off year after year. So make the investment, even if you have to take out a loan to do so. The savings will pay the interest many, many times over.

If You Want To Know How Green a Data Centre Is, Ask For a Verified PUE

In a recent article, Global Services asked if cloud computing [is] really green. Considering that most of your supply chain apps are moving to the cloud, and that sustainability is a must, it’s a question you should be able to answer. Unfortunately, the article was completely useless and gave you no useful information whatsoever.

All it said was that

  • a recent study from Microsoft noted that, due to increased efficiency and scalability, outsourcing companies can reduce their energy use and carbon footprint by up to 90%,
  • an uninterrupted power supply is required to keep data warehouses running and cool, and
  • energy efficiency is not green on its own, and is no longer enough.

With respect to these statements

  • we all know scale adds efficiency, and that data centres will be much more energy efficient if they use modern high-density low-power blades while you use ancient box servers,
  • classic data centres will create sauna temperatures if not kept cool, and
  • the energy source needs to be renewable.

In order to determine how green a data centre is, you need to know at least the following three metrics:

  • The Performance Per Watt (PPW) of the hardware.
    This tells you how efficient the hardware is. Typically measured in MFLOPS (Mega Floating point Operations Per Second) or LINPACK FLOPS per watt, an efficient modern IBM BladeCenter can get up to 536 MFLOPS/watt. Compare this to a desktop Beowulf cluster that maxes out at 58 MFLOPS with 4 dual core Athlon 64’s.
  • The average load of each operating machine.
    If a machine is only operating at 20% load, on average, you’re only getting 20% of the PPW. But if the average load of each operating machine is 80%, you’re getting at least 80% of the PPW. A modern data centre uses dynamic process allocation and virtualization and machines sleep until the load on the machines that are awake exceeds about 90% in a sustained manner, at which point another machine is woken up and added to the available pool. A traditional data centre does not use virtualization or have machines that support fast wake-up or shut-down or dynamic load balancing software and the machines are always on.
  • The Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE).
    PUE is a measure of how efficiently a data centre uses power and measures how much power is used by the computing equipment in contrast to the overhead required for lighting, cooling, etc. Defined as Total_Facility_Power / IT_Equipment_Power, an ideal data centre has a PUE of 1.0. While not achievable, a PUE of 1.1 is, even though the average data centre still has a PUE of 2.0 to 2.5. Today, a data centre is generally considered green if it has a PUE of < 1.5, but the best data centre in Europe, datadock, has a PUE of only 1.21 and the Thor Datacenter in Iceland has a PUE of only 1.07 and a zero carbon footprint. With carbon emission mandates coming into effect around the globe and significant mandates for power reduction by 2020, if the data centre isn’t closing on a PUE of 1.2, it’s not efficient. And unless at least one its primary energy sources is not renewable, it can not be considered green. (At the very least, the overhead should come from renewable sources.)

So don’t get confused by grandiose claims, scale, and jargon. Ask for these third-party verified metrics. Then you’ll know how green the data centre really is.

If You Don’t Understand Your Energy Risk …

… those hard-earned “savings” could disappear overnight if:

  • oil surpasses $100 a barrel again
    (which many economists and futurists think it will do by the end of the year)
  • carbon taxes are imposed
    (which are unlikely to be postponed much further)
  • energy grids hit capacity
    (and the organization is forced to get its own power plants up and running quickly)

And if that isn’t scary enough, there’s a 69% chance that your organization does not understand it’s energy risk, according to a recent survey by Treasury and Risk (as quoted in a recent Technology Review article on Navigating Your Energy Risk). It’s about time your organization calculates its carbon footprint. Unless the risk is known, the organization will be unable to mitigate it when energy prices rise rapidly or carbon taxes are introduced in one of its locales of operation.