Cloud Computing Energy Consumption
Greenpeace report highlights growing energy needs of cloud computing infrastructure.
March 29, 2010 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Greenpeace projects that energy consumption related to cloud computing could more than triple by 2020. It also predicts that between 2002 and 2020, the global carbon footprint of data centers and telecommunications networks–the main components of cloud-based computing–would increase carbon emissions by an average of 9 percent each year between 2002 and 2020.
In its March 30 report “Make IT Green,” Greenpeace focuses on the environmental impact of cloud computing. The term references the “cloud” of data that users access through the Internet rather than hosting themselves–for instance, Google Documents lets you use a word processor without installing a program on your computer. Thus, cloud computing offers powerful tools without the necessity of in-house data hosting. In light of cloud-specific technologies like the iPad, Greenpeace says 2010 could be the “year of the cloud.”
However, the Greenpeace report says that as cloud-based technologies proliferate, more energy is needed to power them–specifically, the data centers and telecommunication networks behind them. And often, cloud hosting companies turn to cheap, coal-fired electricity to power their data centers.
In that sense, cloud computing companies face issues familiar to any company that is a heavy energy consumer, and Greenpeace urges strategic siting of data centers as well as exploring clean and alternative energy sources.
The report concludes, “Unfortunately, as our collective demand for computing resources increases, even the most efficiently built data [centers] with the highest [utilization] rates serve only to mitigate, rather than eliminate, harmful emissions.”
To read the full Greenpeace report, click here (.pdf).
For previous InsideCounsel coverage of cloud computing, click here.
For more on cloud computing, check out InsideCounsel's May issue to read about trends in legal technology.
Greenpeace projects that energy consumption related to cloud computing could more than triple by 2020. It also predicts that between 2002 and 2020, the global carbon footprint of data centers and telecommunications networks–the main components of cloud-based computing–would increase carbon emissions by an average of 9 percent each year between 2002 and 2020.
In its March 30 report “Make IT Green,” Greenpeace focuses on the environmental impact of cloud computing. The term references the “cloud” of data that users access through the Internet rather than hosting themselves–for instance,
However, the Greenpeace report says that as cloud-based technologies proliferate, more energy is needed to power them–specifically, the data centers and telecommunication networks behind them. And often, cloud hosting companies turn to cheap, coal-fired electricity to power their data centers.
In that sense, cloud computing companies face issues familiar to any company that is a heavy energy consumer, and Greenpeace urges strategic siting of data centers as well as exploring clean and alternative energy sources.
The report concludes, “Unfortunately, as our collective demand for computing resources increases, even the most efficiently built data [centers] with the highest [utilization] rates serve only to mitigate, rather than eliminate, harmful emissions.”
To read the full Greenpeace report, click here (.pdf).
For previous InsideCounsel coverage of cloud computing, click here.
For more on cloud computing, check out InsideCounsel's May issue to read about trends in legal technology.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
- 1US District Judge in North Carolina Will Take Senior Status
- 2From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Rollercoaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
- 3Critical Mass With Law.com’s Amanda Bronstad: Why Jurors in California Failed to Reach Verdict Over Zantac, Bankruptcy Judge Tables Sanctions Against Beasley Allen Attorney
- 4Jones Day Client Seeks Indemnification for $7.2M Privacy Settlement, Plus Defense Costs
- 5Elections Have Consequences: Some Thoughts on Labor and Employment Law Topics in 2025 and Beyond
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250