Capitalizing on the advance in power of microprocessors and data storage capacity, firms like Amazon and Google are beginning to build massive and highly efficient information processing infrastructures that use the broadband Internet to reach customers. In 2008, Google was said to be operating a global network of about three dozen datacenters around the world loaded with more than 2 millions servers, although this information may be incomplete as Google is very secretive about the location of its datacenters. According to Google’s earnings reports, the company has spent $US1.9 billion on datacenters in 2006, and $US2.4 billion in 2007. Google unveiled four new datacenter projects in 2007. Each has a cost estimate of $US600 million, which will include everything from construction to equipment and computers.47 Both Microsoft and Google have extremely efficient large-scale datacenters; both companies are aiming for an industry-leading PUE of 1.12 in their computing centers (Wheeland 2009). Expanding the use of these services means more incentive to concentrate ICT operations on top-of-the-line facilities, and will continue the shift.
To exemplify the above, an article published in June 2006 by The New York Times (Markoff & Hansell 2006), unveiled Google's project to build the largest and most sophisticated datacenter on the planet near a small town on the banks of the Columbia River, named The Dalles, in North Oregon. Today, the site features three 68,680 square foot windowless warehouses designed to host hundreds of thousands of computers all working together as a single machine to deliver content over the Internet. A kind of information-processing “dynamo” of unprecedented power, comparable to a nuclear power plant for generating electricity, as stated in (Carr 2009b). Since then, The Dalles has become a symbol for the datacenter industry’s growing need for massive amounts of electric power. In its March issue, Harper magazine publishes in (Strand 2008) one Section of the official blueprints of the site plan estimating roughly that once all three server buildings will be operational in 2011, the plant can be expected to demand about 103 megawatts of electricity—enough to power 82,000 homes. The Web, the magazine says, "is no ethereal store of ideas, shimmering over our heads like the aurora borealis. It is a new heavy industry, an energy glutton that is only growing hungrier."
Google is not alone. Microsoft is also investing billions of dollars in very large computing grids, such as its datacenter in Northlake, a suburb of Chicago, which covering 500,000 square feet (46,000 square meters) and costing $US500 million, is one of the biggest, most expansive and sophisticated datacenter on the planet. The entire first floor is designed to be crammed with 200 40- foot (13 meter) each containers, loaded with up to 2,500 servers. To support Northlake's datacenter electricity needs, Microsoft has created three electricity substations that can distribute up to 200 megawatts, that is, as much as a small aluminium melter. Other Internet giants like Yahoo! are also busy building large server farms. In 2008, half a dozen were being built in Quincy in the middle of the Washington state close to the Columbia River. Other massive datacenters are being built in the UK too. For example, Rackspace has built a large datacenter on Slough Estates that will run on renewable energy and will use low-power equipment such as AMD's Opteron processor and HP's c- Class blade servers. The company has partnered with organizations such as NativeEnergy and the International Tree Foundation in the UK to enable carbon-neutral operations through offset programs.
Neither Amazon, Google nor other major providers would officially comment on their datacenters' efficiency levels. However, they argue that thanks to their large customer base, they can make large investments in efficiency innovations, which smaller firms cannot achieve on their own, leading to a continuous maximization of their infrastructure that ultimately benefits both parties. It is commonly reported that a typical PUE for a cloud-based infrastructure is around 1.2 and below, whereas the average datacenter PUE is 2.5 (Wheeland 2009). Furthermore, we see through initiatives like the EC2 Spot Instances program that maximizing the utilization rate of the datacenter is of primary concern since the worst thing for a cloud provider has to maintain an inventory of unused capacity.
Furthermore, cloud computing practices promote worker mobility, reducing the need for office space, buying new furniture, disposing of old furniture, having the office cleaned with chemicals and trash disposed of, and so on. They also reduce the need for driving to work and the resulting carbon dioxide emissions.
But while the environmental energy efficiency benefits of cloud computing are generally not contested, all the discussions about cloud computing being an effective strategy toward green IT actually miss the point, according to an inflammatory report released by Greenpeace in March 2010. This report, "Make IT Green: Cloud Computing and its Contribution to Climate Change," updates and extends some of the research published in 2008 in the Smart 202048 report on how IT contributes to climate change, and finds that the Year of the Cloud is only going to make things worse (Wheeland 2010) and (Greenpeace 2010).
The concern Greenpeace expresses in this report is that despite an increasing focus on PUE, and despite efforts to constantly make computing facilities more efficient, cloud computing is never going to make enough of a dent in greenhouse gas emissions without the involvement of constraining national and supranational regulations. This is because, despite the fact that some providers are reaching extremely low PUEs and are also looking to build their datacenters in places so as to maximize energy efficiency and harness renewable or clean energy, “it is still a tiny slice of the pie of both new and existing datacenters, and the ones that are not using renewable energy or free cooling are the biggest part of the problem”.
Greenpeace alleges in this report that while cloud computing companies are pursuing design and enforcing strategies to reduce the energy consumption of their datacenters, their primary motivation is cost containment, and that the environmental benefits of green datacenter design are generally of secondary importance. Increasing the energy efficiency of its servers and reducing the energy footprint of the infrastructure of datacenters are a must do, but efficiency by itself is not green if you are simply working to maximize output from the cheapest and dirtiest energy source available says Greenpeace in (2010). In this respect, Greenpeace lays out how dirty some of the most renowned cloud provider's biggest datacenters are:
Google's Dalles facility does the best job, with 50.9 percent renewable energy from hydroelectric power. Microsoft's Chicago facility does the worse job, with 1.1% of renewable energy and 72.8% from coal-burning electricity.
But Greenpeace's concerns about cloud computing's negative environmental impact does not stop here. They argue that with “The arrival of the iPad and growth in netbooks and other tablet computers, the launch of Microsoft’s Azure cloud services for business, and the launch of the Google phone and the proliferation of mobile cloud applications are compelling signs of a movement towards cloud-based computing within the business sector and public consciousness in a way never seen before.”
So another burning question Greenpeace is posing about cloud computing is just how big the cloud really is when it comes to electricity consumption and GHG emissions and how big will it become given its rapid growth, and given that many major cloud brands refuse to disclose their energy footprint.
The Smart 2020 analysis has already forecasted that the global carbon footprint of the main components of the cloud (datacenters and the telecommunications network) would see their emissions grow, on average, 7% and 5% respectively each year between 2002 and 2020, with the number of datacenter servers growing on average 9% each year during this period. The new report brings adjustments to the Smart 2020 report forecast on the electricity demand of the global cloud, highlighting the impact of the projected IT demand and importance of where and what sources of electricity are being used to power Google, Amazon and other cloud-based computing platforms. Table 5 is projection of growth in ICT electricity consumption and GHG emissions by 2020, using a 9% annual growth rate estimated in the Smart 2020 report for datacenters and recent estimate by Gartner for growth in telecommunications of 9.5% a year.
Using the Environmental Protection Agency's Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator51, I found that 1034 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCO2Eq) represent the CO2 emissions from the electricity use of 125 million homes for one year!
Therefore, according to Greenpeace, cloud providers should build new datacenters in areas that provide cleaner energy mixes for their grid, and push regulatory bodies, in the regions where their existing datacenters are housed, to add more renewable energies to the grid.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please Share Your Views