Everyone is moving to the cloud, leaving giant imprints on networks globally and potentially creating an environmental mess that may be hard to clean up, according to a recent report from Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO)
Internet and most other data traffic is fast migrating to the cloud, and some industry observers are saying mobile IT specialists might soon be doing even enterprise networking and communication management activities on tablets. The Cisco report supports at least the view that cloud data is growing at an exponential pace. "Cloud computing traffic will grow 12-fold from 130 exabytes to reach a total of 1.6 zettabytes annually by 2015, a 66 percent compound annual growth rate," the company said.
Perhaps you are wondering what that translates into. I have to admit to being equally mystified by the numbers. What exactly is an exabyte or zettabyte, and what can we compare these with if we wish to make sense of them? Luckily, Cisco didn't leave us in the dark. The Internet and networking equipment vendor says 1.6 zettabytes of data is equivalent to:
22 trillion hours of streaming music
5 trillion hours of business Web conferencing with a webcam
1.6 trillion hours of online high-definition (HD) video streaming
What are the implications of this fast growth for the high-tech industry? What kind of environmental footprint will this leave, and who should bear the burden of cleaning it up? Who's going to be supplying the equipment to support this enormous traffic and storage? Who will service the equipment and provide software support? Where will these servers be hosted, and what are the security implications for companies, nations, and individuals?
We can't answer all these questions here, so why don't we focus on what I think will quickly become a public relations hazard for the high-tech industry if it doesn't find ways to counter the growing impression that cloud computing traffic will hurt the environment. Don't blame consumers; a large chunk of cloud computing traffic occurs in the cloud itself, rather than externally, according to Cisco. Last year, 77 percent of cloud traffic remained within the datacenter, and the company expects this figure to drop only to 76 percent by 2015.
My conclusion from this is that cloud computing is far more complicated than many admit, and companies will have to spend a lot to figure out how to use the technology responsibly. Other researchers have reached a similar conclusion.
A recent report by Ecodesk, a sustainability data publishing site, says the shift to cloud computing is affecting carbon emission targets in the electronics industry. Companies like Samsung, Intel, Microsoft, Apple, and Fujitsu are reporting higher emissions because of their increased use of cloud computing.
CO2 emission figures are also rising at these companies (particularly at Samsung and Intel) because they chose to include figures from their entire supply chain in their reports. This means they are not limiting themselves to internal operations and are therefore considered "responsible" companies, Ecodesk says. "On the surface they look like big polluters," but in reality they've adopted an approach that should raise overall performance and cut total emissions as supply chain partners comply.
"Tech companies in particular are leading the charge and being very bold by forfeiting their own emission targets to embrace the emissions produced by third parties," said Robert Clarke, the CEO of Ecodesk. "The shift to embrace cloud computing and supply chains has meant that each company that embraces what we feel is the most comprehensive model experience their own emissions shoot up, although the overall impact on the environment is reduced significantly by cloud computing and supply chain imperatives."
Ecodesk's suggestion for managing cloud computing activities is for companies to ensure they deal only with partners whose services are "clean," rather than "dirty." Clean cloud computing services providers "use renewable power sources and highly advanced efficiency in power consumption, from lighting to cooling."
How clean are your company's cloud services? If you don't have a ready answer, that's already a problem.
I agree. Studies have been done to show that virtualization and cloud computing actually help to save resources. Most of the machines suited for the task have energy-efficient components that are meant to last longer and consume less resources over time.
When I hear the phrase 'cloud computing', I just cannot help thinking about the following issues:
- Is my valuable data safe out there so that I don't need to keep a locak backup?
- Will my access be reliable and fast enough 24/7 or there will be unavoidable and annoying interruptions?
- Who else will access my valuable data? How easy is it to get hold of the commercially sensitive documents I will be storing on the could?
- If something goes wrong, who is legally liable and to what extent? Can all my damages be compensated for somehow?
I am sure many people have similar worries to the ones I have listed above. Cloud computing is a great idea in terms of reducing CO2 footprint and improving storage and processing efficiency. However, I believe that such technologies need time to get more mature and to gain public confidence before they can achieve a widespread adoption.
Not sure that I agree to your opinion, Prabhakar. The users of cloud computing would not need to consume as much power from storing and processing data on their own computers. The computer devices can also be smaller and more efficient. This would out-weigh the power consumption of servers.
@pjoygordon, I find your assertion a bit hard to interpret. Computing done on a customers machines on a customers site does not need to have the wasteful updates of hardware every few months, probably consumes less power, and probably is both more reliable and more secure.
One option that I have seen overlooked for cooling any server system is the use of local outdoor ambient air, which in most parts of the world is cool enough to remove an adequate amount of heat from a server installation. In many parts of the world the waste heat from a server would be a welcome assist for building comfort heating, at least much of the year.
My other concern is about this huge quantity of data floating around in the cloud. IT may be adequately secure, but how big of a power failure will it take to lose a million dollars worth of data? I am not speaking about a utilities failure, where the UPS takes over and things are OK, I mean an data center power distribution panel, downstream of the UPS, feeding an array of servers. The soft spot well inside the armor. The glitch sensitive belly that nobody wants to admit even exists. WE all know that the economics of scale mandate the single UPS scenario, but we may not choose to think about the distribution area between that UPS and all of those servers. But that segment is subject to damage and failure, and probably not nearly as well designed as it should be. Also, not as rubust or reliable.
This is an important debate, given the burgeoning Cloud Computing trend. Let's use a Life Cycle Analysis perspective, which includes a wider scope than CO2 emissions from powering and cooling data centers alone. Barb Jorgensen mentioned the reduced amount of hardware; this is key. When customer-premise products are fewer and smaller owing to Cloud Computing, the overall number and weight of hardware decreases -- thus requiring less extraction of raw materials, manufacturing, scrap, packaging, transportation, and end-of-life transportation and treatment (whether waste or recycling--still a significant impact). Data centers have it in their best interest to use as few servers as possible and in the most efficient ways -- 80%+ utilization. Whereas customer-premise hardware may be used a fraction of this--therefore in aggregate requiring a lot more hardware across customers. Check out a webinar on this topic: http://www.instantpresenter.com/WebConference/RecordingDefault.aspx?c_psrid=E950D8888448
Cloud computing means all those data centers and network infrastructure connecting those millions of users to these data centers , has to be on 24x7.
In a localised IT environment such was not the case. The servers could go offline on weekends, PCs & Printers shut down after office hours, Laptops would be on standby and so on.
The shift to cloud apparent;y saves on local IT infrastruture no doubt but the instrastructure the cloud relies on has to be much more robust and always on line. That increase the energy consumption many fold and that is the real problem we have to face as the clouds get bigger and bigger.
Another aspect is of user data - most of it will still remain on the cloud even after it has served its purpose and can safely be deleted but the owner of data will be lazy to do the necessary housekeeping . And that will make the cloud dirty - full of a lot of garbage data.
I am more concerened about secuirty aspect too. What is security of data? Also, for local data when I erase it, it is gone for ever. But once it is on cloud, it will always be available in some backup media.
The new government rules and regulations may prove to be a double-edged sword: achieving some positive goals but costing organizations a great amount of money and work and, perhaps, lost sales as well.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This