📈 44 cm water level rise under the IPCC business as usual scenario.This number shows that climate change is very real for Singaporeans and for their data centers, close to 10% of the whole of APAC! 🎧In episode 36, Gaël Duez discussed with Professor PS Lee, National University of Singapore Dean's Chair of Mechanical Engineering and one of the top experts worldwide on data center cooling, the challenges in making data centers sustainable.🔍Some key points of their exchange are:🌡️why temperature rise has multiple downside 🌡️energy challenges that affects the sustainability of data centers🌡️liquid cooling technology as an important option🌡️why lessons from DC operating in tropical climate apply almost everywhereAnd much more!❤️ Subscribe, follow, like, ... stay connected the way you want to never miss an episode!📧 Once a month, we deliver carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents in your mailbox, subscribe to the Green IO newsletter here. 📣 Green IO next Conference is in Singapore on April 18th (use the voucher GREENIOVIP to get a free ticket) Learn more about our guest and connect: PS's LinkedInGaël's website Green IO website 📧 You can also send us an email at greenio@duez.com to share your feedback and suggest future guests or topics.   Poh Seng's sources and other references mentioned in this episode:Coastal Risk Screening Tool A Heat Dome Hits Virginia: One Data Center's StorySingapore Climate 2023: The Year in NumbersWorld Without End by Christophe Blain and Jean-Marc JancoviciFuture of the human climate nicheTan Tin WeeSUSTAINABLE TROPICAL DATA CENTRE TESTBEDEED TranscriptGaël Duez 00:21Hello everyone. Welcome to Green IO with Gaël Duez. That's me. Green IO is a podcast for responsible technologists building a greener digital world one byte at a time, twice a month on a Tuesday. All guests from across the globe share insights, tools and alternative approaches enabling people within the tech sector and beyond to boost digital sustainability. Because accessible and transparent information is in the DNA of Green IO, all the references mentioned in this episode, as well as the transcript will be in the show notes both on your podcast platform and on our website greenio.tech when it comes to sustainability, I have a sweet spot for Singapore because of its uniqueness. This is one of the top cities in the entire world which has benefited the most from the global extractivist, highly carbonized and financialized economy, and also one of its most at risk of climate change. Hence a blossoming of initiatives there on how to both pivot towards more sustainability and mitigate climate change impacts. And these efforts apply especially to the backbone of its infrastructure data centers. As we are growing aware that the human body has some physiological limits that can be reached during heat waves where the wrong mix of high temperature and humidity is reached. It's death for people staying outside too long and this concerns everyone, not only the populations usually at risk like infants or elderly people. It was really well illustrated by Jancovici Jean-Marc and Blain Christophe in their international bestseller comics World Without End and based on a 2020 mega study published in Environmental Sciences, a third of humankind is now at risk to live in places where temperature could be lethal several weeks per year. Well, everything that I just said about humans applies to data center equipment which also needs to be cooled down 24/7 for many obvious reasons. Starting with latency and sovereignty, we cannot move all data centers in the world where the air will remain cool like the Nordics. Hence a serious challenge for the tech industry, how to run a sustainable data center and more specifically how to build sustainable data center hubs where tropical climate creates hurdles which are getting bigger due to climate change. To discuss this, I'm honored to have Professor P. S. Lee on the show. Based in Singapore, PS is National University of Singapore Dean's Chair of Mechanical Engineering and one of the most cited scientists in mechanical engineering and transport energy rings worldwide. He has specialized in data center engineering for two decades and he is also a field practitioner. The founder of Coolers DC, what a cool name, which advises top DC operators like Equinix or Meta. He will also be our keynote speaker at the Green IO Singapore Conference in two weeks, April 18 to be precise. One reason among many reasons to join the first conference in Asia focusing 100% on green it and Green IO. Listeners can get free tickets using the Voucher GREENIOVIP and how exciting it is to kickstart my discussion with Professor Lee. Welcome, Poh Seng. Thanks a lot for joining Green IO today.PS Lee 03:54Hi guys, thanks for having me. So it's my pleasure to be on your podcast.Gaël Duez 03:59So PS, I played again with the excellent Climate Central's coastal risk screening tool, which enables people to simulate the impact of a sea level rise, among other impacts. And the results were already concerning for a 44 cm water level rise, which is the current IPCC best estimator for the business as usual scenario with most of the iconic gardens by the bay in Singapore under the water. And if we simulate a 2 meters rise, a likely scenario. If some tipping points with ice in Greenland or Antarctica are reached, well, the entire Singapore's harbor is at risk. My point is, climate change is very real for Singaporeans. Could you maybe explain to us why and what is more precisely at stake here?PS Lee 04:53Sure. I would like to refer to the recently published 2023 Singapore Climate Reports, which marks an alarming continuation of global warming trends, with Singapore experiencing its fourth warmest year since unprecedented temperatures, especially during the months of May and October. This underlined the urgency of addressing climate change. The report's projection of up to 326 high heat stress days by 2099 in high emission scenarios starkly highlights the impending challenges, especially for industries like the IT sector.Gaël Duez 05:33Correct me if I'm wrong, but Singapore is a very massive IT hub in Southeast Asia, is that correct?PS Lee 05:42Yes. As of two to three years ago, in Singapore, the total data center capacity is actually close to 1, that is close to the 10% of the whole of APAC. So for city states to be hosting that kind of capacity is actually quite amazing, but it's actually important to manage the power and the associated carbon footprint. So it is. Right now, the data center industry is already consuming 7% of Singapore total electricity consumption. And if we don't manage this in a couple of years, this can actually go up to 12%. So that's why the Singapore government has actually imposed a data center moratorium about two and a half to three years ago, which they finally left the year before. Thereafter, there was a data center call for application, which the industry expected to meet very stringent criteria, including PUE, no more than 1.3, as well as the adoption of innovative and sustainable data center solutions.Gaël Duez 06:59You mean that for two years and a half it was not permitted to build new data center facilities in Singapore.PS Lee 07:07That's right.Gaël Duez 07:08And just to make sure I understood well it's already 7% of electricity consumption and it could triple with the current trend.PS Lee 07:17Yes and especially with the interest in AI in other high power workloads. So if we don't manage this in a sustainable fashion, this percentage is certainly going to increase very sharply over the next couple of years.Gaël Duez 07:35So clearly the Singaporean government doesn't want to go the Irish way with the Irish scenario. Where I recall today the electricity consumed by the data center industry is already above 20% if not 25%. I don't recall the number exactly but it was really mind blowing. And so you were mentioning this very strict criteria to build a data center in Singapore, obviously low carbon electricity and also innovative solutions. Maybe it would be interesting to unpack the challenges that data center operators in Singapore and more largely in tropical climates are facing.PS Lee 08:19Yeah sure. I think the first and foremost operating data centers here in the tropics with a high ambient temperature and humidity is actually going to be a very energy sapping exercise because of the constant cooling needs in order to maintain the IT equipment within acceptable temperature range in order to ensure proper and reliable operations. But associated with the heat stress that we're experiencing during the recent few years due to climate change, this has actually imposed a more challenging condition for data center operators to ensure the resilience as well as efficient operation of data center here in the tropics and specifically here in Singapore. So that's definitely going to be they are constantly looking for more energy efficient cooling solution and this goes beyond operational efficiency, rethinking energy sourcing as well and potentially integrating renewable energy sources to mitigate the carbon footprint. And for city state like Singapore in terms of domestic generation of renewable energy is going to be limited as well. I think the only viable renewable energy source here is actually solar and based on a report published by the Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore series which is hosted here at NUS. So even if we were to sort of use all our rooftop space for the solar panels, so the percentage of the electric supply that comes from solar is actually still going to be very limited, well less than 10%. So that's why I think Singapore is actually adopting innovative approaches whereby we're actually cutting agreements with our Asian neighbors to look into the imports of green electrons, low carbon electricity. Then I think related to the temperature challenge or the temperature or what we call a thermal management challenge associated with operating data center here, there's also this wear and tear on it equipment because the increased heat stress days will directly translate to accelerated depreciation of critical data center equipment. And this necessitates more effective maintenance and proactive design consideration that can withstand the rigor of a harsher climate, and again, related to a climate. So when it comes to heat rejection, typically we need to operate the cooling towers that actually consume water, then that brings about the water sustainability issues. So given the intensity or the intensification of the extreme weather events. So water cooling, the technologies, while efficient, may actually impose a sustainability challenge. Hence, we are always actually looking at better ways of reusing water recycling along with explorations of air and more efficient liquid cooling alternatives. And these are now becoming imperative. But we are also grabbing with, for example, the challenge of a skilled workforce, especially if you look across the region, Southeast Asia. So the data centers industry is actually booming. So how do we actually adapt and mitigate the impacts of climate change? Data center also means nurturing a workforce which is proficient in engineering and understanding sustainability practices and technology. So there are definitely quite a few challenges that we are confronting today in order to ensure the sustainable growth of the IT industry.Gaël Duez 12:42If I follow you here, in trying to wrap up what you say, I've listed four challenges. You've got the energy challenge, the equipment challenge, the water challenge, and I would say the workforce challenge.PS Lee 12:56Yes. These are the exact four points that.Gaël Duez 12:59I mentioned, and I think it will be worse deep diving on all of them. So if we start with the energy challenge, I've got a first question. So you mentioned solar, and solar not being able to attend more than to contribute to more than 10% of the overall electricity production. But what about wind energy? Is there any ability to put wind from around Singapore or is it just something completely nuts because of all the boat traffic?PS Lee 13:33Yeah. So Singapore is what we call a renewable energy challenge country, right? So when it comes to the wind, unfortunately, our wind speed is actually on the low side. If you were to put in the wind turbines, whatnot, right. In terms of the energy that this can generate will be very limited, right. Because of the low wind speed. Hence comparing the different options, solar is actually the only viable renewable energy option. Although in the recent one, two years, there have been a lot of interest in assessing the potential for geothermal. And there's also talk about going into nuclear, although I think the nuclear question has not been fully addressed because we are in CD states. So certainly the public perceptions, the safety related issues will have to be adequately addressed before Singapore to take a position. So we are very much constrained in terms of renewable energy options.Gaël Duez 14:47I think I'm not 100% sure that regarding this energy innovative approach you mentioned, which is basically outsourcing the production of low carbon electricity, I think you're the one who mentioned it as a geopolitical problem. Could you elaborate a bit on what are the pros and cons of sourcing your low carbon energy elsewhere than on your own territory?PS Lee 15:13So sourcing, renewable, the energy or the low carbon electricity from for example our neighbors. So that actually requires the cutting of bilateral agreements. And if let's suppose the electricity is actually to pass through in more than one country, then that actually requires multilateral agreement. Hence the political issues will then come into the picture. But I think Singapore has been actually very forward looking and over the past year or so, in fact we have signed an agreement totaling more than four gigawatts of clean electricity imports. But obviously the data was in the details. For example, what will be the price that would be paying for such clean electricity? The imports, because our other neighbors also have their net zero commitments. So there are actually a lot of issues. But the one thing is clear, I think once the Singapore government decides on the course of action, they will actually put in all the necessary efforts to realize them. So I feel hopeful that it will be a win-win arrangement. For example, we will collaborate deeply with our asean neighbor so as to sort of increase the deployment of renewable energy projects so that when they have access they can actually look into exporting some of these clean electricity to Singapore. But it may actually require some sort of differential pricing. For example, maybe for their domestic demand the rate will be kept at the lower level, but for those that they are exporting to Singapore, that may actually incur a certain premium.Gaël Duez 17:10What about the infrastructure? I mean, you need a connection cable. Are they already there? Do you plan to construct more?PS Lee 17:16Yes, I think the associated grid infrastructure will be actually critical when we look at linking up the grid that cuts across different countries. For one, I think there may be differences in terms of some of the standards. I think this is something that Singapore will have to work with the neighbors to finance the grid infrastructure and that may actually require quite a big amount of upgrading or the expansion of the existing grid. So I think this will likely be a costly exercise. But I think if this will actually be a win-win arrangement, by adopting a collaborative approach, we can actually increase the renewable generation capacity.Gaël Duez 18:05And if I run a data center facility in Singapore, how does it work concretely for me? Is it more okay, my government is in charge of decarbonizing the electricity, so I consume the electricity that I've got in the grid. That's it, period. Or do they also have to close a deal like purchasing power agreement or some sort of directly with foreign countries?PS Lee 18:32So I think this is the part that is still not quite clear yet. So for example, can you achieve the data center operators, can they cut a direct view, for example, power purchase agreement with renewable generation plants, for example, in Indonesia? So this is the part that is still not quite clear because the agreement that has been cut is still country to country. But I think there's actually a lot of interest from the data center operators to have access to as much green electrons as possible. But the details have not been ironed out yet. But I suppose it will be done in a phase approach. First, country to country, the agreement has to be done then that can actually trigger down to the various sectors. Certainly. I think data centers are one industry that has strong demand for the low carbon electricity. But there are also other sectors, right? So I think the Singapore government will then have to figure out a way. Then when they import such, the green electrons, which sector should it go to? Is it the data center industry or is it the semiconductor industry? Or would they actually allow, for example, the sector to actually cut direct agreement with the renewable, the generation, the plan overseas? So this is not clear yet. So I suppose over the next two to three years, right. There will be actually more clarity. But I think what is clear, Singapore government has always actually had a very consultative approach. So I'm sure they will be actually reaching out to industry, including data centers, to have the dialogue and to sort of come up with a framework, right, such that it will actually benefit, for example, data center operators who have the desire to steeply decarbonize their data center operations.Gaël Duez 20:41And eventually, because I believe the Singaporean electricity grid is fully unified, it's a theoretical question, or at least it's a bit like an analytical accounting question, because an electron is an electron. It's not green or per se, but it's more like between the different business interests, which business interests can claim, between the semiconductor industry, building and heating and or heating, not that much, but cooling. And in the data center industry, which industry will contribute the most to the low carbon electricity sourcing effort? But still. So how many data centers and how many operators are we talking about? Is it a very concentrated market with a handful of firms running larger facilities, or do you still have a lot of smaller or medium sized data centers run by, you know, I don't know, institutions, big companies, etc.PS Lee 21:40I think it's a mixed bag. So for Singapore, the data center industry, it has been reported that there are between 70 to 80 data centers operating here in Singapore. So you look at some of the more recent announcements, in particular, meta -150 mw, obviously it's huge, then, even since they actually consolidated some of the data centers. So they are actually probably in the range of 70 to 80 megawatt. So again, very sizable. And I think there's also the Google, the Microsoft, but certainly there are also the smaller data centers. That's probably in the range of maybe between 10 to 20 megawatt. But I think moving forward, for a mature market like Singapore. We will have to look at the edge data centers, which are smaller in capacity. Maybe we should be actually looking at anywhere between five to ten to 20 maximum in the capacity. And for those data centers, they are handling very high power workloads. For example, if you are doing AI training, I think it makes more sense to actually have this in, for example, Malaysia, in Indonesia, because they have abundance of renewable energy potential, they can then obviously have the green electrons to offset the carbon footprint associated with the very high capacity data centers. So I'm actually very hopeful that the various parties, various countries come together to set up what I call the sustainable data network, whereby we actually work in a very collaborative fashion so as to more effectively manage the carbon footprint of the entire Southeast Asia region.Gaël Duez 23:40Because you're an expert on these topics, whether my electricity is low carbon or not, I think the question of reducing the electricity bill is pivotal here. I would like to ask two questions that are very closely interlinked, as far as I know. How should we build data centers today, or refurbish them, and how should we run them to make sure that we save or we reduce as much as possible, or energy consumption.PS Lee 24:14I think certainly you make an excellent point. There's this constant desire to have access to more green electrons. I think this has to be peltrapped with energy, the efficient technologies specifically addressing the high energy, the consumption associated with operating cooling systems for data center, suddenly we can actually look at innovative cooling technologies, for example, the exploration or the adoption of single and two phase directorship and immersion cooling systems. So these are actually at the forefront of reducing the data center energy use and improving the cooling efficiency. And there's actually another wonderful side benefit that is less reported associated with the use of high efficiency, the liquid cooling that actually allows your hardware to actually operate at optimal efficiency. So, meaning that you'll be able to get the optimal workload accomplished versus, for example, when you are operating your IT equipment under the air cooling mode, which often goes into suggestion like thermal throttling, meaning that you're not able to fully maximize in terms of the performance. So I think adoption of innovative cooling technologies is certainly one of the first things that we want to do in terms of improving the energy efficiency of data center operations.Gaël Duez 25:58Just regarding this water cooling approach, I've got a question, which is how sustainable it is. And my question comes with two faces, and we will talk about the water consumption later. The first, is it mature enough or is it still R & D? Because last time I checked, the moment you put metals in water, bad things happen, corrosion and so on. And that will be my very minimalistic contribution in terms of chemistry. But how much is it like R and D and a bit of hype, or how sustainable it is? And my second question is how big the investment, environmentally speaking. But it also comes with a financial cost, obviously, when you refactor or you refurbish your factory to enable water cooling, because you could have a lot of carbon embodied with the data center facility itself. So hence my two questions, which are two sides of the same coin regarding the sustainability of water cooling technology.PS Lee 26:59So liquid cooling is not new. It has actually been around for a decade. It's just that the data center, being a recent adverse industry, didn't quite adopt it in a big way. But I think we are actually getting to a stage whereby, because of the increase in thermal design power, because of the sustainability imperative, I think we are getting to this stage whereby liquid cooling really needs to be a serious option. And it's certainly well beyond R & D. So to give an example, we actually started a company called CoolDC. We started off with a test bedding at one of the major co-location operators in one of their production data halls. And shortly after the completion of the test vetting, we actually managed to secure a project with a major local bank. And they are actually looking at implementing liquid cooling for 16 racks and this handling production workload. So certainly I think it's actually ready for the big time. But the challenge is actually how do you come up with a system that can scale with demand, when talking about, for example, high power IT equipment, it will not happen overnight, there will be a scaling up over time. So then the challenge is actually how do we configure a cooling system that can scale with demand in a very cost effective fashion, in a fashion that minimizes the disruption to ongoing operations. So I think there are actually ways to do it, because without liquid cooling, in fact there are actually different configurations. It can be air assisted, liquid cooling, which can be pronged into an existing brown fuel air cooled data centers without laying the elaborate piping network. But then obviously, going back to your second question, then what about the impact in terms of the environmental impact, for example, in terms of embodied carbon, so should you, for example, I have to set up new data centers. So again, I think it really depends, right? So we're very innovative in design. In fact, you can retrofit, right? Brownfield Data Centers to be very energy efficient. And that major local bank, the client that I mentioned just now, is actually in fact retrofitting one of their existing data halls. So as to support the equivalent  that can be done. It's just that the engagement, the dialogue with the infrastructure folks and the IT team has to happen at an early stage. So as to minimize the disruption because if after talk, then obviously that will potentially lead to the interruption to the IT operation, but then if, for example, you start the dialogue early, you know, when the IT team is planning to have the next round of hardware refresh, it refresh. If you time the upgrading or the retrofitting of the infrastructure to support liquid cooling in line with your IT refresh cycle. I think that can be done with very minimal disruption. And the other initiative that I have been spearheading, the sustainable tropical data center. In fact, what we did is actually we retrofitted a 40 plus year old power substation into a very efficient data center. That's where, so moving forward, that likely will be the model. Because for one, you want to save on embodied carbon. And the fact that for a mature market like Singapore, we are actually running short of power. We are also running short of space. We can't keep continuing to have new build data centers. But the fact that you see we have a lot of existing building stock, I think there's one perception that liquid cooling may actually lead to increased water consumption. That's not really the case because in fact, when talking about direct to chip or emergent cooling, this can be fully the closed system. For example, instead of rejecting the heat through a conventional cooling tower, which is obviously going to consume water, you can actually perform the heat rejection using a dry cooler. In fact, we have actually demonstrated this at that cold location data center that I mentioned. We actually demonstrated that you can actually simply reject the heat using a dry cooler without consuming the water. So again, really there's a lot of variance in terms of how you configure a liquid cooling system. So I think it really needs to be a very early engagement between the infrastructure team, the IT team, as well as the solution provider, so that you can actually come up with a configuration, a solution that is really fit for purpose because you don't want to over design or under design. Then we need to adopt a holistic approach whereby we actually factor in what's the impact in terms of the embodied carbon, what's the impact in terms of the water consumption. Then obviously, what's the impact in terms of the power or the energy consumption, which is typically measured in terms of power. But moving forward, I think it has to be really a very collaborative approach, and the dialogue needs to actually start as early as possible and not as an afterthought.Gaël Duez 32:49I've got a question for you regarding what you said about water consumption, which was one of the four challenges that you've listed. Where do these big headlines about water consumption of main hyperscalers, at least western ones, come from if water cooling doesn't consume that much water? Because, you know, I mean, all of them, Google, Azure, AWS, they've been blamed for consuming a lot of water. So where is the issue here? Because you tell us that, well, it doesn't, you can run a closed system and it doesn't consume water, or at least marginally so can you enlighten us a bit here?PS Lee 33:32One option, as I mentioned just now, is actually to use, for example, a dry cooler instead of cooling the tower, thereby having a fully closed system without actually consuming water. But then obviously there's a trade off, right? So if you operate a dry cooler versus a cooling tower in terms of the PUE, in terms of efficiency, right? The former, without the consuming water, will be actually less efficient, somewhat less efficient then in terms of the footprint. So the space required for a dry cooler versus cooling tower is actually going to be bigger. So I think it really has to be a holistic assessment. So what makes sense? Do you want to go, for example, the best possible PUE, or do you want to have a more balanced so called matrix involving not only the PUE but also the weight? So I think that's probably what's necessary moving forward. So for data center operators, including hyperscalers, to look at things in a more holistic fashion. But then I think the fact is still hyperscalers actually have very high capacity data centers. So then that obviously will translate to a large carbon footprint. Yeah. So I think that's something actually unavoidable in certain sense, but I think as much as possible we will have to then maybe look into the transition from air cooling to cooling because that will bring about a reduction in terms of the total energy consumption. So I think that's something that we do, but I think the other aspect that can be done is actually the end user. So we also need to be probably more prudent in terms of our consumption of digital services. So maybe you want to limit how much TikTok or YouTube that you watch each day.Gaël Duez 35:27It's a bit like the elephant in the room. Is sobriety like digital sobriety a topic at all in Singapore or in Southeast Asia, as far as you can tell?PS Lee 35:37I think people, obviously so here in the news, in social media, that we need to be more sustainable. Carbon emission is definitely going to be something challenging to manage, but it's just that I think some of the things that don't actually trigger down to the individual, to the personal level. So moving forward, we may really need to consider imposing a personal carbon budget so that you're more conscious in terms of how much digital services that you consume. I think it's all part of being a responsible citizen. Everyone obviously is conscious of climate change. We really need to take it upon ourselves so that we are also very conscious in terms of managing our consumption. I think that certainly will be very complimentary to all the wonderful energy efficient technologies that we are deploying in our data centers. Very complementary to the integration of renewable energy. But if, let's suppose we can in tandem manage the consumption while actually managing in terms of the energy efficiency improvement, integration, and renewable energy, I think all in all, that will make the earth more sustainable.Gaël Duez 37:13The example you gave about making people more aware of the need to refrain from digital consumption, I think it connects pretty well with what you've said several times before that. Dialogue is key. And making sure that all stakeholders start discussing on how to make the data center industry more sustainable. And my question is that a Singapore way of doing things like, it seems to be pretty much in the DNA of Singapore business and governments to talk to each other. I don't know if it includes consumers as well as you've just mentioned right now, and how much of the government is involved and how much more specifically does it use the stick or the carrot.PS Lee 38:07So I can frame it as dialogue and collaboration. So I think Singapore has always been very collaborative. I think one, the key reason being that Singapore is actually a migrant society. We have a very relatively short history. So in our 50 years of nation building, I think Singapore achieved a lot. And I think that happened because we are able to rally people coming from a different background, different races, different religions to come together in a very collaborative fashion, then obviously you see collaboration between government, industry, academia, civil society. So I think that really is very much needed when we want to actually address the multifaceted challenges associated with sustainability, associated with climate change. I think the Sierra Leone government probably will soften, or rather usually will first go with the carrot before they bring the stick. I think really helping the industry, helping the public to see the needs to be more sustainable and the need to be more collaborative, I think that will be actually more effective than, for example, imposing the very draconian measures. I'm still hopeful that Singapore will be able to focus more on inculcating or enculturation. They need to be sustainable, they need to be collaborative so that people come together willingly. Because I think that will be more effective than forcing people to comply with certain regulations. I thought that should be probably the last resort but I suppose it needs to be a balance, because obviously there will still be companies that are non compliant. Certain amounts of regulatory advancement will still be necessary.Gaël Duez 40:20And I'm asking you also the question, because I'm pretty sure you're familiar with what is going on in the rest of the world and in Europe. Very recently, an energy efficiency directive has been launched and it was pretty precise regarding the metrics that a data center should now report above a certain capacity. And it goes way beyond just renewable energy and PUE or we also waste use, etc. Do we have this kind of reporting requirements planned in Singapore, in other areas in Southeast Asia, for instance, or nothing to your knowledge?PS Lee 41:02Not to my knowledge, but at some point we may have to do the same thing. Going back to our earlier discussion that moving forward for Singapore especially, we will need to be very selective in terms of the kind of data center, the kind of workload that we are hosting. Obviously, we are very energy constrained. We have very limited options when it comes to renewable energy sources. So I think at some point we will probably need to mandate that the data center operators will actually need to report various matrixes, for example, maybe pertaining to PUE or WUE, what's the amount of renewable energy, the sources that are integrating into their operations, things like that. But I think it will take a while. I think at least for now, I see Singapore, the government actually engaging industry, encouraging them to go through the green transition. And I think that is something that will take some time. But I'm sure the Sambo government actually provides the necessary support, for example, in terms of grants, in terms of assistance, in terms of technology, so that the existing stock of brownfield data centers, especially those that are quite dated, right, can then go through this green transition.Gaël Duez 42:36Now I'd like to zoom out a bit and talk about resiliency and the lessons for the rest of the world, because tropical, or you meet subtropical climates, are pretty widespread around the globe. And for example, in the state of Virginia, home of AWS, this is a subtract tropical climate. And I don't know Pierce if you read it, but in 2022, the reviewer, security technology published a fictional story about a heat dome descending in the summer of 2025. So it's next year near the town of Ashburn, Virginia. Ashburn is called ‘data center alley’ by its folks in the US, because it's by far the largest concentration of data centers, not just in the United States, but in the entire world. And spoiler alert, it ends with a data center manager having to shut down an entire hyper scaler facility facing the cornelian choice of either losing billions of dollars in equipment or entering its history with the first ever cloud blackout. And everything you said in this interview makes this story some sort of more likely because you describe the worsening climate condition that Singapore faces, all the challenges to cool down data centers, etcetera. And my question is: how realistic it is, and what are the lessons for pretty much everyone running a data center facility in the world from the specific conditions that operators in subtropical areas, the one who are the most at risk of heatwave? Well, what could be these lessons? PS Lee 44:30I think certainly the increasing episode of heatwave is going to pose challenges to the data center industry, especially if they are still using conventional air cooling systems. So I think this is part of that kind of dovetails here very nicely into why I think liquid cooling is actually the way to go because one of the studies that we did, which I thought is pretty interesting. So what we did is actually we increased the supply air temperature as well as the supplied liquid temperature, because we actually have two racks, one which is actually an air cool rack, the other is actually the liquid cool rack, both having the exact same IT configuration. So the only difference is actually the cooling method. So what we have shown is actually for the air cooled rack, the server's performance, the energy consumption, it's actually very strong functions of temperature, because when you're operating your IT equipment using air cooling, all your chip temperature, or what we call junction temperature, are actually much higher, typically in the range of 80 or 90 degrees celsius. And that is actually very close to the temperature threshold, because you want to protect the electronics, [for] the server you usually set the upper temperature limit. So once you cross that limit, then the thermal throttling skips in because you want to protect your electronics. But when you actually operate your liquid cool rack, even with an increase in supply temperature, what we notice actually both the performance as well as the energy consumption actually stays relatively insensitive to temperature. So the implication is actually what if you have a liquid cooling system, or rather if you are using a liquid cooling system, even if, for example, there's actually an increase in your outdoor temperature, ambient temperature, whatnot, that's not going to lead to a big issue in terms of the performance of your IT equipment in terms of the energy consumption by the demand. But if you were to actually use the conventional air cooling, then you'll run into serious problems because of the increase in your ambient temperature that actually leads to your ip, the hardware going into more frequent thermal throttling, which is obviously going to affect the performance. That's also going to mean that your equipment now is going to have a higher power penalty. So I think from the resilience standpoint, I think it makes a lot of sense for the industry to actually look into transitioning from air to liquid cooling. So that's actually my personal experience that I can share when it comes to the data center resiliency from the angle of cooling.Gaël Duez 47:48However, you mentioned earlier that transitioning a full entire facility from air cooling to water cooling comes at a price, and you were advocating more for a modular approach. So if, how much would it cost for a per scaler to migrate entirely air cooling to water cooling? I think it will be ace watering without bad word play.PS Lee 48:15It's true. If you have software looking at retrofitting and air cooled data centers to liquid cool, and suddenly there will be the additional CapEx. The fact that you have a sunken investment on your air cooling infrastructure and for you to replace that with liquid cooling infrastructure, certainly there will be additional CapEx, but it may, you may have no choice, right? If let's suppose your tenants come to you and say, I'm going to bring in one rack of GPU service because I'm going to run generative AI workload. If you don't have the supporting liquid cooling infrastructure, there's no way that your tenants can actually operate his high power servers or his high power rack. Even if they can operate it, they wouldn't be able to get the performance that they paid for. So the multiple factors that you need to consider one is actually, what's the cost, what's the ROI the other is actually what is the business opportunity that you don't do it. Because if you can't support the high power rack, high power equipment, your tenants will take the business and go to your competitors. So I think it really requires a holistic assessment. Certainly ROI is important, but at the same time, do you want to future proof your data centers so that you're able to handle the current, the future workload that's going to come into your data centers? So I think operators probably don't really have too many options. If you don't do it, you are going to fall behind your competitors.Gaël Duez 50:05So when economics incentives meet sustainability incentives, I think that's a nice way to wrap up the entire episode. Professor, before we leave this episode, I've got one final question. Would you like to share a positive piece of news with us? Whether it comes to sustainability in general or more specifically, its sustainability?PS Lee 50:32Sure. Traditionally, the Southeast Asia data center markets are not known to be trailblazers in terms of adoption of the most advanced, most innovative solution. But because of the confluence of various factors, including the increase in thermal design power achieved because of the sustainability imperative. So over the last 12 to 24 months, we have been seeing a lot of interesting developments. For example, data center markets in Malaysia and Indonesia are starting to sort of call for liquid cooling infrastructure. So I think that can propel the region, in fact, to be the leaders when it comes to adoption of sustainable and innovative data center solutions. So I'm actually very hopeful that the region can achieve leadership in terms of embracing the most sustainable and the most innovative solution. But going back to one of the key discussion points, it has to be a highly collaborative approach.Gaël Duez 51:42Yeah, that was the key word here, collaboration. And we've got a lot to learn from a small but very powerful state who has to work well with all its neighbors and to source electricity and to find innovative solutions. Thanks a lot. PS, that was lovely to have you on the show. I'm eager to see you on stage for Green IO Singapore. I hope that many listeners based in Singapore and maybe some of them based in Southeast Asia will come as well. Thanks a lot again and talk to you very soon.PS Lee 52:16Sure. Thanks for having me.Gaël Duez 52:19Thank you for listening to this Green IO episode. If you enjoyed it, share it and give us five stars on Apple or Spotify. We are an independent media relying solely on you to get more listeners. Plus, it will give our little team Jill, Meibel, Tani and I a nice booster. In our next episode, we will talk about product management and more specifically, how to be a climate conscious product manager with Antonia Landi, a leading voice in the european product ops community, and François Burra, co-author of the Climate product management Playbook. Stay tuned. Green IO is a podcast and much more. So visit Greenio Dot Tech to subscribe to our free monthly newsletter, read the latest articles on our blog, and check the conferences we organize across the globe. The next one is in Singapore, but you already know it on April 18, and you can get a free ticket using the Voucher GREENIOVIP and you already knew it. What you might not know is that early bird tickets for London on September 19 are already for sale. And what you might not already know is that we opened the call for speakers for London, so feel free to apply if you've got something interesting to say regarding it, sustainability, whether it's cloud data, operation design, etcetera. I'm looking forward to meeting you there to help you fellow responsible technologists build a greener digital world one bite at a time.❤️ Never miss an episode! Hit the subscribe button on the player above and follow us the way you like.  📧 Our Green IO monthly newsletter is also a good way to be notified, as well as getting carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents. 

⚙️Cybersecurity and sustainability do share a complex relationship! The two approaches share commonalities, such as grappling with resistance from teams and executives and prioritizing resilience, but they also seem to split in notable ways such as constant updates in cybersecurity impacting bloatware and equipment obsolences. 🎧In this episode Gaël Duez invited two experts on the field, Mary Prokhorova from InDevLab and Michael Oghia from Datacenter Changemakers, to discuss the nuances of cybersecurity and sustainability’s relationship.🔎Some few takeaways from their conversation are:💡the critical role of IT infrastructure in modern business processes💡importance of protecting critical infrastructure to avoid environmental damage and societal impacts💡significance of investing in digital infrastructure to support the green revolution and highlighting the impact of climate risks on both physical and digital security❤️ Subscribe, follow, like, ... stay connected the way you want to never miss an episode!📧 Once a month, we deliver carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents in your mailbox, subscribe to the Green IO newsletter here. 📣 Green IO next Conference is in Singapore on April 18th (use the voucher GREENIOVIP to get a free ticket) Learn more about our guest and connect: Mary’s LinkedInMichael’s LinkedInGaël's website Green IO website📧 You can also send us an email at greenio@duez.com to share your feedback and suggest future guests or topics.   Mary and Michael's sources and other references mentioned in this episode: Reduce, Reuse, Refurbish: Dispelling Sustainability Myths with EmXcoreSustainability and Cybersecurity: The Unexpected Dynamic Duo of the Energy Transition Ukraine’s top mobile internet company is down Guidebook for a Cyber-Resilient Low-Emissions Energy TransitionEurope is bolstering energy sector resilience. But cyber risk remains a major vulnerabilityRising sea level and coastal infrastructure optic fiber at risk The Impact of Rising Sea Level on Internet Infrastructure Cybersecurity is an environmental, social and governance issue. Here's why The Rising Role of Cybersecurity in ESG and How Companies Are Taking Action Florida water treatment facility hack used a dormant remote access software, sheriff saysTranscriptGaël Duez 00:00Hello everyone. Welcome to Green IO with Gaël Duez. That's me. Green IO is the podcast for responsible technologists building a greener digital world one byte at a time. Every two Tuesdays, our guests from across the globe share insights, tools, and alternative approaches, enabling people within the tech sector and beyond to boost digital sustainability. Because access and transparent information is in the DNA of Green IO, all the references mentioned in this episode, as well as the transcript, will be in the show notes both on your podcast platform and on our website greenio.tech, cybersecurity and sustainability it has been a while since I decided to have a dedicated episode on the complex relationship between the two. On one hand, the two approaches share some common features, such as not always. Being an easy sell to teams or. Executives, or their common emphasis on resiliency. On the other end, there are some areas where they seem to go the opposite direction. Security requires regular updates, having an impact on both bloatware and equipment obsolescence, resident equipment increases the environmental footprint of infrastructure, and so on. Quite a lot to cover in this episode, so I wanted to bring two experts on board, Mary and Michael, with different angles of approach. Mary Prokhorova is the founder and CEO of InDevLab and also the co-founder of Servi5, which is specialized in cybersecurity products. She's based in Ukraine, where she can unfortunately experience firsthand and on a daily basis the vital importance of cybersecurity. Mary has a specialized education in software design and development and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in software and cybersecurity. So right on the spot with our topic. Michael Oghia is a consultant, editor, and ICT sustainability advocate working within the digital infrastructure, internet governance, and media development ecosystem, currently as a Partnerships Manager & Co-producer, at Datacenter Changemakers at Datacenter Forum. In a nutshell, he knows a lot about sustainability, infrastructure, and resiliency. And a fun fact, he was one of the first persons I connected to almost three years ago when I started my journey into sustainability. It was obvious to me that I wanted him on the show at some point and voilà. Better late than never. Welcome both of you to the show. Thanks a lot, Mary. Thanks a lot, Michael, for joining Green IO today.Michael J. Oghia 02:40It's my pleasure. Thank you so much for inviting me, and indeed, it's been a long time coming, so I'm very grateful to finally be here with you.Mary Prokhorova 02:52Yeah, thank you. Nice to meet you all.Gaël Duez 02:55Okay, so to start maybe unwrapping all the different topics, Mary, what do you think about the parallel I draw between cybersecurity strategy and sustainability strategy not always being the top priority and the way teams will handle it? It's important, but it's obviously less important than delivering or providing new features or whatever. Can you comment on this? Do you agree? Because you've got a lot of experience with different companies, is it something that you've noticed also or not that much? Mary Prokhorova 03:29Of course, I agree. I think that cybersecurity will be a part of sustainability. The main focus will be on sustainability, sustainability for a working model, for general organization development, and general impact on this world. I mean, not only like ecological impact, I mean like something more that organization could bring to our people. Maybe it's also mind-changing. It's also focusing on more important things for our nature. But the general sustainability will also based on security tools. If we are talking about sustainability, for example, for critical infrastructure, if we are talking about electric station or about heatric electric station, we're also about talking about how it works with IT infrastructure. And do we have a risk if something breaks from IT infrastructure, this infrastructure still works and will have not any ecological strategy for nature. It's, for example, from my side, from my experience, I have situations when cybersecurity and it infrastructure have a very big impact on manufacturing. In this part of Europe. We have a lot of manufacturing that work, for example, with windows, with plastic, with different tips. And the station was next something went wrong in infrastructure. And all this manufacturing was stopped. I mean, logistics was stopped, and production was stopped. A lot of plastic was broken. And do you know how much plastic they need to utilisate more than one ton per day? So you understand how much trouble it is for nature and you don't know how to reduce this plastic. So it's also about how infrastructure could and cybersecurity could influence to general production and general ecological questions.Michael J. Oghia 06:14I completely agree with Mary's point there, and I wanted to say something very similar in my remarks throughout this episode as well, that there are many different ways that we can kind of paint this argument. Where is the intersection between cybersecurity and sustainability? And one of them that Mary just mentioned is very prominent, which is that if you are a, whether it is a business or a factory if you are struck by an attack, depending on what you're doing or what you're making, you might be then left with a lot of waste or a lot of byproducts that you cannot then produce, you cannot use. So what do we do with that? So I think that's a very specific element that is kind of relevant to this intersection, but that is definitely one of them that I had thought of as well. And if you think about this from many different angles, if you think, okay, well, if you're a factory producing something, let's say, related to plastics, as Mary mentioned, that could be a source of waste. But everything that requires something to be fixed, anything that requires something to be addressed, that is additional carbon emissions, that is additional resources being used to fix a problem that didn't need to happen. It only happens because of often malicious actors, whether state or non-state. And thus it's just one more layer to our very complicated, complex world that we live in that I think is very relevant to this discussion.Gaël Duez 08:00I fully agree. And actually, that was an angle I didn't pay attention to before. I was focusing a lot on resiliency and critical infrastructure, like Mary said, on electric power plants. But I never pay attention to it. Yes, actually, when you've got a cyber attack that could create a lot of waste and byproducts that you absolutely do not want. Okay, let's deep dive into this resiliency approach. Because I think sustainability and cybersecurity are very much related when it comes to resiliency. Mary, maybe you want to elaborate a bit on this one.Mary Prokhorova 08:34Yeah, yeah, for sure. I also want to focus too that modern business having its part inside. And it's a very nice point to focus on because if we are talking about digital, business development, about business growing, we are also talking about IT infrastructure and IT systems development and growing for this business. And all our modern business is growing with their internal IT system. It doesn't matter whether is it an on-premise solution or a SaaS solution, is it Microsoft Office or your customized CRM system. So if you want to grow, you need to also to develop your IT part. And if you do not secure your IT part, you will not secure your business processes. These business processes are based on all these IT tools. I mean like CRM, like Riverside podcast recording, like email, like your personal data in social network, et cetera. So that's why it's very nice to understand for business how much part they have in these business processes. And what's the influence of this IT part on their modern IT process and for future IT processes? Why I also mentioned about future, because we are right now in era of artificial intelligence and the part of this artificial intelligence will be more bigger each day. And also we need to understand where we could use this tool for our business automatization, digitalization, et cetera. And where we need to protect our data from this big smart machine. What I want to say, is if we want to grow, if you want to make a sustainable business, you will use IT tools, IT instruments, IT platforms and sustainable IT infrastructure. If you want to build sustainable IT infrastructure, you will need to focus also on security questions. When we are talking about increasing security for each organization, first we are talking about hardware and about IT infrastructure, about cloud, about servers and about networks. So if we are talking about companies that have their own IT solution for the market, we're talking about software security. Also, we need to be sure that this software is also secured from internal and external attacks. So if we are talking about how to check this software, you need to provide a cybersecurity audit or penetration testing. Penetration testing is the method when you try to hack this software. And there are three methods like black box, gray box, and white box. And they depend on how much information about this system that you want to hack. How much information do you have? If you have low information, it's a white box. If you have nothing, it's a black box, a gray box. It's a mixed something.Gaël Duez 12:39Have something, not the gray box, just Mary, sorry to interrupt you. Just to make sure to understand. Gray box is more the situation where you want to assess the exposure to an internal threat. Like an employee having access to some information, but not all information. When you use the gray box situation, is it this kind of situation that? Do you want to test?Mary Prokhorova 13:02Yes, it's one of the cases. Only one, because Gray box was used also with employees that were in your company and that lived in one or two years and tried to hug you because they are not happy. It's a real case when your previous employers do have not good thoughts and they are not happy and they are connected with your enemies and trying to hug you and provide them corporate information about your general structure.Gaël Duez 13:45And let's start with maybe one example, which is the bring your own device question. We know in sustainability that the more we mutualize, the better it is. But obviously, when you start with this first layer and actually this fifth layer that Mary described, using that much personal equipment might be good for the planet, might be good for the environment, but that causes some issues with cybersecurity. So we see this tension between cybersecurity and sustainability. Sometimes they're fully aligned and sometimes they're a bit opposite. What are your take on it?Michael J. Oghia 14:18Okay, this is a good question because I don't see bringing your own device as it could be incompatible with sustainability, but it doesn't necessarily have to be. It doesn't mean that the company let's say, or whatever entity doesn't have any options, they can choose a partner like Fairphone or refurbish older devices that could work, for instance. I think I definitely understand that there is often perceived as a trade-off between sustainability and cybersecurity, but I don't think there necessarily has to be. There is a neutral way forward in some ways. But I think also recognizing that as something that Mary said, which I think is very important, too, that sustainability and cybersecurity go hand in hand. And they're very complementary in many ways, because the more you're investing in your own cybersecurity, the more you can also think about how you're making your organization sustainable and resilient. And so, yes, going back to the bring your own device question, that's a big question. And I can't say, aside from what I've already said, that I have a specific solution to that because I've never technically worked on that. I would say it really depends also on the needs of the company or of the entity in question. But I would also really suggest then that if let's say, a CTO is saying, no, there is no way that I'm allowing my employees to come in with their own devices, I would then say, okay, well, is there a way that we could provide refurbished devices? Is there a way that we could provide some kind of, maybe we can go and buy devices that are already manufactured or whatnot, so that we're essentially creating less demand for new products, something that's already been made? If you go get a phone, for instance, that was manufactured three years ago, even if that's new to me, that's less wasteful than being like, okay, we're going to provide you with the latest iPhone or whatever, or the latest Android. On the other hand, too, getting a refurbished device can also come with its own positives, such as a lot of times, older devices have a lot fewer bugs because those bugs have already been worked out. So perhaps there are already good security patches and whatnot. But then again, I also recognize that security is a constant cat-and-mouse game where just because you're on top of things, well, somebody is trying to get right ahead of you. So this is a complex question that I think each company or each organization needs to step back and think, well, what are our options?Gaël Duez 17:24So it's interesting because what you're saying is obviously, if you need to invest in redundant equipment or if you cannot allow your employees to bring their own device, it will come with the cost, and you can mitigate this cost with refurbished equipment, et cetera. On the other hand, what you also say is in general and the devil is in the details, but in general, the older the better in terms of cybersecurity. So this kind of sentence that you hear all the time, how we need to update, we need to update, we need to upgrade. Because for cybersecurity reason I think it's not that obvious, isn't it?Mary Prokhorova 18:06I was born in a family who have a small own business with computers. And with all this equipment I was growing between monitors, between hearts, like video cards, mother plates, et cetera. So my first toy was this hard storage. And my parents were very deeply involved in hardware. And they talk like news, not mention it like the better. And also they mentioned it like if you buy a new device, you will receive new bugs and new issues and you will not use this device a full power. Currently, I'm working in cybersecurity and its field and I could say that they were right. But if you come back to your question, the truth in the middle, you don't need to waste your time for ten or 20 years to renovate your equipment and software. But it does not make sense to run for the latest update. Because also if you are talking about hardware, for example, personal devices, we have artificial absolutions. If I could correct when we need to buy the new stylophone to the new droid, more new laptop, et cetera. But also we receive this hardware with new software that has a lot of bugs, and a lot of new issues. And it does not make your job, your work easy. You will meet a lot of these tips and very fucking bugs in each device. But also I have met in my practice, I couldn't say names because it's a government structure. When they still work in 2015 with equipment that was bought in 1990 years, all these computers and the light test version of the operation system was Windows 97. And they still work. It's not a zoo, it's a park of moments, really stone era.Gaël Duez 21:15Interesting that you mentioned Windows because that's a big debate among cybersecurity, security, and sustainability communities about them stopping the maintenance of Windows 10 pretty soon for security reasons. And we're talking about millions, dozens of millions of equipment that might not be compatible anymore. So what you're both saying is that it's actually not the best way to enforce cybersecurity. We know that it's definitely not the best way to enforce a sustainable world. But it might also be a bit counterintuitive to say that it's not the best move to enforce better security for Windows users. Am I right about Windows eleven?Mary Prokhorova 22:03Currently, I see a lot of mistakes in the current system, and my colleagues are also trying to work on this system, on their personal devices. And they have a lot of questions and a lot of proposals on how to fix it. And the biggest one is to drop down and stop Windows 10 and stop any updates from Microsoft for a half year. It's also about sustainability. Sustainability for your personal work because if you can't work with your laptop, with your operational system, and to provide any your digital products, it's not useful, it's not sustainable, maybe.Gaël Duez 22:56Michael, so we talked about resiliency from one angle, which is the environmental impact of a cyber attack, for instance. But they are much more about resiliency than just this. Could you maybe explain a bit more? Why are you both a resiliency expert and a sustainability expert when it comes to its infrastructure? How do you mix the two in your professional life?Michael J. Oghia 23:20This is a great question because I see resiliency as being one of the core ways that cybersecurity and sustainability interact. So how is that the case? One is that infrastructure security is really critical to, for instance, the energy transition. So this is one thing that we need to take into account. You're asking me kind of, how do I see this coming together? The Nord stream attacks in 2022 are a great example of what happens when there is a significant attack, whether it's cyber or physical, on infrastructure that leads to environmental damage, essentially a detrimental impact on the environment. So in this sense, critical infrastructure resiliency is absolutely important. And of course, cybersecurity, to me, includes physical security, and it includes the more technical, let's say software-based kind of security, where, okay, how do we protect our hardware, how do we protect ourselves from software-based attacks? But also, if somebody is trying to cut a submarine cable between two countries, that is also what I would consider a cyberattack. We can debate the semantics or the nomenclature as much as we want, but that, to me, is really relevant for a few reasons. One is because when infrastructure is damaged, alternatives have to be found. If energy infrastructure in particular is attacked, then that means that alternatives have to be found. So let's say a lot of solar is coming online. It is attacked via a cyberattack. In other words, let's say that solar provider is not investing in their cyber resilience, and cybersecurity, then that solar plant might go offline, which means what happens? We might have to start a coal plant. So, do you know what I'm trying to say? In other words, if we're not investing in making ourselves secure, then we have to find alternatives to meet demand. And because the energy companies are prime targets because they have a lot of.Gaël Duez 26:07Money.Michael J. Oghia 26:10Because they're so critical to society, ransomware gangs, for instance, have been targeting them a lot. And it just means, for instance, that we need to think about how our infrastructure fits into the larger place in society and how protecting them is really vital. Because it's not just about keeping a company online to protect its own stock price or things like that, which is fair enough, but it's also about, well, again, if we're not using solar energy because we can't access it for a week, that means that we're probably relying then on fossil fuels, which are easier to ramp up within an energy system or whatnot. These are the ways that I see cybersecurity as really interacting with or really intersecting with sustainability. Sustainability is the sustainability considerations, being the impact of cyberattacks, the lack of investment in cyber resiliency, and ultimately kind of creating instability that then leads to situations that have not necessarily been planned for or damage to the environment and damage to society.Gaël Duez 27:29But that's super interesting. And as you say, there's a lot to unpack. But there is also another angle that I'm wondering how interesting it is, which is building resilient IT systems is also good in the face of climate risks. My point is, that good old SMS should be way more resilient sometimes than authentication via an apps, for instance, because it requires 3G, 4G, 5G, or whatever. And what about climate risk? Do you believe that climate risk is also something that will require us to build a more reliable, more resilient IT system or not?Michael J. Oghia 28:17Well, yes, for many reasons. One is that we talk a lot about the green revolution. We talk a lot about the digital revolution. Digital and green revolutions go hand in hand, and you really can't have one without the other. Why? Because much of the green revolution is powered by, for instance, IoT devices. Internet of Things. The Internet of Things is notoriously insecure, which means that the more that we invest in the green revolution, the more we need to also invest in the digital revolution to make sure that they can stay on par with one another. So that's one way that I think there's a bit of a climate risk. Number two is obviously physical infrastructure, which, again, may not fall under a more traditional definition of cybersecurity, which tends to focus on, okay, but are our computer systems more resilient? Is the code less exploitable by malicious actors? That's a very tight definition, a very narrow definition of cybersecurity. But I consider cybersecurity also. Well, what is happening? What about the physical security of our infrastructure? So I remember a few years ago, I saw an article floating around about how a lot of the subsea landing stations on the coasts are at risk of being inundated by water with rising sea level because of rising sea levels. It just goes to show how the environment is very much obviously connected, very intricately connected to the digital and the cyber components. And so as we face more climate risk, as we face more sustainability challenges, it's going to impact the digital either at the physical security layer, such as with coastal or undersea infrastructure, or it's going to impact potentially, let's say, the digital layer, the cyber layer, or whatever you want to call it, the software layer because we're going to be relying on more and more devices to help us manage the increasingly complex system that we're using to deal with the 21st century. But yet that system might be deeply insecure because of the kinds of devices that we're relying on. So, again, that's why it's complex because a lot of these pieces fit together, but they're not always necessarily being given the same kind of weight.Gaël Duez 31:13And, Mary, is it something that you agree with, having a broader definition of cybersecurity to incorporate also all the infrastructure and all these new risks?Mary Prokhorova 31:23I could only support Michael. And if you are talking about also cybersecurity, we understand that cybersecurity protects all our know-how, all our digital assets, and tips. We need to focus on saving our products from different streets, not only from a human, but maybe from not special destroying, because it's also 100 of service computing people's minds and general coding, design, et cetera. So if we are talking about sustainability and resilience for people at all, we also need to secure their knowledge.Michael J. Oghia 32:23I want to mention two things that I think are really relevant to this conversation. One is that we spoke about waste, but there is also something to say that we haven't focused that much on, which is that the lack of cyber resilience, the lack of real cybersecurity protection for especially critical infrastructure providers, is deeply important to the environment. Why? We already have examples where environmental pollution is either being caused or could be caused by either the hacking of something like a dam, a hydroelectric dam, I mean, or, for instance, in 2021, hackers infiltrated a water treatment plant in the US state of Florida, which allowed them to change the chemical levels of the water supply remotely. Thankfully, that was found and addressed before it could cause any damage. But these kinds of attacks on water and wastewater treatment plans are happening elsewhere in the US. It's happened in Australia, it's happened in Israel. And soMichael J. Oghia 33:37there is precedence for this, not to mention other attacks that have happened in Iran and elsewhere. So that is seriously something to think about, that a facility could be compromised and that can lead to water, soil or air pollution and other, and not just pollution, but serious toxicity, toxic release, that could really seriously damage communities and its surrounding environments. So this is something to consider that this is a very real and present threat at the more macro level to the infrastructure in general. Now, something that I would like to say to also support some of the things that Mary has discussed from a company point of view, is that I think companies, in particular, must-see cyber resilience as closely connected to their environmental, social, and governance strategy. This is absolutely something that impacts their bottom line. It impacts the people who work at their organization as well as their clients, their customers, and their community in that way. And it really comes down to making sure too, that a company can speak to regulators, can speak to shareholders and say, look, we are taking this very seriously and we are protecting and preserving the value of our company and the stability of the society that we are contributing to by taking this seriously and by really protecting our data, protecting our systems and protecting, obviously, one of the most important things that they have, which is their customers trust in them as provider or as a vendor.Gaël Duez 35:33So we're reaching the end of our episode, a very rich and complex episode. I think that the word complex must have been said at least two dozen times. But this is a reality of the world, and this is a reality of cybersecurity and sustainability. So before we stop, I would like to ask you my traditional question, which is, would you share a piece of positive good news about sustainability or maybe about cybersecurity, your choice?Mary Prokhorova 36:05In the last year, I have seen a lot of startups with very interesting concepts that merge cybersecurity, sustainability, and green technologies. I mean, also new concepts for data centers, for computing centers where they have a close ecosystem, for cooler water heating, for citizen computing, and all this very interesting part for world data centers where they not only heat our environment, but they provide some new warm water for customers. I also say very interesting project about equipment utilization, I mean hardware storage utilization, because it's a very important point about data destruction when you want to destroy very high-level security data, you need to destroy equipment. And I saw a very interesting concept and working machine and working equipment where they destroy all this equipment in dust, like real dust. And it's very interesting and very nice for our environment also and for general reducing. So I saw that a lot of startups, and most of them are from Europe, are thinking about new nature and new communication between digital equipment and nature. And all these startup founders are very young generation people, up to 35. And also I see very interesting concepts from schoolers, from very young guys like 15, 18 years old. And it's very nice to see such smart minds who are thinking about sustainability not only for business processes but for more long-term periods. So as for me, it's nice news. It's nice news that we are working not only on the digital ecosystem, but we trying to connect our digital ecosystem of this equipment part with our physical world and to make this whole ecosystem much smarter, much more sustainable, and much more from an ecology angle safety.Michael J. Oghia 38:51So two things I'll just very quickly reply to Mary, Gaël and then I'll reply to your question. But I have to say, Mary, I completely agree with you. I do agree as well that cyber risk and cyber resiliency are becoming more of a front-of-mind topic across the ecosystem. And I think it's really good that people are starting to recognize, or I can't say people are starting to recognize, but I'm glad that companies, especially governments, are saying, yes, this is really a priority and it's something that we're going to be putting resources toward. And I hope that continues to answer the question that you posed. Gaël, I have to say in general, especially on the sustainability side, I skew more toward the pessimistic than the optimistic when it comes to bright notes and whatnot. But there are a few. First, I would be remiss if I didn't say that there are a lot of really interesting things happening on both the security side and the sustainability side within the Nordics. I've been working on the Nordics for the past two years. The Nordic data center sector is growing exponentially and it's combining a lot of really good natural features, such as its cold climate, with really good people who are working on things like integrating data center heat waste into the district utility grids, who are working on a lot of innovation. So the Nordic data center sector is something that I think is really a bright spot for that intersection between sustainability and security. But then I think the second that is also a bit of a bright spot is the rollout of renewable energy and more serious conversations about nuclear energy as well, especially in Europe. I don't see renewables and nuclear as being opposed. I see them as complementary. And obviously one of the kinds of common denominators across the energy sector, whether it be renewables or nuclear, is security. Cybersecurity is physical security. So I think for me I hope that there will be continuous positive momentum. I would rather be pleasantly surprised and wrong versus correct than live with the impacts of my pessimism, which is a very much worse world to live in.Gaël Duez 41:33Oh, thanks a lot, both of you. That's a very nice closing statement. Michael, thanks a lot. And thanks for joining Green IO. A lot of insights are being shared today on a topic that I'm not that familiar with. So I thank you for your time.Michael J. Oghia 41:46Thank you for having us.Mary Prokhorova 41:47Gaël, thank you for the invitation. ❤️ Never miss an episode! Hit the subscribe button on the player above and follow us the way you like.  📧 Our Green IO monthly newsletter is also a good way to be notified, as well as getting carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents. 

🎙️In our latest episode, Hannah Smith, the COO of the Green Web Foundation, and Ismael Velasco, the founder of the Adora Foundation, highlight the potential pitfalls of Carbon Aware Computing a strategy that aims to reduce carbon emissions by aligning software operations with the carbon intensity of the energy grid. While this approach has gained traction among the IT industry, including giants such as Apple, Microsoft, and Google, Hannah and Ismael discuss with our host Gaël Duez its complexities and limitations.💻As they explored the nuances of Carbon Aware Computing, it gave us insights that while it holds promise as a tool for reducing emissions, it also poses challenges that must be carefully considered. The oversimplification of energy grid dynamics and the myriad factors that influence carbon intensity underscore the need for a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable computing practices.❤️ Subscribe, follow, like, ... stay connected the way you want to never miss our episode, twice a month, on Tuesday!📧 Once a month, you get carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents, subscribe to the Green IO newsletter here.📣 Green IO next Conference is in Singapore on April 18th (use the voucher GREENIOVIP to get a free ticket) Learn more about our guest and connect: Hannah’s Smith LinkedInIsmaël Velasco LinkedIn Gaël's website Green IO website 📧 You can also send us an email at greenio@duez.com to share your feedback and suggest future guests or topics.     Hannah and Ismaël's sources and other references mentioned in this episode:  Adora FoundationCAT (Climate Action Tech)GSF (Green Software Foundation)Green Tech South WestApple deviceGoogle Cloud PlatformMS surfaceDon’t follow the sun: Scheduling compute workloads to chase green energy can be counter-productiveBitcoin’s Impacts on Climate and the EnvironmentBitcoin Uses More Electricity Than Many Countries. How Is That Possible?How Much Energy Does Bitcoin Actually Consume?Carbon Aware Computing: Next Green Breakthrough or New Greenwashing?The problems with carbon-aware software that everyone’s ignoringHow Texas’ power grid failed in 2021EU countries already hitting some of their sustainable energy targets for 2030 What Role Will Soluna Play in the Future of Computing? A Recap of the Water Tower Research Fireside Chat SeriesTranscript  [00:00:00] Gaël Duez: Hello, everyone. Welcome to Green IO with Gaël Duez. That's me. Green IO is the podcast for responsible technologists building a greener digital world, one byte at a time. Twice a month, on a Tuesday, our guests from across the globe share insights, tools and alternative approaches enabling people within the tech sector and beyond to boost digital sustainability. And because accessible and transparent information is in the DNA of Green IO, all the references mentioned in this episode, as well as the transcript, will be in the show notes, both on your podcast platform and on our website, greenio.tech. Let me share with you a personal story. Last July, I was on a rooftop in Paris, sharing a drink with a friend who happens to be a former colleague of mine.One of the most talented CTO I had the chance to work with. Loïc was asking about what I was doing in the green IT field and the quick wins I was advising to CTO willing to ramp up sustainability. I mentioned carbon computing as a no brainer and I was ready to move forward when he posed me and asked me what I was referring to, POP, do you hear that sound? Yes, another information bubble just exploded. I was so sure that almost every CTO knew the concept, I explained it, he was enthusiastic about it, and since then, it has been my magical key to onboard CTO and Cloud Ops, folks. It's easy to grab, pragmatic, and actionable. They love it. And they're not the only ones.Almost all cloud providers launch some kind of carbon-aware program. And it's a pillar in the Green Software Foundation course, for instance, to get the Green Software for Practitioners certificate. But a few weeks ago, I stumbled upon a remarkable series of articles written by Hannah Smith, based on initial research and insights by Ismael Velasco, about some serious pitfalls with Carbon Aware Computing. It might be another case of micro-optimizations not aligning with macro optimizations, like when someone thinks that it's a great idea to film a live show with a smartphone to get souvenirs, but actually, everyone does it and no one can see the stage anymore. I have been lucky to have already had both Ismael and Hannah on the show, so it was super easy to have them back for an in-depth discussion about Carbon Aware Computing.[00:02:28] Gaël Duez: A quick reminder for the people who didn't have the chance to listen to Green IO episode 26 or episode 5 about Hannah and Ismael. Hannah Smith, based in the UK, is currently the Chief Operating Officer of the Green Web Foundation. She's also a pillar in the web WordPress sustainability community as well as a long-time volunteer for the climateaction.tech community and overall an amazing community builder. Hello Green Tech South West as well as a season green software practitioner. Ismael Velasco is also a member of the amazing community. He's based in Mexico and he's a true veteran in the software industry at large and green software in particular. You should check his API grateful degradation concept. His knowledge and commitment go far beyond Green IT with his involvement in the Adora Foundation, which fosters social innovation across the globe, and recently decided to focus more on the sustainability side of technology. So, welcome Hannah, and welcome Ismael, I'm so glad to have you back on the show.[00:03:35] Hannah Smith: Thanks, Gaël. I knew it was a while ago that we recorded our episode. I didn't realize it was episode five. [00:03:44] Gaël Duez: Wow. Yeah, that was a while ago. I don't know why I've waited so long to bring some of my former guests back to the show, but I think I will do it more and more again. The pleasure of having you both here is great. So thanks a lot. And before we deep dive into both your approaches, maybe it's time to set the stage, I would say. And I would, I'd love to ask you, Hannah, the first question, which is not that easy maybe, what is Carbon Aware Computing? [00:04:12] Hannah Smith: Well, oh, I don't know. I think we can make it easy for people to understand. At its basic level, there are two ways that you can approach Carbon Aware Computing. We do talk about it in the article that we wrote together. There is the idea of time-shifting software, and there's the idea of location-shifting software. And you do both of those things based on the carbon intensity of the grid at any particular time. So what that implies is that maybe you've got an API that you can access that gives you data about what the carbon intensity of a grid is at any given time. For carbon intensity, if anyone's not sure what that means, that simply means how clean or dirty energy is. So you have a high carbon intensity if energy is dirty, e.g. is being produced a lot with fossil fuels, and you have a low carbon intensity if it's renewable produced energy, so it's not emitting as much carbon. So the idea of carbon awareness is looking at the carbon intensity of energy and then shifting your software around, either to run at different times of the day or to run in different physical geographical locations. I think in a nutshell, that's it. I know Ismael, you were involved in writing the, well, I think the very first post about Carbon Aware on, Hackernoon. So I wonder what else would you add to that description? [00:05:38] Ismaël Velasco: Yes, I think that is, there's not much to add really, because it is quite a simple concept. So simple and so kind of commonsensical. It was surprising for us to question it because it just made so much sense the grid is mixed, so when is it greener? It's greener. I run my computer there. Therefore, I'm greener that's a simple, principle, right? If the grid has more renewables, I time my computing to run when the green, grid is greener. And that should mean that my computer is reducing emissions because it's running on that green. And that is the common sense idea that's growing. And maybe just to give some examples, so people can. Envisage it more concretely. Apple released an update for their American US iPhone, where you keep it plugged in, and it only charges when the grid is particularly green in your area. So if the grid is mostly powered by carbon and fossil fuels. Your iPhone will not run electricity, but when the grid is particularly green, then it will charge your phone. And that way it's been greener. Microsoft has done the same for your Windows updates. So your computer will wait until the electricity is greener in your location. And if it knows that it's currently greener, then it will say, update my computer now, instead of doing it, when the electricity is dirty. So those are types of examples of how you might do that. And the theory of change is that by doing that, you are avoiding emissions, which is the theory of change that Hannah and I questioned.[00:07:31] Gaël Duez: And the examples you provided, Ismael, are both time shifting, I reckon that quite a lot of time we hear also the expression chasing the sun or chasing the wind, so do you have also examples of location-based Carbon Aware Computing? [00:07:50] Ismaël Velasco: The people who have done this at the biggest scale are Google. So Google first implemented it internally, and now they offer it to all the users of their cloud. So they started computing, where all their data centers across the world were. And then they started finding out, in which location on the planet, the electricity was greenest. And then if they were to do say a backup and could run that backup from a server in any of 50 countries. They would choose a country that had the greenest energy at that particular time. So instead of just saying, I'm going to wait until it's the right time, like with the Apple phone, they would say, I want to do it right now, but I'm going to run it somewhere in the world where it is greenest. And now if you go, and you have your applications hosted in the Google Cloud you can see Which server is currently greenest and there's an API you can even see and say this one is greenest so you can say, okay, whenever you run a job in my application look in Google and find the location. Chase the sun, find the location where? There's a lower electricity and do it there. So we'll put all our jobs there and again, theory of changes. That way we're reducing emissions. [00:09:19] Gaël Duez: Do you know if the prices across the region vary accordingly I had a very interesting discussion with a cloud ops people who wanted to implement it with another big hyperscaler. Let's not name it. And they discovered that the bill would go up by like 30%. So when you see Google went full speed on this Google Cloud Platform, went to full speed on this solution, do you know if it costs, people to move from one place to another, or if you chase the sun or the wind, actually you don't see an increase or at least a significant increase in your bill?[00:09:57] Hannah Smith: That's a great question. I didn't, I couldn't answer that confidently and say, I mean, generally, you know, the renewable energy, on the whole, is cheaper, but I don't know if that necessarily equates in the way that you're saying it, Gaël. That's a great question. An interesting one. [00:10:13] Ismaël Velasco: My understanding is that generally, it is cheaper because very often It's not always this is one of the assumptions that people kind of take for granted But it is very common that the times when the energy is greenest is also when demand is lower. So It can often be cheaper countries like the UK are beginning to roll out carbon pricing as well around electricity and this is something that's growing. So it varies from place to place there have been places where everybody piling on to green energy, so this happened in the US, for example, they started in Texas, among other places, but especially in Texas, some people install US miners in the electricity plants when the electricity was dirty and demand was high, they were paid not to run any compute. And when the demand was low, they were paid to run it. And it was when it was greenest. The result was the electricity prices for the city rose significantly because US used so much. So it's not an absolute rule, but in general and increasingly targeting the greener energy will often be slightly cheaper.[00:11:34] Gaël Duez: I'll try to research that and put, the answer in the show notes before the episode is released. And I think we, we are good. Because it's a very straightforward concept. It is getting adopted very widely, with several examples from very big tech companies. So, problem solved, and we've got, a word record of the shortest, Green IO episode ever. So is the problem solved and that is the best possible tool to use, to reduce carbon emissions from the grid, or actually do we have a problem? What is actually the issue with Carbon Aware Computing? [00:12:15] Hannah Smith: Yeah, well, it's an interesting question because as Ismael said, right, you explain it in the way we've just explained it, and you're like, oh my god, this is the best solution ever. Of course, we should be doing this. This is like, amazing and so logical. So we were discussing this in climateaction.tech, which we're both, as you mentioned, Gaël, in the beginning, we're both members of, and we both hang around in the Slack group. And Ismael posted this thing saying, Hey, look, I've been kind of looking at this carbon-aware stuff. And when I look really deeply at this, and when I actually think about how the grid works in practice, Ismael was like, I'm concluding that this is maybe not the solution it seems. And Ismael in his fantastic way was really in-depth, loads of examples, kind of really kind of got into the problem. And, I happened to stumble upon it at the time that Ismael posted it. And I was like, Oh my word, I think he's got a bit of a point here. This is actually a little problematic. And it all comes down to this idea that carbon aware. Is looking at a very simplistic metric, which is the carbon intensity of energy, at a given location or at a given time, but it's doing that in isolation from how the grid actually works in practice, which is phenomenally complicated and has a lot of nuances around it. And what Ismael did was kind of present the issues and present some concerns here. So I was quite interested in that and sort of said to Ismael, Hey, let's work on this together. Let's tidy this up. Let's format it. And, let's really explain to people in, in as much depth as we need to go into why we think there's a problem here, but in a nutshell, grid aware.Sorry, carbon aware is not thinking about the realities of managing the grid, of how supply and demand actually work in practice. And what happens when you suddenly just shift a load of stuff from one place to another. So yeah, I think there is a problem. But I think it's really important to say that it's not a problem where it means that the whole of this concept is nonsense and shouldn't be done. I think that that was something Ismael and I wanted to clarify upfront. There's a real benefit here. There's real potential for awesomeness but not in the way it's being done at the moment. So I think the way we turned to Ismael was we talked about these warning labels. We said, Hey, look, there's these warning labels that aren't being applied to these approaches at the moment.There are these nuances that are just being conveniently overlooked and this approach is just a little bit too simplistic at this point in time. But you know, the awesome thing is, it can be matured, it can iterate, it can improve, and that's really what we're, well, what we set out to try and do with this work. And this proposal we came up with on Grid Aware.[00:15:16] Gaël Duez: Ismael, could you enlighten us a bit on that, how the grid works? And then explain to us what are the, the pitfalls or the aspects of the Carbon Aware Computing concept, which are conveniently, overlooked, and Hannah just said. [00:15:34] Ismaël Velasco: Yes. And first I just wanna share one of the kind of subjective elements of this. I began super enthusiastic about this. I sort of worked with the Green Software Foundation to organize the first carbon aware hackathon and, sort of looked at their APIs. I love that. I evangelize, I move people, et cetera. It was great. Then as Hannah said, I've got some confusion here. And the biggest question is actually, again, really simple, which is what made me so suspicious of my own questions. If I run my software, if I consume energy when the grid is very green, am I taking away emissions from the planet? Now, that's weirdly enough the question that no one seems to actually have asked themselves at all. And the key concept is very logical, is that if we were running on 100 % or even 99 % green energy, that might work. But at the moment, the planet has a supply of 40 % of renewable energy, 43, and a demand of 100%. And in every country, maybe not Iceland. It's fractional, right? It's 40, it's 50, it's 20, it's 70. But the point is that every day and every year and every five years, there will be a 100 % amount of electricity used. And the emissions of that 100 % will not come from the green energy, they will come from the extra, right? That's logical. Now, the analogy that helped me clarify this is if you think of the electricity we use each day, each year, pick your timeline as a train with 10 carriages, each carriage takes 100 passengers and each passenger is an emission.Four of those carriages are green, and six of those carriages are dirty. What is Carbon Aware Computing? Imagine those four carriages appearing randomly on the train. On the first day, they're all at the front, on the second day one is in the middle, but there are always four carriages out of ten. Now, most days, I come in at eight o'clock, I go to the train, and I go into the first carriage in front of me. It might be green, it might be dirty. But now I'm going to do carbon awareness. I'm going to make sure that every day I take the green carriage, no matter what, I will move to the place where the green carriage is. I will tie my arrival and I will always go on the green carriage that provides zero emissions. I'm going to come out of that green carriage feeling so clean. I've been clean all week. Every day I've been in a green carriage. My body is absolutely clean. Perfect. But what happens? That carriage is always full. So the day that I came into that green carriage, the person who always comes into that green carriage. Now can't get in because I'm already there and there's only room for 10 people. So she has to go into one of the dirty carriages In other words, you always have whenever I get on the plane or the train There will always be 400 people in dirty carriages. So I'm feeling very clean but the emissions. The total emissions of the train are the same regardless of when I run my computer I will always run it In that maximum 40 percent green period there are only a number of exceptions. How could you do this and actually reduce the number of passengers that come out of the dirty carriages?One is if I don't go on the train. Right? If I reduce a person, I don't go on the train, now there are not 1, 000 passages, there are 999. I've reduced emissions. So if I can reduce the electricity that my computer uses, great. That has been great. The second one is if I use electricity that is going to be thrown away, it's called curtail energy. Imagine that the wind blows really hard in Scotland at 3 a.m. That's more energy than the grid can use. So they throw it away. If I run my job there. Then that's not going on the train, right? Those are people outside the train. I am reducing my emissions but the problem is that that is I've estimated between one and three percent of all global usage. So you'll never run at most you're increasing our green percentage to 46 % it's meaningful but time shifting still not really reducing emissions, and it's not straightforward 95 % of curtailment in Britain happens in Scotland. So we only have 5 percent of curtailed energy. In other words, it could be good if you can time it, but it's not enough to make a really big difference. [00:21:28] Gaël Duez: If I had to sum it up, it would be. That we have a limited amount of, low carbon electricity supply. And if you get some strategy to have access to it, no matter the time, no matter the day, like optimizing, like hell, if we don't manage to either increase the total amount of, I would say clean energy supply to follow your wording or that we don't manage to reduce the amount of demand that will by default might go to a high intensity, high carbon intensity energy. Then it's, yeah, it's a zero-sum game. [00:22:18] Ismaël Velasco: Brilliant. Absolutely. Yeah.[00:22:21] Hannah Smith: I mean, I think one of the key things to think about here with this, something that really helped me is I really liked Ismael's carriage analysis. I found that really helpful. I also found it helpful to think about it like a balloon. The balloon is still the same size, and all you're doing is just squeezing air into different parts of it. You're not actually reducing the amount of air in the balloon, you're not actually making a meaningful difference to the emissions coming out. And that is down to the fact that the grid always has to balance supply and demand. And that's this element of grid management that isn't really taken into account with this approach, is those people managing the grid have to always keep supply and demand in balance. And as Ismael was saying, what they'll do is they'll use as much of the renewable energy as they can, but then they'll top it up with fossil fuels to meet that 100% of demand. And that's always happening, that's always the case. And they create that supply and demand equation through data, through looking at typically when there is a certain amount of demand, so you know that there's more demand during the day, there's less demand during the night, and they forecast that and schedule it and manage the outputs of all the different power plants in the grid to meet that demand. So you're coming along and making a sudden change doesn't actually make a difference to what those grid operators are doing, because it's unpredictable. They don't know it's going to happen, and it doesn't materially make an impact. And what Ishmael said, I'll just say this bit, because I think this is a useful bit to build on as well. What Ismael helped me realize, and what we talked about a lot within the article, was that, furthermore, shifting that demand unpredictably can actually ramp up the amount of fossil fuels going on the grid because the demand suddenly increases. All right? And look, at the moment, we're talking about fractions of percent. So it's not manifesting in a mad way. But one of the things that we were worried about is that if carbon aware is done at scale, what you actually find is grid operators are then bringing more fossil fuels online because they're the quick things to ramp up to meet the demand. So it doesn't really seem to make sense at the moment when you think about that reality of things going on.[00:24:46] Ismaël Velasco: And that's a really important point because it means we have two dimensions to our argument, really. One is, don't assume it's helping. Right? That's the first one. And what you wrote is exactly what the White House report on crypto summarizes. Said the only two ways you reduce your emissions through computing is if you reduce your demand or you increase the green supply. Most carbon aware patterns don't do either, so they're not affecting it. So, one is, are you making a positive difference? The second point that Hannah just introduced is that there's also the question that no one seems to be asking, which is, are you making a negative difference? And what we found, Hannah and I, as we started looking at it, is that there are lots of scenarios where running carbon aware patterns at scale could not only not help, but it could actually create harm. And we've got some examples of this happening. In Iran, for example, bitcoin miners used electricity so much at the same time that the whole grid broke. The same in Venezuela. So you could imagine that if you happen to have the greenest energy at exactly this moment in a place with a creaky grid, like Texas or Azerbaijan also collapsed. And all of Google says green everybody and runs everything there. You could imagine that you might bring the grid down.[00:26:35] Gaël Duez: But playing a bit of the devil's advocate here, I would have two other questions. The first one is, what about market incentivization? So, like, yes, at an instant time, you've got this demand and supply balance, which might lead to not generating a positive impact, even maybe a negative impact. But the adoption of more and more carbon aware computing practices will drive cloud providers, software providers, you name it, et cetera, energy providers, et cetera, to adopt greener practices more generally to supply more low carbon energy. I would say that will be my question number one. My question is number two, could it also be an incentive to avoid curtailment? And I would like, Ismael, if you could maybe explain a bit more curtailment and the example you took between Scotland, to England, for instance. Because what I understood, actually quite a fun fact, is something that we discussed, just the latest episode on open source software, about all to connect which we are building, at least in Europe, but in many other parts of the world, to connect the grids and to avoid curtailments, to avoid wasting the most precious thing that we've got today, which is low carbon electricity. Could it be an incentive also to make sure that we don't waste energy so we reduce dramatically curtailment? My two questions could be summarized as what about the market incentivization in the medium term, not even the long term? And what about the possibility of using in a better way wasted energy today, mostly curtailed energy?[00:28:28] Ismaël Velasco: So I'll give my version of a very brief answer, but I also think because of time, that this is also a good opportunity for Hannah to introduce the idea that we're not just condemning carbon aware software, that we're saying, let's do it properly, let's do it well, that there are improvements and that this could be a really good solution. But we do need to ask those questions, so it's not all doom and gloom. So one of the positive arguments for carbon aware patterns is that one around incentivization, around culture. So, for instance, I got super excited by carbon aware software and it motivated me to dive into all kinds of other things. I eventually arrived at the conclusion that, oh, I think there's a problem here, Houston. We've got a problem like Hannah put it, but thank goodness that I got into it because it opened all kinds of other fields. So that's great. The other argument that is made in favor of it is that by investing and timing it to the green times, you are motivating the market to invest more in renewable energy. And I think that was true a while ago, but I think, weirdly enough, we won that argument a while ago. The market for renewable energy is now cheaper, so people are investing. The news came out today that there are about four or five countries in Europe that have hit their 2040 or 2030 target now, not because of incentives around carbon, our computer, it's just cheaper. But I think there is a cultural incentive around anything that we do intentionally for green issues, for transparency, for clarity, and evidence. So there are ways to do this. And you can say at the end of the day, I reduced my demand. I used new green energy, like curtailed energy. But you've demonstrated that you've asked yourself, and you've also asked yourself, is this having any perverse side effects? No. And I've said it. Google says it, and Microsoft says it. Right when they're doing this at scale, Apple says it. But when nobody says it, then the potential for greenwashing and perverse effect is huge, especially since this is one of the few areas where the big corporations and the really sincere green advocates like ourselves currently are on the same page. So it's very easy for everyone to go, yay. So we need to simply say, do it, but tell us how it's helping. One example of that, just to finish and answer your question, is curtailed energy, which is basically this idea of green energy that is happening, but it's being wasted because it's happening at the wrong time.[00:31:24] Hannah Smith: So I think the question of curtailed energy is a really good one, and I think it's a really awesome incentive. And through the research, and there's this really deep level of thinking that we did on this, we kind of realized that using curtailed energy is one example where Grid, carbon aware kicks ass. It really is like awesome. And that's what we want to incentivize. It makes sense. And it seems to stack up. So when we were writing this post, as Ismael said, we didn't want this to be all doom and gloom. And we didn't want this to be a takedown because it's too easy to take down other people's work. And that's not really how we build sustainable solutions. We want to build each other up and, you know, work, work, work, work, work, work on each other's stuff. So what we did, we were like, okay, we need to come up with a kind of name and way of talking about. The Times When Carbon Aware Does Work. It's a working title, but we came up with the idea of talking about grid aware software instead. And so that really, the idea of that naming was to say kind of, hey look, this is more than just thinking about this simple metric of carbon intensity. This is actually thinking about the grid and all the complexities there. Because actually, that seems to then push you in a more nuanced direction with the solutions.And so what we said was one of those examples, as I mentioned, is using curtailed energy. But not just curtailed energy in its simplistic form, but coming back to something Ismael was talking about earlier, it's using curtailed energy in stable grids in places which can actually absorb this additional demand coming in. And on top of that, I think it's also doing it in a way that is in harmony with the grid. So I think that long term, what we need to start seeing, is APIs and standards and conventions so that data centers can actually agree to use that data, and they can actually, sorry to use that energy. And there can actually be handshakes that, Hey, we've got curtailed energy. Hey, then data center over here. Now is your chance to be helpful to the grid, and to get some demand. You know, get some computer running here and make use of it. So rather than it being like a free for all pile on, I just, when Nishma was talking earlier, I had this like the image of American football where they all, or rugby, where they all just kind of pile on each other, and it all just goes disastrous, you know, and this, this horrible scrum, and it's all just gone tits up. Like, that's not what we want. We want it to be kind of done in a more organized, democratic fashion. Where the curtailed energy, like someone in the grid is saying, Hey, it would be really helpful if right now someone could come along and use that curtailed energy. And then we have these standards and processes in place that people can know that that's available and send their compute there. And that section's missing at the moment. So Gaël, you're right. This question about curtailed energy feels really central to this proposition of making this load better. [00:34:37] Gaël Duez: How operational today is a Grid Aware computing approach?[00:34:42] Hannah Smith: I think there's work to be done here. So in sharing this work, it's popped up all sorts of interesting people discussing this. I mean, I can talk about the UK. That's where I'm based. It's probably the grid that I have the most hands-on knowledge about. Ismael already mentioned, that up in Scotland, we know that that's where the majority of curtailed energy is. Now, if anyone's not familiar with the geography of the UK, Scotland's right up in the North. It's quite sparsely populated. It's very rural up there. And that's where all the wind energy is. It's offshore farms and in some cases onshore, but actually, the vast majority of demand is based down in the South, down in London. So the energy that's being produced up there in Scotland. Needs to find its way down south. Now, the problem at the moment is that as far as I understand it, the national grid is not producing data that tells you where that curtailed energy is in more specific, more specificity. There aren't also ways to know which data center then would be in a good position to use that data. I think there's work happening on it. It's developing. But right now, if you were a developer, you couldn't just go along, pull out a load of data and make this happen. So there's work to be done here, in this field. And, you know, as I mentioned already, there's real potential in this field. To work on those things, this is what we wanted to propose as the next version of Carbon Aware, which we labeled as Grid Aware.Let's get all these amazing minds working on this part of the problem, rather than getting stuck at the first gate, which was, ooh, acknowledging location time shifting is interesting and fun. We need to push this field forward, and we need to do more on this. [00:36:30] Gaël Duez: I was laughing a bit when you were explaining this because I had this image of what Sylvie Daumal recently shared on the episode with systemic design. And in systemic designs, I've got this hearsay that says that solutions of today are problems of tomorrow. And that's just so true here. Once again, this is us trying to jump on a very easy and technical solution and very appealing. And I was like 100% in for this solution and then suddenly posing and saying, in which environment are we truly evolving? In which system in which almost a biosphere, an electrical biosphere, I would say electrical sphere. Once again, systemic design is everything. When it comes to sustainability, I'm realizing that there is maybe something that might not have been 100% clear for some listeners if they're not that familiar with cloud operations and energy. Claim for hyperscalers that yes, almost all of them, except maybe one of them, explained that they run 100% on green energy. And I had this wording, so I would say low carbon energy, but that we really need to understand that when a Google, Amazon or Azure or Huawei data center operates, it is actually plugged into the grid, and it's using the energy that is being made available at this very moment. And when they say they produce 100% green energy, it does not perfectly match the energy they consume. So actually they pay. Ismail, am I correct? Do you want to elaborate a bit on what I said?[00:38:22] Ismaël Velasco: Sure. And I actually want to focus sort of as we close the episode, on four things that every tech practitioner can actually do already to operationalize this well, and that is within our reach. So the first one is to monitor your own net electricity demand. That's the metric you really want to influence. So more than when is this compute job or this computing job running in the grid? The most impactful thing that I can do is use less energy tomorrow than I did today. If I can do that, I will win. If I can't do that because I'm a growing business, can I slow down the rate of my energy demand? So every year, I consume 3% more electricity. Now, I'm still growing, but I managed to grow only one and a half percent every year. Anything that reduces your demand, that's the biggest win of all. That's the thing that we need. So that's a very practical thing. Quantify, monitor, and improve that. The second thing is time shifting. And location shifting can work. If you want to find a metric for time-shifting and location-shifting privilege. Low demand, not grid carbon intensity. In other words, run your jobs when the demand is lowest, not when the grid is greenest. They will very often be the same, but not always. You might have the greenest grid at 12:00 in Brazil, but it's not your lowest demand. So adding a bunch of demand might not be good. In Scotland, yes, if the lowest demand is 03:00 a.m. It's probably the greenest. But if you're going to use an API instead of targeting, when is the carbon intensity the lowest target, low demand, then as a cherry on top. If you want, add carbon intensity. But if you target low demand, the chances that you're going to have a positive effect are higher and a negative effect lower. If you just target carbon intensity, it's very random and unlikely. So that's a simple operational right. If you are going to location shift, time-shift, and you're in a good grid like Britain, et cetera, you're not targeting Texas, you're not targeting Azerbaijan. You target good, strong connected grids, then target low demand first. If you do that, that's progress. We talked about lowering demand. I'm using less energy. Great. The third one is, how do I add more green energy? One is the curtailed energy, but that one is difficult, and small. In Scotland, the bottleneck is less for computing because you could put your machine there. But the problem in many grids is that, for example, that excess energy cannot travel to the south, where it's being used. So unless you're located there, it's going to break. So how could you add more green power? Which goes to your question. So, one way is generating your own power from your own solar panels, from your own wind turbines. The pattern that we have for electricity historically is hyper concentration on massive power plants. The pattern we've had for computing traditionally is hyper-concentration hyperscalers. But both are distributable. You have distributed electricity and distributed computing. And for the global south. The future is microgrids and distributed computing. And for resilience, they're investing in Texas, because then the whole thing doesn't break if you've got microgrids. So if you were able to power your computer from your microgrid or your solar panel, you are adding extra generation directly. That's brilliant. Has huge potential. And then comes the answer to your question, but what if I run it on Google? Aren't they 100% green? They have done very good things. But what you say is absolutely true. Their data centers are powered by the same grid as everybody else's, which is mixed all the time. So they cannot say my server is actually powered by the sun. They're being powered, but what they do is that they buy what they call additional electricity, which is good. The bad pattern of those things is you're generating green electricity. I'll buy you and I'll take the credit. But actually the demand hasn't changed. Instead, these people are paying someone to build a new wind farm to generate the same energy they will consume. So it's new, it's additional. They can say it is added, but it's not direct. That has also the risk of side effects. So it's not perfect, but it is okay. It's acceptable as long as you are going for additional energy. The fourth one is what you are doing. We need to talk about this. For me, the biggest shock in this process has not been the discoveries, but that I haven't found this conversation happening virtually at all. It's been quite shocking to me that there is no very clear point of reference. Even now, since I published the Hackernoon article, I've had talks with some of the very pioneers of these patterns and no one seemed to actually say, is this reducing emissions? Does this have side effects? And I also want to share that someone in one chat wrote, when this came through, I was going to make a post about my concerns with carbon aware software, but I was afraid to do so. There is a lot of commitment to this idea and a lot of investment in this idea, emotional and economic, from both environmentalists and companies. ET was interesting. That's one of the things that most excited me about working with Hannah was that I just thought, I'm nervous. How do I communicate in a way that is clear-cut enough that we can say there is a problem, but that also doesn't sound like I am hating on people? I've been a bit more direct on the hacker noon one because I think we need to be very direct. But basically, above all, I think we need to create a space where we are talking about this and writing about this. I would love to be proven wrong. That'd be even better. But above all, I think nobody should feel a hesitation to say this might be problematic. As I've been following this thread, I am beginning to question some of our carbon emission metrics for software that we've been using. So it's like a little threshold. We're also exploring with the Mayan people here in Mexico, some experiments with distributed energy generation and distributed compute. So we might be piloting those things. There are companies like Soluna in Morocco, there's a company in Paraguay who do exactly this. They go to power plants and they install servers. The servers help the power plants, and smaller plow plants manage their demand response and monetize it. And they're able to sell server space at a fraction of the hyperscalers. So there is some work going on, all of those things, but it's mostly invisible. So if we can agree to demand evidence from industry, just to demand evidence of impact and risk assessment, just those two things. And if we can explore grid aware software or whatever, or carbon aware software 2.0, but just talk about it, we're still on time, I think, for this not to get out of our hands, but it's a small window.[00:47:10] Gaël Duez: Yeah, I agree. Thanks for mentioning the podcast. But actually, this is really what I'm trying to do here, is having nuanced conversations. And the main thing that we've been trying to achieve with this discussion is not throwing the baby with the bathwater. Usually, I ask my guests to close the podcast with positive news on sustainability, or even better, on green it or digital sustainability. And I think for the very first time, because this is a first, this is the first time I've got former guests coming back in the podcast over. The very first time.I'm going to be the one answering my own question about how rude it is. But I think what I actually find very refreshing and energizing, and which brings me a lot of optimism, is that I strongly believe that three years ago, we would never have this kind of nuanced in our way to tackling its emissions and having the ability to say, okay, so we are doing things, and we are doing things at a large scale, enough to start to see that the pattern is not white or black and that we can really kick-start some continuous improvement process, which is actually how it works in every industry. You don't do things perfectly right from the start, and you've got this discussion, and even in the orange industry, you can think about all this ongoing discussion about software development practices, the agile methodology, you've got ongoing discussion over and over trying to fine-tune things, et cetera. And for me, starting to see this kind of discussion happening for green software and more generally green, it is very positive because it means that we're getting a scale where we can see the details, the nuances, and that goodwilling people can debate without any prejudice to each other and try to find what will be the best way. So that would be my closing words.[00:49:18] Ismaël Velasco: I think carbon aware software done well. Time and location shifting are the future. I think that the more we depend on renewable energy, the more integrated will be time and location shifts in computing to what is called demand response. What Hannah was saying about how the grid has to constantly balance. And when you had fossil fuel only, it was very simple because you had complete control. You open the tap, you close the tap. You open the tap, you close the tap. The reason we have curtailed energy and the reason we have all kinds of risks is that we can't open the sun and close the sun, open the wind, and close the wind. So one of the challenges is when you move to 70% renewable energy, 70% of your energy is unpredictable, which means that we, and this is already happening in many places, will have computed and other forms of event-driven electricity consumption integrated into the grid. So every time the sun goes down, there's low demand, we will have more compute, et cetera. So this kind of. I do think that carbon aware time shifting, and location shifting are intrinsic to the future. And the good news is that the only thing where we're doing well in climate action is the energy transition. That's the only bit where we're ahead of the curve, where we're accelerating. So I think that has implications for us. And as long as we ask enough questions to do it responsibly, I think that all the work that's been done on this will prove to have been visionary and very long-lasting as part of the new societies that emerge.[00:51:20] Gaël Duez: Okay. That was great to have you on the show, Hannah. I'm so happy that you've been back again. Let's make sure that we meet in London. No, that won't be the case, but in Paris for the Green IO Conference. Thanks a lot for joining. It was a pleasure as usual. [00:51:35] Hannah Smith: So thanks, thanks so much Gaël for having us on the show. It's amazing to be able to chat this through and it's really nice to speak it out loud because actually so far my involvement in this work has been written. So actually being here and verbalizing it is a really, really fun activity, and it's been really, really useful to do this. And I love the work you do, and I can't wait to meet you in Paris in December. It's a long time to go, but we will, we will catch up with each other then. [00:52:08] Gaël Duez: And thanks a lot Ismael also for joining the podcast with your energy, your refreshing perspective, and your humility you didn't come here saying, Hey, this is how it works. And this is the problem, but more, maybe we should ask questions. And this is what I found so far. And I will be so happy to be proven wrong, which is. I sincerely believe in the very basics of a scientific approach. So thanks a lot Ismael for, for, for joining in bringing us all these insights and, have a good day, in Mexico today because it, we call it still quite early for you, and hope to see you soon in the podcast.[00:52:48] Gaël Duez: Bye bye. [00:52:49] Ismaël Velasco: Thank you. [00:52:50] Hannah Smith: I'll see you soon. [00:52:51] Gaël Duez: Thank you for listening to this Green IO episode. If you enjoyed it, share it and give us five stars on Apple or Spotify. We are an independent media relying solely on you to get more listeners. Plus, it will give our little team, Jill, Meibel, Tani and I, a nice booster.[00:53:10] Gaël Duez: Today, I had former guests coming back for the first time. And in our next episode, we will have another premiere with a member of the European Parliament among us, Kim Van Sparrentak will join us as well as Max Schulze, the founder of the Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance to talk about regulations in digital sustainability. What are they? What to expect? But also have they been built in the Bristol Maze? And yes, we will also discuss lobbying. And yes, it matters to people outside Europe because of the long arm of European regulations. By the way, Green IO is a podcast and much more. Visit greenio.tech to subscribe to our free monthly newsletter, read the latest articles on our blog, and check the conferences we organize across the globe. The next one is in Singapore on April 18, and you can get a free ticket using the voucher Green IO VIP. Lucky you. Looking forward to meeting you there to help you dear responsible technology purchase build a greener digital world one byte at a time.❤️ Never miss an episode! Hit the subscribe button on the player above and follow us the way you like.  📧 Our Green IO monthly newsletter is also a good way to be notified, as well as getting carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents. 

🔍How open source software slashes energy consumption, extends hardware lifespan, and drives sustainability?🎙️In this episode, Gael Duez unravels the intricate relationship between open source software and IT sustainability together with Oliver Cronk, the host of Architect Tomorrow podcast and Sustainable Technology practice lead at Scott Logic (UK), alongside his software engineer colleague Katie Davis. 💡Discover how open source software (OSS) and hardware (OSH) are not just benefiting companies, but also driving global sustainability efforts. With insights from a recent HBR study revealing OSS's monumental impact on reducing software development costs, the stage is set for a game-changing conversation. ⚙️💻Katie breaks down the key to OSS success: transparency. Learn how freely available code empowers developers to make efficient, sustainable choices, while Oliver highlights the importance of common hardware standards and circularity to combat waste and inefficiency.📊Dive into the battle for open-source data transparency with Katie, and explore Oliver's vision for the tech community's future direction. From reducing emissions with initiatives like the Tech Carbon Standard to innovative projects like the Open Compute Project, the episode is packed with actionable insights and inspiring solutions.❤️ Subscribe, follow, like, ... stay connected the way you want to never miss our episode, twice a month, on Tuesday!📧 Once a month, you get carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents, subscribe to the Green IO newsletter here. 📣 Green IO next Conference is in Singapore on April 18th (use the voucher GREENIOVIP to get a free ticket) Learn more about our guest and connect: Oliver’s LinkedInKatie’s LinkedInGaël's website Green IO website📧 You can also send us an email at greenio@duez.com to share your feedback and suggest future guests or topics.   Oliver and Katie's sources and other references mentioned in this episode:Scott Logic’s Technology Carbon StandardHarvard Business School Strategy Unit Working Paper No. 24-038 on Open Source SoftwareOpen Compute UKTristan Nitot's talks about eroomGSF Carbon HackBoavista Cloud ScannerCloud Carbon FootprintEU Energy Efficiency DirectiveClimate Q&ABuilt and planned electricity Interconnect across EuropeViking Link: Interconnector from Denmark to Great BritainReporting requirements on the energy performance and sustainability of data centres for the Energy Efficiency DirectiveTranscript Gael 00:00Hello everyone. Welcome to Green IO, the podcast for responsible technologists building a greener digital world, one byte at a time. Every two Tuesdays, our guests from across the globe share insights, tools, and alternative approaches, enabling people within the tech sector and beyond to boost digital sustainability. So today we're going to talk about a relationship, a deep, pivotal, and yet troubled relationship. Open source and IT sustainability every person I talk in our sustainability field takes it as a no-brainer. Open source is good for sustainability. But which open source are we talking about? And is this link? Is this correlation so strong? For instance, is open source software always more frugal or sustainable in the way it is designed? We don't know. Let's investigate it. But there is at least one certain thing. Open source software is big. A recent post made by Sasha Lucioni, one of my absolute favorite thought leaders in AI, caught my eye. A recent HBS study found that companies would have to spend 3.5 times more on their software development if open source were not around. And we're talking about an $8.8 billion estimated market. So open source is big. Let's see how it connects with sustainability. Today I am delighted to have two guests to talk about sustainability. Who has done open sources from the trenches? Oliver Cronk is a fellow YouTuber. Now I can say because, yes, Green IO launched its YouTube channel a week ago to offer a wider choice for accessing its content than traditional podcast platforms like Apple or Spotify. Anyway, Oliver is the Architect Tomorrow host, a channel for enterprise and platform architects with a soft spot for sustainability, among other topics. He's also a tech strategist at Scott Logic, a software and data consultancy based in the UK, and has a significant track record in both IT and energy. As an example, he built carbon calculators, air quality databases, and industrial emissions reporting systems, which made him experience firsthand the issue of accessing open, transparent, and reliable data. Katie is a software engineer with a Math’s Degree, so not easy to mess with her when it comes to data and statistics, and she is a driving force in this sustainable technology practice at Scott Logic, especially involved in the recent release of the technology carbon standard at open UK several weeks ago. A standard under the Creative Commons license, of course. By the way, they will present it at Green IO London on September 19 this year, but that's a different story. Welcome, Oliver. Thanks a lot for joining Green IO today. So, are you on your bike or more comfortably sitting at your desk?Oliver 03:02No, today I'm stationary. I'm at my desk.Katie 03:04Thanks for having us.Gael 03:06You're welcome. That's nice to have you on the show. And welcome, Katie. Thanks a lot for joining Green IO today as well. That's vegetable time, not food time. I guess because you love to garden and to grow your own food. That's a very nice angle for sustainability. Katie, maybe the first question will be for you, with your academic track record. When we talk about open source, it can actually cover a lot of different angles. Could you give us your definition or your way of approaching what is open source?Katie 03:40Of course. So when I think about open source, I always think about open source software. So this is software whose source code is freely available to modify, to distribute, deploy, and even extend it into their own projects. So I think one of the key parts of open source is that it's transparent. You can view the methodology behind the code. There are also types of open source, which I think maybe Oliver could expand on.Oliver 04:08Yeah, no, happy to. So I think you've touched on open data, which is an important one. But then open hardware is really interesting as well when it comes to sustainability. So at the open UK conference, you mentioned, Gail, there was a great presentation about open compute, the open hardware sort of initiatives to ensure that there are sort of standards for hardware. And there are companies now taking the used hardware out of the big hyperscaler data centers and reusing it because it still has a life. Right? The big hyperscalers no longer want it, but you can easily get additional life out of it by hosting it in another data center and getting other people to run workloads on it. So there's a whole host of different strands of the open source kind of ecosystem, really. Software, hardware, data, significant ones.Gael 04:48I think that would be a good way to define these pillars of data, software, and hardware. So, Oliver, you started with hardware, not maybe the most obvious when we are in the IT world. What are the progress today that you've seen in open source hardware?Oliver 05:05Yeah, I'd love to throw to Katie to talk about the sort of data that's available, hopefully in the future, in more of an open form about hardware. But in terms of hardware itself, I think there are some really interesting developments. Like I talked about, the open compute project, they have a whole sustainability division that's looking at the circularity of the hardware. I think having open standards when it comes to hardware is important because otherwise, it's the compatibility challenge. Right. If everyone is inventing their hardware to kind of be unique and proprietary, it just means we have a whole lot of potentially wasted components that won't work with other systems and we're producing lots of different types of components that only work with one particular platform. So I'm a really big proponent of the open compute project also because they're looking at things like can we increase the ambient temperature of data centers, for example, to reduce their cooling requirements and things like that. So they're doing some really clever stuff in that area. But I think also open hardware is interesting when you look at the sort of hardware hacker sort of culture that's created as well. Right? What can you run on an embedded device like a Raspberry Pi? How can we extract every last efficiency out of a couple of watts that a Raspberry Pi runs on? So I think there's some really interesting sort of things that come out, the constraints that you impose when you look at sort of consumer grade hardware and the open source movements around that.Gael 06:20Yeah. And just to not close, but to comment on the hardware topic, it really resonates with the new battle of my good friend Tristanito, who's one of the founders actually, of Modzia Europe. So he's been in the game for quite a while and he's got his amazing talk now that he's given several conferences already about Moore's law is dead now it's eroom. So that's kind of reversing the Moore name. The idea is every year you don't double the size of your computing power, every year you divide by two the size of your code. So every year you can run your code on lighter and lighter machines, which means older and older machines, which means saving potentially millions, avoiding building new computers that actually don't need. But anyway, Katie, you wanted to elaborate a bit more on the data side. I think this is one of your main battles, isn't it?Katie 07:18Yeah. So especially with the sort of manufacturers of hardware, the data they provide themselves, often the figures they're given, these, it's not clear on how they actually calculate them. So for example, if you wanted to find out the typical energy consumption, they might provide this figure, but it's hard to find out where they're getting this from. How long are they running the device to arrive at this figure? Additionally, there's another sort of documentation that these manufacturers provide, like product carbon footprint, which gives the emissions from each use stage of the lifecycle. So manufacture transportation usage, end of life. But again, it's just not clear how they get these figures. So the benefit of open source is having that methodology transparent to everyone to see how these figures are arrived at.Gael 08:06Yeah, the big issue if you've got quite diverse hardware estate is that we might add apple and orange because the way one manufacturer would calculate things is not the same as the others. And eventually, these numbers don't make sense at all. What do you see as a potential path to overcome this very big difficulty in data sustainability?Katie 08:34I think open source is key, just having a sort of level playing field for the methodology that we use to calculate these things. So I mean, I think we'll probably discuss it later, but like tools like Cloud Carbon Footprint, sort of having that methodology that you can use across cloud providers, so it's more comparable, easier to track your improvements across the estate. And I mean, that's just one part of the standard.Oliver 08:59Katie touched on a really important point there, which is at the moment because the manufacturers can essentially almost makeup, I'm exaggerating a little bit to make a point, but because they can almost make up their methodology, their numbers, it almost becomes a marketing exercise to make it look like their product consumes less energy. And it's a bit of a game, right? So if you come up with a really creative way of measuring the power consumption of your device, I mean, we've seen servers, for example, with different sort of load ratings and energy consumption, different load ratings, and each manufacturer seems to sort of measure at different loads. So some are at 20%, some are 80, some are 100. It's like, okay, well, you can make yourself look cleaner by just presenting the characteristic that your model of hardware tends to perform best at. And of course, then you don't really know whether you're making an improvement or you've just bought better marketing when you change suppliers. So I think that's why what Kate is saying is really important. This apples-for-apples comparison is super important because we already have the same with the cloud. Like you run AWS's cloud carbon tooling versus Azure's versus Google's, they all have different methodologies, and so they're not comparable.Gael 10:04And that's a point with carbon footprint. And I'm very happy you raised both of you, actually, you raised the point. Is that true? It's a very powerful tool. Cameron was on the show last year. I'm a big advocate of CCF, among other open source tools, but at the end of the day, they have to recalculate things that should be provided by hyperscalers. And I think here we've got two very serious issues. The first one is the methodology. Tools like open source tools like Boa Vista cloud scanner or CCF, obviously the methodology is transparent, so at least we know how they manipulate the data. But then there is the issue of the data itself. I mean, do we have the granularity to calculate things in a wise enough way? And I'm not always sure, because for cloud. But Katie, I will let you elaborate on it. For cloud, it's always a question of transforming financial data almost all the time, financial data, into sustainability data. And some data would be more, I would say, accurate, like starting with CPU usage or GPU usage or whatever. But what's your thought on it, Katie?Katie 11:17So with regard to cloud, one of the key issues is that each cloud provider has their own tooling, but the methodology is not the same. So I think one of the main challenges is to do with sort of greenhouse gas scopes. So I think AWS, especially, doesn't include scope three. I think that one of the benefits of the cloud carbon footprint tool is that it provides a way to at least try and estimate that proportion allocated to scope three and sort of compare on the same level with those from Google as you are. I think Google does provide data on scope three emissions. So I think it's sort of just picking the right methodology for your estate. So, for example, if you just had Google Cloud, maybe you just go with their tool, since it's probably more up-to-date and includes scope three. Whereas, if you had multi-cloud or AWS, you might want to look at a tool like Cloud Carbon Footprint.Oliver 12:14But I think the point, Gael, around using financial numbers to come up with sustainability metrics is an interesting one. Clearly, it'd be great if we could trust the native tool, like Katie said, to use the Google tool, the AWS tool, because they have access to the underlying data that allows them to more accurately calculate the emissions. The trouble is, there's a trust thing there, isn't there? I think it's how transparent are they being and how much we trust them to kind of calculate this fairly, rather than just putting forward a polished view of their emissions, a managed kind of view of their emissions rather than reality. And so this is where I think the open approaches really would help because if they were open and transparent about what went into providing the service that you pay for, you would be able to make a more informed decision. And I think the calculations would be far more robust than basing them just on billing data. Ideally, you find situations where you save money, and you save carbon, but those two aren't necessarily going to go hand in hand in all cases.Gael 13:12Yeah, absolutely. I had an issue with a client very recently when we made the calculation that the bill would go up by 20%. And then you have also the question of how do you calculate a clean energy region. Because I don't know if you've seen this beautiful post from Mark Butcher migrating from Scotland to Ireland, where almost a time six difference in the carbon intensity of the electricity grid. If you do very basic math, you will still double your carbon footprint. Still, I would like to go back to it. Okay, so we claim that open source and open data because we are 100% on this open data subpart of open source here should be there, but the question is why not? One of the pushbacks I've heard from Isposkella representatives is like the business secrets and that they don't want to share because it's sensitive data. But what's your thought on it? And do you believe there are other obstacles, I would say on the road toward mods transparency, at least from the data perspective?Katie 14:18I think that sort of garden data for a commercial reason, especially with regards to sustainability, is just not really the way forward. I think to sort of make sustainable software key and forefront, we really need to be transparent, so people can build on methodology. It's not really any good sort of reinventing the wheel when there are already so many good established, like data point methodologies out there. I think as well, open source projects, have such a large user base, especially compared to some enterprise software, especially internal sort of company software, not always, but sometimes. So I think any efficiency gains that we make to open source software can have a real downstream impact.Oliver 15:05Yeah, Casey's kind of moved on to one of the other key kind of conversation points we have around open source. Right. But before we go there, my take on what you're saying, I think the commercial pushback is an interesting one, and I'm not convinced it's as simple as if we just reveal some more data, and all of a sudden the cat is out of the bag and everyone will know how we're running our data center. I think the reality is running a modern data center, certainly for a hyperscaler, is super, super complex. Right? And they're even using AI to optimize. Google and Meta, for example, have used AI to optimize their cooling and stuff like that. So I think to think that if you just release some data about your energy consumption and the high-level waste footprint and water footprint and all that sort of stuff, that that's going to be commercially dismantitious if you release that information, maybe to a point, because it will reveal perhaps to your competitors how efficiently you're running things. But yeah, I think it's just an excuse that they're hiding behind, quite frankly. And I think what will happen if they continue to drag their feet is the EU will regulate. And I think the EU is already regulating. Right. If you look at the data center regulation that's coming out, if you're running a data center over a certain power consumption now or in the near future, you will have to start reporting on more data. So I think that the reality is if companies continue to drag their hills on being transparent, regulation will follow. And it's probably better to kind of get ahead of that.Gael 16:27Yeah, you're mentioning the energy efficiency directive, and actually I will put the link in the show notes as everything that we've discussed so far. But is it the only way forward? Is it okay to regulate? I'm a big advocate of better norms and more transparency, but do you believe this is the only trigger that will force big actors to become more transparent? Is there any other way?Oliver 16:51I think Google has shown that this can be a competitive edge. Right. I am pretty sure that Google is still the only ones that give you near real-time carbon intensity information of the different regions that they operate in. Why is Google doing that? In my view, they're doing that because they are probably still number three in terms of enterprise cloud adoption. Like it's AWS and Azure, depending on which stats you look at, are the leading two. Right? Google is still trying to compete. So in order to compete, I think they are offering more transparency. They're offering more options around sustainability than the other two are, arguably. And so I think this can be a competitive edge. I do wonder whether if Google went a bit further in the near future, the EU companies might all of a sudden go, do you know what? We're just going to adopt Google Cloud because they just give us the data we need for regulatory compliance, for example. So I think the regulatory lever can be really powerful. But you're right, it probably can be too big a stick at times when actually industries can get ahead of that by just saying, do you know what? We'll just be a bit more transparent, a bit more open, a bit more sensible and pragmatic about how we operate, and then that way the regulators won't have to force this out of us.Gael 17:58I think it's pretty obvious that the European Union has a... I don't remember who coined the word, but I really love it. The long arm of EU regulations that you also see in California, etc. That is when the EU regulation actually doesn't stop at the European border, and it goes pretty much everywhere in the world, as we've seen with the privacy laws. First, the European Union is not as powerful economically speaking as it is today, even still a very, very big market, obviously. But what about the UK? Because you're both based in the UK. The UK is not a European Union member anymore. But on this specific aspect, do you think that whenever the European Union regulates, somehow it will lead the UK to adopt a similar pattern? Or is it a different way of doing things in the UK now?Oliver 18:48So I think the reality is, as much as the UK thinks it's left the European Union, the reality is we still live in Europe and Europe is one of our biggest trading partners. And so, therefore, whatever Europe does, we'll almost certainly have to follow in some regard. So I think we haven't abandoned GDPR, for example. We still have that in our law, a very similar law to that. And I think it's a matter of how much we want to sort of stay in harmony with our biggest trading partner or not. And I think we've got political changes probably happening in the next few months for the UK, and it will be interesting to see quite what happens there.Gael 19:23Regarding the link that you made between kind of transparency, a competition I would say on one hand, and regulation on the other, I think it's a very interesting point that one will lead the other. Do you believe that, except maybe for Google, there are other cases where transparency could become a competitive advantage?Oliver 19:42I definitely think hardware, like the end user hardware. I honestly think if there are organizations that are far more transparent about the supply chain and the kind of full lifecycle analysis of their products, and they do that in a way that you don't have to fight free PDFs and extract information from data sheets, but actually, they perhaps provide an API or an open standard or something where you can just get that information. I think that fairly soon will be a competitive advantage. And so I think the first organizations that do that will win. I also look at companies like Fairphone that are more modular and repairable with the right to Repair Act that the EU has also just put out. I honestly think that there is scope for innovation in repairability, and it will be really interesting to see, for example, how Apple responds to that regulation. Do they do it to the minimum or do they go beyond and be more transparent about the supply chain and so on at the same time, I think that would be amazing if someone chooses to innovate on that angle? And I think they would find a lot of success in that space, in honesty.Gael 20:45We'll see. I think it's some kind of pattern. Usually with Apple, it's like they pour tens of millions of dollars in lobbying against, then they drag their feet a bit, and then when everyone starts to follow, they put tens and millions of dollars on moving forward and then claiming they're the best. And I simply don't understand why they don't skip the two first parts of the dance. But that's a different story. So we talked a lot about hardware, data transparency, methodology, and transparency. But Katie, you mentioned before the correlation, not that obvious correlation, between open source software and sustainability. And please could you elaborate a bit on it?Katie 21:25Yeah, of course. So as I was saying, open source projects can often be adopted widely by many organizations and can also be extended or used in their own projects. So I think due to this scale, sort of any efficiency gains or sustainability improvements that are made to the code can have a real impact downstream. So like a ripple effect. What might seem like quite a small optimization, like in the core code base, can have massive impacts downstream on the community. So sort of reduce the environmental impact across the ecosystem. So sort of reduce the environmental impact across the ecosystem, baking in these sustainable practices into the actual open source code. In the same way, sorting other nonfunctional requirements like security have already been, would be hugely beneficial, something that we're missing at the moment.Gael 22:19Do you have some examples of maybe communities, open source communities on a dedicated software starting to pay attention to that? Or is it way too early stage? At the moment, I think it's pretty early.Oliver 22:32Right. But the comparison I would make to this is a bit like when you buy your laptop, what power profile does it ship with? Right? Does it ship with the high-performance profile enabled by default or the power-saving profile enabled by default? And I would encourage all open source software contributors and maintainers to think about that same sort of thing. When someone downloads your software or includes their library in their software, what mode is it running in by default? And does someone have to specifically go and tune it for either efficiency performance or security? Because for security now it's pretty frowned upon, right? If you ship your open source software in a way that's unsecure by default, I would say that Katie was encouraging us to think about our open source projects and making them run efficiently by default. And maybe if you really need to crank the performance out of it, then, yeah, you go and tune, and you go and make optimizations. But that is something I think that could have a massive impact. And Katie's right, the scale at which open source libraries and software are deployed means that any savings that we make there are going to massively outweigh perhaps any optimizations we might make on our enterprise code. So we do a lot of work with big government and big financial services customers, but even still internal applications for them are hundreds of users, maybe thousands of users. They're not the millions of users that open source projects have. So where do you focus your optimization efforts as an open source developer? Do you optimize your own code that's running on your company systems, or do you optimize open source? So I would say as far as coding efficiency goes, think about what code you're optimizing.Gael 24:08And especially knowing that we have only to target like 5% of open source developers because it's like 5% contribute to almost 90 to 99% of the code base. So we can target very active developers. My question would be, is it a bit different as an end user, obviously a developer, but downloading some kind of libraries, whatever, et cetera, do I have today all the information? And honestly, the answer is no. So I'm kind of self-answering my question, but what would it require being able to understand, okay, this is kind of a frugal design or low carbon open source code. There is nothing in I'm pressure like 99.99% of the MD in GitHub or any other repository that doesn't mention the carbon footprint at all or any kind of environmental approach. There is this project, I'm kind of thinking out loud at the moment, but is the impact framework provided by the Green Software Foundation the right approach? Or any other tools that could be used or leveraged to access this information. What do you think about this?Oliver 25:20I think the impact framework shows potential to have a standardized way of calculating things. It's very early and we're excited. We're going to be part of carbon hack this year and that's all about the impact engine framework. And we're going to be, for example, probably looking at how you measure S3, the impact of S3, the Amazon S3 service using impact framework. I think what we need though is more of a standard, and you've perhaps given me a bit of an idea here of where the carbon standard that we launched recently could go, right? I mean, we've primarily designed it as a way of navigating the technology space and working out where your emissions live in the upstream operational and downstream sort of categories that we have sort of touched on throughout this episode. But actually I do wonder whether there is almost a metric that you should be looking for in each of those. And I think we're signposting open source tools and standards. But I do wonder if ultimately that might be where we lead. Is giving people an easy, almost like an eco label for software or a bit like the calorie counting you get on food, right? We need something as simple as that for someone to go red, amber, green on a library or a piece of software. We're not there yet, but I hope we get there.Gael 26:29Yeah, I think that was the idea behind the API green score, main french companies. It's an open source approach as well, but it's more like a best practices checklist. Like, okay, is my API management clean? Do I provide information on carbon, et cetera? And then you've got a score. I kind of like this approach. It's very straightforward still, it requires pretty transparent methodology and data to be sure that we compare Apple with Apple. Once again, I'm really about fruit salad. Katie, as a developer, because you are, what would you like to have when you use open source code to make sure that you're using a very efficient one?Katie 27:12I think the idea that you discussed, Oliver, was really quite a good one about sort of the comparisons to calorie counter. I think having that sort of metric, just so when you're looking and researching what you actually want to use in your code, you don't really have to dig in too much. That would be really useful if you could just see high level. What sort of sustainability level has this library got, for example? And for a developer, you want to be looking at how you can code. So I think learning from how upstream dependencies, open sourced libraries have been coded efficiently is a really good way to learn.Oliver 27:49I think that exemplar approach is really interesting. It would be nice to see those sort of standards sort of applied. I think in most cases you could argue they are right, because lots of open source libraries have been optimized for performance, which means they should be fairly efficient. But that's necessarily, that's a big assumption. Right? And so I think what we're talking about here is something that validates that and ensures that there isn't excessive memory usage or excessive CPU consumption, perhaps polling anti patterns. I think maybe we aren't that far away from maybe being able to take some of the Green Software foundation principles and standards and patterns and maybe running some tests because that's the other part of this. We talk a lot about coding, but the testing is really important as well. And so we're equally looking at other software development lifecycle roles, like testing to say, should there be a test suite for efficiency, for energy consumption of code? So part of your pipeline, your builds break if energy consumption is over a certain level or efficiency is not hitting the bar. So this is the sort of bigger picture software development lifecycle thinking we're also doing beyond just sort of classifying emissions into their different buckets. It's also thinking about how does each role play its part when it comes to building more sustainable software.Gael 29:07I'm very enthusiastic about what you describe, and actually I know that there are a few projects in CI CD pipeline trying to automate it. So, full disclosure, I've launched a project with my good friend Benoît Petit at the Boavizta association, but that's not public yet. But we've released the version zero of our repository of green it tools because we want to increase the transparency in the landscape. So the idea is not to assess if the tool is good or bad, but just to assess how transparent is the methodology, the data used, and all the information that will help people choose the right tool. And that's something that I will at Green IO Singapore and in forthcoming podcasts. It's really a transparency battle, it's not an assessment quality assessment battle, and a good practical exercise to close the podcast. How would you launch this open source initiative if you launch it?Oliver 29:59Well, we'd certainly come back on the podcast if you have us. Katie, what are your thoughts? You're more in the development world than I am these days, I think in.Katie 30:09The sort of same way as projects like Green Software Foundation, I think sort of co-pilot tool. It's the same sort of thing. So the way that Green Software foundation have sort of promoted their principles and their green coding patterns sort of promote the tool in the same way.Gael 30:28But when you launch an open source, mean you have an idea you want to launch. Obviously you will create a GitHub repository and the license, blah blah blah. But hey, you're still two or three of you. I don't know how many people actually, how many people will join from Scott logic for that kind of project? Will it be only the two of you, or are you?Oliver 30:53We have a team of about ten people working in this space at the moment, but people have rotated in and rotated out as we're a consultancy, right? So when we have client projects, people will go on to client work. So it very much depends on what client projects are going on at any one time as to how many people are involved in our R & D initiatives. But ultimately we're rolling out sustainable software thinking across the whole of the company and that's 500 people in total, about 450 or so consultants. Not all of those are developers, of course, but this mindset and these best practices are being pushed out across the organization because we don't want this to be a bolt on, we want this to be how we just work by default back to the sensible defaults thing. So I think yeah, for launching it we'd almost certainly launch it internally, we'd alpha test it ourselves and then I think we would look to kind of work with friendly clients and then kind of use open source ecosystems. We're part of like Linux foundation and Finos. So shout out to Finos that we do a lot of work with. They're a great organization for financial services, open source adoption. So I think yeah, it's kind of use the community, right? I think would be the straightforward answer to that one because that's the beauty of the open source effort, right, is it's always community driven. So kind of embrace that community approach.Gael 32:06And does it respond well, the community, to that kind of project?Oliver 32:10Well, it's interesting, right? My presentation at OpenUK, I would have hoped for a slightly larger audience, but I was competing with AI. There's a lot of AI talks and everyone, I think if you put an AI talk on everyone wants to go to that talk right now because it's just so hot. It's kind of ironic that everyone wants to go and listen to the really power hungry, hardware hungry topic of the day rather than talk about how we can tread more lightly. I do fear there is a culture war, Gael, happening like some of the tech meetups I've been going to recently there's almost two camps, there's people that are almost falling for the techno optimist manifesto from Marc Andreessen Horowitz and just think, growth and energy consumption and increasing energy consumption isn't a problem. Why is it problem? And there are others who are more aware of the issues that we have around. We don't have endless power sources that are renewable.Gael 32:58Sadly though, the trick, and I will do it in London again, is that my keynote speaker for closing the day was Théo Alves da Costa and he's the co-founder of data for good, and he's the one who trained the ChatGPT for climate. I think it's climate Q&A, but they didn't use the ChatGPT tool, the model they use. Another one, I think it was. I don't remember which one it is. S hungry energy hungry model. But anyway. And the idea, know if you train a chatbot on IPCC, report only usually the answer to the question is pretty good. So that's a good usage. And so I managed to get some people in there because it was artificial intelligence and sustainability. So we will do it in London again, don't worry. But anyway, Katie, some thought on what we've just discussed.Katie 33:54I think what you've just been discussing there about the sort of war between AI consuming so much energy and sustainability. It's really interesting because I think they're both so forefront at the minute, not so invested as I am in sustainability. For example, I think that my sort of passion for sustainability has really grown last few months, especially just even coming to terms with the terminology and the language of it. It's a whole world really, that I'd never really thought about. It's really shifted my thinking, especially not just within development, but everyday life.Oliver 34:30I'm living a Jekyll and Hyde personality day by day at the moment. Right, Gail? Because I am spending almost equal amounts of time on AI R&D and sustainability R&D. So at some point the two streams will cross, and it's interesting to hear about Climate Q&A. That's great. I didn't know that existed. So thank you. And almost, yeah, what we'd love to do is almost to create a climate Q&A for technologists. So that the bit like we were just talking about earlier, the know, that's the sort of ultimate goals we have at AI for good. But yeah, I do struggle with this. And in fact, I've got a blog in drafts that I'm not sure I'll publish. But it's sort of talking about this conflict I have between technological progress using AI and on the other hand, all the power consumption and the sustainability impacts that that will have. So I do have this sort of schisms in should we be embracing this thing or should we be being more cautious? It's a really fascinating time, I think, to be a technologist right now, like the different challenges and opportunities that we have in front of us, it's incredible. Yeah.Gael 35:32And I fully agree with you. And I think actually it's also a good thing not to be made in one piece of wood, I would say. And because our world is complex, it requires subtility. And even if it's not very comfortable coming up with subtle approaches to the big questions that we have, and not having one single answer for every question. I think it's a good approach, whether it's AI or. I don't know how to say it, but yeah, kill the tech or whatever approach, or go back to the stone edge, I don't know. I don't want to use it as a caricature. But you see my point. We're thinking complex, and it's very uncomfortable because I think we are more and more aware of how complex is the world we live in. And that's just us adapting to the reality of our world. So quite a lot has been covered here. To close the podcast, as usual, I would love both of you to share one piece of good news. Sustainably related, even green it related, but sustainably at large is cool. Something that makes you happy about our path towards a more sustainable world, I would say.Katie 36:44I think for me because I'm quite new to the tech space, especially the technology sustainability space. I think just seeing the community growing, it's really positive. Seeing all the initiatives that are out there, whether they're open source. I think just like seeing the work that our team's been doing as well, the tech carbon standard, I think it's all really positive. It's going in the right direction.Oliver 37:08I'm going to choose something that's not tech, but it's energy. So I'm probably as much an energy nerd as I am a technology nerd. And the thing that really excited me the other day was the announcement of quite a big electricity interconnect between Denmark and the UK. Right? And I hadn't heard about this, but a huge investment, like we're talking billions of pounds or euros investment to create this undersea link between Denmark and the UK. And it makes a lot of sense because both Denmark and the UK have a lot of wind power, and because of the time difference between Denmark and the UK, our peak electricity demands are at a different time. So there's a lot of sense in this interconnect, because when it's windy in Denmark and there's lots of demand in the UK, they can send their wind power to the UK and vice versa. And so I didn't know this thing was even being built. And it's gone live literally in the last couple of weeks. And it's significant, I think it's like at least a gigawatt of interconnect. So a serious DC power interconnect between the two countries. And that just made my day, because I knew we've been rolling back on various sorts of environmental policies, but this has just gone live and I didn't even know they were building it.Gael 38:09And that's really, that's actually, that's so fun because I stumbled on a map of all these new connects being built across Europe, both for sustainability reasons, also for security reasons, after the Russian aggression against Ukraine and all the energy issue that it raised. And that was mind-blowing that there is already a lot of being built and even more being planned. And as you say, that's just perfect. It's sharing energy and low-carbon energy as much as you can. So I really love it. I think I will try to find the map and put it in. That'd be great. Thanks for sharing it. That made my day as well. Super cool. So it was great. I will put all the references in the show notes as usual. And what is also super cool, is that there is like a very good deal of chance that we will meet in London in September. So thanks for joining. Talk to you soon. Keep up this amazing work with a very open source technology, carbon standard but sustainable pilot idea. I love it. So let's stay in touch. Thanks a lot for joining and have a very nice and sustainable day.Katie 39:17Thank you.Oliver 39:18Thanks for having us.❤️ Never miss an episode! Hit the subscribe button on the player above and follow us the way you like.  📧 Our Green IO monthly newsletter is also a good way to be notified, as well as getting carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents. 

How can we make systemic design operational for sustainable design?🔧Systemic design is dedicated to handling complex systems, complex questions, and complex issues. Sounds familiar with Sustainability? But if things are so complex how digital product people willing to design sustainably can embrace them? In this episode, we dive deep into the world of systemic design and how it can help us increase digital sustainability. Don't miss out on insights from Sylvie Daumal (acclaimed author of 'Design d'expérience utilisateur' ) and Thorsten Jonas (founder of the SUX Network), as Gaël Duez discusses the operationality of systemic design in Tech.❤️ Subscribe, follow, like, ... stay connected the way you want to never miss our episode, twice a month, on Tuesday!📧 Once a month, you get carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents, subscribe to the Green IO newsletter here. 📣 Green IO next Conference is in Singapore on April 18th (use the voucher GREENIOVIP to get a free ticket)  Learn more about our guest and connect: Sylvie’s LinkedInThorsten’s LinkedInGaël's website Green IO website 📧 You can also send us an email at greenio@duez.com to share your feedback and suggest future guests or topics.   Sylvie and Thorsten's sources and other references mentioned in this episode:SUX network and its SUX podcastDesign d'expérience utilisateur - 3e édition: Principes et méthodes UXApple’s Mother Earth videoFuture WheelThe Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning OrganizationSystems ArchetypesSahel : le recul du désertSécheresse, désertification et reverdissement au Sahel Pour une Hydrologie RégénérativeCan rock dams combat climate change?Structured dialogic designDialogic Design Science Transcript Gaël (00:17.)Hello everyone. Welcome to Green IO, the podcast for responsible technologists building a greener digital world, one byte at a time. Every two Tuesdays, our guests from across the globe share insights, tools and alternative approaches enabling people within the tech sector and beyond to boost digital sustainability.You know, when I discuss with fellow digital sustainability enthusiasts about sustainable design, I often hear these statements. It's systemic. We need to see the big picture beyond our own company, our own clients. We need to fundamentally change the way we think about design, if we want to design for a better future. We must move from human centered to planet centered design. I couldn't agree more. But I also recall a conversation I had some months ago with a researcher in economics. We were talking about Donella Meadows’ book, « Thinking in Systems », and her position was, well, let's say abrupt. It's a good idea on paper, but it's not operational. You cannot modelize it. So, I was wondering, how operational is it for us working in the digital sector? How do we transform into actions the statements which I listed previously? And to answer these questions, I'm glad to be joined today by two experts in systemic design: Sylvie Daumal and Thorsten Jonas. Sylvie is based in Paris and she is somehow a rockstar in France when it comes to systemic design, a field she has been invested in since the early 2000s. She wrote a book last year, « 58 tools for systemic design », a very technical book, which has been acclaimed in the French design community. And on a more personal note, I'm so happy that we managed to record this episode, which has been rescheduled four times, I think -  record broken.Gaël (02:20) Thorsten is based in Hamburg. He has been in UX design for almost 20 years, if not more than 20 years, and he founded Sustainable UX Network two years ago. A community who has gathered an impressive momentum with more than 2000 very active members across Europe, and all over the world. We share quite a lot with Thorsten, who is a fellow podcaster, a fellow speaker, a fellow community builder, and whom I see the name popping up on every cool event I'd like to join. And yet, we didn't manage to meet until today, despite me spending quite a lot of time in Hamburg when I was working with my former colleagues. So, welcome Sylvie, welcome Thorsten. Thanks a lot for joining Green IO here today. Thorsten (03.01)Thank you very much for having me. Sylvie (03:04)Thank you, Gaël. Gaël (03:07) So, the big, big question I stated in the introduction: how can we make systemic design operational? And maybe, before jumping on the question, maybe we should remind ourselves, what is systemic design and why is it useful? Sylvie, do you want to start maybe with some kind of a definition?Sylvie (03:32)Systemic design is dedicated to handling complex systems, complex questions, complex issues. It is used mostly when you have questions about any kind of subject that involves many people, that involves many bots. The fact is that systemic thinkers are people who have a special angle to see things. The system is not really existing on its own, it's just the way that you see things. And what is the big characteristic of the system, is the fact that to identify many, many parts in a situation and all the parts are in interaction, one with the other. That's the reason why it is most of the time very complex, because it creates what we call causal loops. It means that one cause can have a consequence. A consequence will have a cause on another part of the system and so on.So... at the very end, you can see that every action, every interaction has a consequence on the whole system. So, it's a way to really envision the whole situation. But most of the time, all the problems are complex. Gaël (05:11) Which makes it useful also for digital design, digital services. Thorsten, I think that's something that you've advocated again and again and again in your public speaking these last years, that we need to embrace systemic thinking also when we design digital services. Could you maybe elaborate a bit on this? Thorsten (05:36)Sure. I think one of the key things of UX design is that we focus on the user, right? We want to build great experiences, great products for our users. And that's what we advocate for. And that's what we try to make other stakeholders understand, that it's valuable to focus on the user and to fulfill the user's needs. And we have been doing this for many years. The problem is, by focusing so much on the user, we totally forget about all the other actors that are somehow influenced by the product, by the experience that we build. So all the tools we use in UX are not taking into account the systemic context of the product, of the experience that we build.And another actor could be a human being could also be the planet, the environment, whatever, everything that is influenced by what we build. And I think this is a really big problem, because very often someone or something else pays the price for the good user experience that we build for our users. Let's say I build a nice service and a nice app for ordering my groceries from home. There are several big services out there that do this, and their advertising is pretty aggressive. You could say, it's a good user experience and it's very convenient for the user. I'm just sitting on my couch. I can order my groceries via app and then maybe 30 minutes later, someone shows up at my door and the only thing I have to do is walk up to my door and pick up the stuff. But who pays the price? Well, it's the delivery riders that are not paid well, that for a long time are even not employed, but so-called ‘self-employed’. These services have a very aggressive pricing policy, so it cannot be matched by the small grocery stores we have here in our big cities, etc. So, for the convenience and for the great user experience, someone or something else pays the price. And that is something I think we in UX for too long have not taken into account. And as I said in the beginning, it's not part of our tool set, and we need to enhance our tools and maybe create new tools to put this into our work, in the first place, to understand the systemic context, to understand the consequences, and maybe the unintended consequences of what we build, in order to be able to do it better, do a better job there and in the end do less harm. Gaël (08:36) And how would you do that? Do you have some tools that you like to use? And I know we could drop it later, but let's drop it earlier because it makes some impact, I would say, in the design world, with Apple in its last conference using, I think, at that scale for the very first time, a non-human persona there with ‘Mother Earth’. And I'm not going to comment on the message itself, but more than the way they conveyed the message, which was using a non-human persona. Is it a tool that you've been using some time, Thorsten or do you think about other kinds of tools? Thorsten (09:23) This is one of the tools. Because the great thing about non-human personas is that we use a tool we are very used to, from our daily work, and just reframe it a little bit to give other actors in our system, let's say, a voice. And it's always easier to use an existing tool and to enhance it, than introducing a totally new tool. It's easier for all of our processes. It's easier for our work with stakeholders. As you said, there were so many wrong things about this, but still it was very helpful for people like us because now people like us can go to clients or wherever and say, hey, what about non -human or non-user personas? And maybe in the past people laughed at us when we said, hey, let's make a persona for mother nature or for the environment or for trees or the river. Now we can say, hey, yeah, but that's what Apple did and nobody's laughing anymore. So, I still see a big advantage that Apple does this. But this is just, just one tool. And something that's very helpful for me is, when starting working on a product or on an experience, we are focusing so much on the user and user needs. And then maybe we try to align this with the business needs that someone else finds very important. And so, this is what we do. And I think we need to add here, what are the unintended, or maybe even known consequences of these things. So what are the negative impacts of these certain user needs? So this is a tool I use pretty often and, and actually a framework I was, and I still am, working on, to be able to see the user needs, and the business needs and then the same framework or in the same canvas, see, okay, but what are the negative consequences on a societal, on an ecological and also on a single human level? Because very often, we also build great user experiences, which are in the end harmful for ourselves. Looking at endless scrolling, looking at TikTok, YouTube, etc, trying to keep us inside of the platform as long as possible and stealing our time. So, this is a very helpful tool for me, mapping our user and business needs to the negative consequences of them. And the third tool I use very often is, and that's what I use before building the non -human personas, actually, it's also very simple mapping. Think about putting your product or your experience in the middle, and then think about all the actors, direct or indirect, that are influenced by the product that is built. So, it's a very simple exercise, but it creates a lot of transparency and visibility. And this is, from my experience, very important to do in the very beginning of the design process, because it helps open up our minds that are so focused on the users and so helps us to understand that there is so much more that we need to understand.And one last tool that is very helpful is to use the user journey. We use this a lot in UX, and also adding additional layers. So, for example, which actors are influenced at this step in the user journey? What is the environmental impact at this step of the user journey? It breaks the very high level view from the beginning, down to certain steps in the user journey, which helps us to work on certain ideas to identify where we can do things better.Gaël (13.39) So, if I wrap up the four tools you've listed, there is obviously the non-human persona. You would say that the first one you use is this kind of actor mapping, like full scale actors, both, direct and indirect, being impacted by the service.Thorsten (13.58)Yeah. Gaël (13.59) Okay. And then you have this mapping and this is that's quite hard to explain. Thorsten (14.04)I call it unintended consequence mapping. Gaël (14.07) Okay. This is what you, you go from the business need and the user needs and you go to the environmental and societal impact. Thorsten (14.17)Yeah. You can, you can do this in two steps. You can also map the unintended consequences without the user needs and business needs. So this also works. But then the next step that is very helpful is to try to find connections to these metrics that we use every day. The user needs and the business needs. So that's why I put this in there, but you can do this in two steps. But yeah, it's unintended consequence mapping. And then the second step, map these to user needs and business needs or connect.Gaël Duez (14:50) Sylvie, do these tools resonate a bit or do you tend to use other tools? I know that you've got 58 tools at your disposal, so you've got quite a lot. But does it ring a bell? Or are there different tools that you use? For the listeners, what I didn't say in the introduction, is that, of course, you know digital design quite well, but you're also an expert in the brick and mortar world, I would say. Sylvie (15:20)Firstly, there are much more than the 58 that I described in the book. I had to do a selection, so I could easily add probably 40 more. The second point is that my question is a bit different from Thorsten’s question. My main concern is about the fact that in 2015, all the parties met in Paris for the COP21. And they all decided to sign what is now called the Paris Agreement. And according to this agreement, we now have six years to divide our greenhouse gas by two. It means that for me, any project that you can have now in a country, in a company, and could be any kind of territory, in school, wherever you work, must be in this trajectory. There is no way to think about the fact that everything that we are doing must help us to divide our emissions by two. My question is much more about how do we guarantee the fact that every project helps us to attain this goal? My question is very different from does it hurt someone. My question is, are we sure that we are going to a place where everyone can live? Gaël Duez (17:31)You work as a consultant with many companies. So how do you manage these very important goals to be taken into account, and how systemic design tools help? Sylvie (17:55)The fact is that you start with carbon assessment. I cannot tell for Europe, but in France it's mandatory. That's your starting point. And you check, from this document, that is most of the time a public document, where are the sources of emissions, and you work with all the people who are involved in this emission. It can be producers, it can be providers, it can be the company itself, it can come from many, many parts and you start asking the question, how can I do better? How can I remove things? Yes, the starting point. Also, most of the companies today are facing a lack in many things. We all know that all the raw materials, their prices have been increasing incredibly during the last few years. The question is, how can we still produce what we are producing if the prices are still increasing in the next months or in the next years? And the last point is, how can we be compliant with all the new rules and the new laws that are arriving, and that are also putting a big pressure on the companies? And for the tools that you use, you have many tools that have been created by a guy called Hasan Ozbekhan, when he was working with Alexander Christakis. These tools are called Structure Dialogic Design. They are based on the fact that you need to gather all the people who are concerned and make them talk and really discuss and make them imagine the solutions. And yes, that's the kind of tools that you can easily use when you're working on such issues. Gaël Duez (20:18)And among them, could you give us one example of a tool you used, just to grasp it, because it might sound a bit blurry for people not being familiar with a systemic design. And I know that for you, it's extremely concrete. Sylvie (20:37)Okay. Like in UX, Design, systemic design starts with research. So a long time researching, exploring the issue and from this research you create what is called a ‘white book’. And a ‘white book’ is a kind of synthesis of the problem, of the situation, of the context. This tool is given to all the people that participate in a workshop. This is a very simple tool. You can create it in, I could say, almost any kind of design project. But the fact is, that it gives to all the participants pieces of information that most of the time they do not have, because they have their own expertise, but they do not know everything about the subject. It helps to align all the participants of the workshop to have the same level of information. That's a very easy and simple tool that any designer can create. Gaël Duez (21:51)Thorsten, the emphasis that Sylvie has put on people talking to each other, is it also an issue you've experienced? Or is the flow of exchanges more natural within tech companies? Thorsten (22:20)It's a very good question because, well, let's start with how do people work together on digital products. And that's a whole topic on its own. And as long as I do my job or my work, I see these problems everywhere. How do people work together and how good and how do people try to understand other stakeholders in the project, etc. So this is still a big problem space. And what I find very interesting about this question, finally we are talking much more about it. We have these fundamental environmental and societal problems that we need to solve, and we need to create or make sure us and even more so the next generations, that we have a future. So how can we better work together on these problems?In an ecosystem, like a company, where we already sometimes have problems working together efficiently, or let's say in a good way. That is a huge challenge, I think. How can we bring people together? And that means not only people from one profession, like the designers, but all the people, in my case, that are somehow involved in the digital product. And so one thing that I found is that we need to find ways and tools where we can gather people around.One example from my work, I named it before, is the user journey. The user journey is a tool UX designers use every time. It's a very good tool to bring in other people from other professions, because it's very easy to understand. If you have set up a user journey already, you can easily use it to discuss, like I said before, the negative consequences, the impacts of certain steps of the user journey, with all kinds of stakeholders. And that's, I think for us, as designers, that's an important role that we have. I think we can be the connectors. We can help bring people together, and work together on these problems, because we have the tools that help to make things accessible and understandable for all kinds of different stakeholders.Gaël Duez (24:55)We have the tools, both Sylvie and you have listed some, with different flavors and colors, which is very interesting. But do we have the mindset? Don't we still have very often today a pushback, that everything that we do in a sustainable way is more expensive, is more complex, is more efficient, is more sexy, whatever. Isn't it that we are facing an issue with a narrative around sustainable design, and beyond sustainability at large?Thorsten (25:32)We definitely do. And that is a huge problem. We need a mindset shift in, well, first, as I explained in the beginning, for us as designers, how do we see our digital design? How do we see user experience? So that's a personal mindset shift for us. But we also need a mindset shift. I mean, that's one of the big, I would say, societal questions. What is value in our society? And this is, this is a huge economical, huge topic we could talk about for hours, but I don't want to make it too big an issue here. But the thing is, as we said, the big problem is that especially from the business side, there is the strong narrative that acting sustainable is a good thing, but it's expensive and that it's not necessarily good for business. And well, the thing is, this is in fact not true. Sustainability is good for business. See Patagonia, for example. And what I also often say is, that especially in the EU, where regulations are coming, it's essential for your business to act sustainable, because otherwise you will get huge problems with regulations. And what I often do is I tell people, or ask people, hey, you might have heard about the regulations about accessibility, about web accessibility. And everyone knows about these challenges. And the same thing will happen with web sustainability, for example, or with digital sustainability. And then people will understand the need of doing these things. I think it's important for us to work actively on changing these narratives on helping people to understand, on stepping in, and countering wrong narratives, because there are many wrong narratives, such as sustainability is just expensive and nothing else. And this is also an important part, not only for designers, but for all of us. To step out of our comfort zone, to step out of our standard daily work. And I sometimes say it's not about designing the next product or the next experience. We need to use our gift, our tools, our knowledge, to design the world around us. And we design things with stories. We are all storytellers, and there are so many wrong stories out in the world nowadays. And I think we need to use our gift to tell the true stories, and to change narratives for good actually. And this is a huge challenge I think we all face (not only designers), but one where we as designers also can play an important role. Gaël (28:38)Staying with this mindset idea, something stuck in my mind - it was something that we discussed also previously before this recording - is we need to reduce everything, we put something in production, so we should get rid of something else. And this is a very counter-intuitive narrative compared to, I would say the gross culture that is still the majority approach, in almost all companies and even public services. So how do you manage to change a bit the perspective, to change a bit the mindset that, hey, when you release something, you should also consider getting rid of the equivalent, if not more? Because as you said previously, the Paris Agreement, minus 50 % carbon emissions, on top of many other environmental impacts to be reduced, so how do you help people having this slow painful change of mindset? Sylvie (29 :45)I wouldn't say that is a painful change of mindset. The point is, as I said, companies are facing many, many new constraints. The first one is, as I said, the shortage of raw materials and the fact that the price of energy is increasing incredibly. So the point is for the same amount of production they pay more, and they cannot have the price of their product increase in the same way. So most of the time the people that I meet are already aware of the fact that they need to change the way their business is run today. They know that they are facing shortages, they are facing many other different issues, like the fact that the European Union decided to have a plan called the FIT 55, which means that they decided that our emissions must be reduced by 55% in 2030 - it's in six years, it means there will probably be many, many new European rules, and companies know that they will need to be compliant with these new rules. So to me, they already know that they need to be much more sober than they used to be, and they also need to find a way to keep their business flourishing in a very difficult context. To me it's not a big deal, because people in companies are aware of all this. So the questions they are asking today are how can we have energy bills that are cheaper? How can we save energy? How can we do things better? And also they need to recruit people and it's very difficult to recruit young talent today if you're not engaged in a very social and environmental policy. So yes, it's also very good for their, what we call the, the brand of the company. Gaël (32:29)So that's interesting, because both of you, you've listed external pressures such as legal, recruitment issues, supplier prices, as triggers for action. And eventually it's not a question of how aware am I that climate change or biodiversity collapse is a threat to the survival of humankind, but it's, hey, it's already on us, so we have to do something. But to do something, we need to embrace a new way of thinking and re-incorporating those external constraints in a way to design things, products, and services. Am I right to draw this parallel between what you've said to both of you? Sylvie (33:18)Exactly the point. It's not about a moral point of view. It's much more about the business concern. Thorsten (33:27)One problem that I see very often is, and I agree with you Sylvie, that there is the awareness of let's say the big problem of the climate catastrophe, for example. What I see very often is a missing awareness on the level of, okay, but what's my part in this in detail? Change, unfortunately, is still too often driven by economic pressure. That's the way we all need to use to push business leaders and decision makers. But I would also love to have this discussion about, okay, what can be the additional values to the existing ones or to the existing big value of growth that we have? And how can we align them with these? And I have no answer to these, but I think that's a core question we should work on, or have to work on. Gaël (34:26)And there is also the question of the timing of this value. My point being what we value today, like making energy affordable for the entire humankind was a very core value of the development policy in the UN. And we realize now, and I think this is something that Sylvie, you told me before, that very often, systemic design today's problems are the consequences of yesterday's solutions, and the same goes as you carry on into the future. My point about affordable energy for everyone, which in itself, is a goal that I would fully support, is that it created a massive boom in energy extraction, and energy consumption was even an indicator of economic and societal progress. So when we value something today, how do we make sure, or how do we at least start thinking that it might not be what we value tomorrow? And it could be one of my final questions. How can some systemic design tool help us answer this question of the ‘future versus present’ assessment of what is valuable? Sylvie (35:58)I would say that probably we must not think about tools, we must think about processes. Actually, the point is not only about tools, it's about the fact that you succeed in gathering all the people around the table. It means that when you are organizing a workshop, and there are many, many tools that you can use in a workshop, the big point of systemic design is you need to have people that represent all the parts that are involved in the problem, and you need to have them discuss and exchange, not only fight you know, but exchange, because the main point is, you need to have in your workshop the people that will implement the solutions that they are thinking about. That's the main point. It means that it's not a top-down process where you have tools, and you think about anything, and you design on your own as a designer. The point is that your work is to make people work together, exchange and imagine different solutions. And from this work, they will implement and give themselves the solution that can work. And that's the main difference, because in systemic design, you are not designing anything. You are just designing intervention in a system. And your work is to have people concerned. Osbekhan said something, that it is not ethical to intervene in a social, technical system without the permission of the participants, of the parties, of the stakeholders, and without their active participation. And that's the main process that we follow. And we have many tools that we can use in workshops. It can be a causal loop, where you show people how things are all connected. It can be leverage points, inspired by the work of Donella Meadows, where you can identify the places that are crucial to change the system. It can be many different kinds of workshop tools, as designers are used to having, because most of the time we have many, many tools.But the main point is how can we gather people that are representing all the parts of the system. And our job is mainly a facilitator. We reformulate, we synthesize, we plan, we organize, but we are not designing a system.Gaël (39:12)So a designer in systemic design, doesn't design, but structures the discussion about the system. Sylvie (39:20)Yes. And the intervention into the system. Gaël (39:25)And I really love the question about bringing everyone around the table, which leads me to something super connected, which is: who's representing the future generations? And that might sound a bit crazy, but actually I know that in Wales, for instance, you've got a Commissioner for Future Generations, which means that there is someone whose job is to speak on the behalf of the people who are not yet there. So is it something that you played with a bit, because you mentioned it's very similar to what Sylvia described, but it was at the very beginning of the episode when you mentioned mapping all the actors, et cetera. Did you ever happen to map someone from the future? Thorsten (40:14)Not yet, but I love the idea. Because I think it's a different level. And the first thing I wanted to say was, there are so many people looking from a UX perspective and looking from, we are focusing on the users so much, there are so many actors that are underrepresented or not represented in all the work we do as UX designers. So there is so much work to do to give them a voice. Gaël (40:48)So, you know, for both of you, my idea might sound a bit crazy, but you could actually leverage it as an overtone window move, which is where you arrive at the workshop and you say, oh by the way, we need to gather everyone, including everyone from the future. And you've got this big reaction, what, what, what, what !? Ah, okay, okay, okay, I got it! So not everyone from the future, but at least everyone from the present. Okay, okay, that's good enough. That's good enough. And suddenly, boom, you've got a big win.Anyway, Sylvie, you know, in your book, there is this chapter, system archetype chapter, which I love so much, because it's so useful to model big interactions etc. But my question is, did you ever manage to use it to go back to, for example, some executive committee, a mayor, a city council, whoever, and say, okay, you know, the issue you're facing at the moment is a tragedy of the commons, is the winner wins all? How actionable are these systemic archetypes? Sylvie (42:04)We exchanged with Peter Senge, the writer of a book called the Fifth Discipline, who identified, I would say, patterns, because there are patterns in systems that are not working, these are patterns of dysfunctional systems. One of them is called the tragedy of the commons. And most of the time, it's something that you can meet when you have a common good for people, and everyone is using it and at the very end there is no more left for other people. It can be water, it can be whatever. What is interesting in Peter Senge’s work is that for each pattern we call the archetype of this dysfunctional system, he also identifies strategies. So, the ways that you can intervene in such a dysfunctional system. Most of the time we as the systemic designer know them, but we do not necessarily put them on the table with the clients, because sometimes they are very complex, and the clients are not able to handle it. It's not an easy tool that you can use in a workshop. So, most of the time we, as designers, have this pattern in our mind. And it helps us also to identify the good strategy. But it's not necessarily a tool that we share with all the people around the table, which is different from, I would say, a persona, or a customer journey, that most of the time are very publicly edited and publicly displayed.Thorsten (44:13)So, my first thought actually was that, taking the user journey or something else is something that is highly manipulated by many people and we want many people 12around the table, I still think from my very personal experience in doing many workshops, that as a good workshop facilitator, you are moderating, but you're also leading the workshop. And there are quite often situations where, as Sylvie also said, we don't say anything, or everything that we know, but try to give the context that is helpful, without throwing everything on to the table. And I think we do this as well. Also, if we work on the user journey, we want to bring all the stakeholders to the table, and we use this tool as a common ground to work on. I still think we, as the designer, we are not giving up all of the control of the situation. So therefore, my thought was, that it's maybe not so different because if we would give up full control of the tools that we use, and let everybody do whatever they want to do, it won't work. Maybe it's not so different. I don't know if this is a good answer, but that's my thoughts. Gaël (46:07)This is definitely a good answer. I think we can close our very deep discussions on all these tools, and actually the focus should be a bit less on the tools and a bit more on the mindsets and on the way we gather people together rather than just focusing on the tool because if you gather just two people in the room with the most beautiful tool, I think we will miss the point with the systemic design approach. So thanks a lot, both of you.But before you leave, I'd like to ask the traditional closing question, which is, would you like to share with the listeners one positive piece of news that you have heard or come across recently to create a more sustainable world? It doesn't necessarily have to be digital related, but of course, if it's digital related, it's always good. Who would like to start? Sylvie (47:09)I can start. I have two ideas in my mind. The first one is an article from the UN that I read recently, about the fact that the Sahel is re-greening, for many reasons. The first one is that they have more rain there. And the second one is because they change the way they grow plants. So yes, for me it's very good news. And the other one is about regenerative hydrology, which is a subject I explored recently. And there are many very interesting experiments. So yes, it's very encouraging. Thorsten (48:03)One thing that immediately came into my mind and which is not directly connected to ecological questions is, you might know that here in Germany, we have a huge issue with an extreme right-wing party. And there was this research recently, about a meeting, and how horrible things have been discussed there. And what gives me a lot of hope is seeing how many people were going out on the streets last weekend, the weekend before, and so 100,000 people going out there. So, the majority of the people have the right mindset. And maybe we all have different ways of doing things in detail, but we have the right mindset. And it's about how we can activate people. How can we make people understand, okay, here's a problem, we need to tackle this. And seeing that so many people are understanding that there is a huge problem, and this is a dramatic problem, we need to act now. And then people leave their comfort zone and go out to the streets. So, similar to what we have seen with the Fridays for Futures some years ago. Seeing this power of the people gives me a lot of hope, and it gives me a lot of hope to see we have to find ways to activate people for these major problems that we have, but it is possible. Gaël (46:07)Yeah. And because they're minorities, they tend to be more vocal than the majority, but yeah, the majority of people are just good folks, especially when it's about surviving or making a species survive. Okay, so thanks a lot. Both of you. It was very interesting to have you on the show. I think I'm going to reread your book, Sylvie, with a new angle and re-listen to some of your talks, Thorsten, with the same approach. I think the overall approach and the. mindset with which we should embrace this complexity of understanding things in a systemic way rather than in a narrow silo way. Yeah, that was enlightening. So thanks a lot, both of you, for being on the show, and as usual, all the references to the books, the articles you've mentioned, etc., will be put in the show notes. And now it's time to say goodbye. So thanks a lot. Thorsten (51 :03)Thank you, Gaël. Thank you, Sylvie. Really enlightening for me as well. Thorsten (51 :07)Thank you very much, Gaël. And thank you Thorsten. It was nice.Gaël (51:12)Thank you for listening to this Green IO episode. In the next episode, we will talk about norms and standards. This is what everyone is asking for in the Green IT community. We want clarity on norms, clarity on standards, clarity on what is truly required. And I realized that, hey, not sure what is actually a standard or a norm. So I will be joined by Audrey Himmer, who's a former lead at AFNOR, the French representative of the ISO network, to talk about what are the norms and the standards which could be applied in the digital sustainability area. But most importantly, How do you build a norm? How do you build standards? Who are the stakeholders? How does it all work? And why do we have different standards, different norms? What are the different approaches? So it is a very unusual episode, but one that will bring light on a much needed topic, as a lot of us are required to boost digital sustainability.And before you leave, a small message from our sponsor. No, I'm kidding. Green IO remains a free and independent podcast. So, we still need your help to keep it that way. We have zero marketing budget, so you can really support us by spreading the word. Rate the podcast five stars on Apple and Spotify. It’s very useful as well as when you share an episode on social media or directly with a relative. It's a very good idea. So thanks a lot for your support, it means a lot to us. Others being me, but also Tani Levitt, our amazing podcast producer, and Jill Tellier, our amazing podcast curator. And of course, stay tuned by subscribing to Green IO on your favorite podcast platform, or via, the Green IO newsletter. The link is in the episode notes, but you already know the drill. Each month, you will get more insights and premium content to help you, the responsible technologists scattered all over the world, build a greener digital world, one byte at a time. ❤️ Never miss an episode! Hit the subscribe button on the player above and follow us the way you like.  📧 Our Green IO monthly newsletter is also a good way to be notified, as well as getting carefully curated news on digital sustainability packed with exclusive Green IO contents. 

Experts Fiona Leibundgut and Thomas Mosser discuss the challenges and importance of measuring IT footprint in large corporations like ABB Motion. They talk about the need for education on environmental impacts, effective communication of data, and the strategies for driving sustainability initiatives in a corporate setting. The podcast also explores the rise and challenges of Green IT, emphasizing the need for regulation and pragmatic approaches.

"Can Digital Marketing be low-carbon?" features guests Audrey Danthony and Diarmuid Gill, experts in AdTech with a passion for Sustainability. They delve into the environmental impact of digital marketing, highlighting the huge carbon footprint of digital campaigns. They discuss measurement strategies, evaluation of environmental impacts, and the importance of investing in low-carbon practices. Code refactoring, measuring carbon emissions, and tips to reduce carbon footprint in digital marketing are also explored. The podcast ends on an optimistic note, emphasizing the role of technological innovation and student involvement in sustainability.

Maxime Blondeau, an expert in anthropology, geography, and cosmology, discusses the impact of digital technologies on humanity. Topics include the mind revolutions humanity has gone through, the perception of an expanding digital world, the scarcity of attention, and breaking news shared by Maxime at the end of the episode.

Anastasis Stamatis, Lou Welgryn, and Theo Alves Da Costa discuss the environmental impact of AI, using AI to protect the ocean, automating sustainability data extraction, integrating AI into society, and news on corporate sustainability reporting.

In this episode, Asim Hussain, Director of the Green Software Foundation, discusses trust and consensus in the tech industry. They talk about building a trusted ecosystem, collaborative decision-making, and the tools for green software. They also touch on Asim's career journey, his advocacy for psychedelic medicine, and the interconnectedness of life.