Environment Variables

Chris Adams is joined by Thibaud Colas; product lead at Torchbox, president of the Django Software Foundation, and lead on Wagtail CMS. They explore the role of open source projects in tackling digital carbon emissions and discuss Wagtail's pioneering carbon footprint reporting, sustainable default settings, and grid-aware website features, all enabled through initiatives like Google Summer of Code. Thibaud shares how transparency, contributor motivation, and clear governance can drive impactful sustainability efforts in web development, and why measuring and reducing emissions in the Python ecosystem matters now more than ever.Learn more about our people:Chris Adams: LinkedIn | GitHub | WebsiteThibaud Colas: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterResources:Wagtail CMS [01:46]Web Almanac | HTTP Archive [08:03]Google Summer of Code [11:07] Wagtail RFCs [19:51] A Gift from Hugging Face on Earth Day: ChatUI-Energy [27:55]PyCon US [36:07]Grid-aware websites - Green Web Foundation [39:22] Climate Action Tech [41:07] Agent Bedlam: A Future of Endless AI Energy Consumption? - My Framer Site Here's how re/insurers can curb GenAI emissions | Reinsurance Business If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:Thibaud Colas: If you get your contributors to work on high value and high impact things, that's the best way to motivate them. So that's kind of the idea here is, formalize that we have a goal to reduce our footprint. And by virtue of this, we, you know, make it a more impactful thing for people to work on by having those numbers, by communicating this specific change to images, here is the potential for it to reduce emissions.Chris Adams: Hello, and welcome to Environment Variables, brought to you by the Green Software Foundation. In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software.I'm your host, Chris Adams.  Hello and welcome to Environment Variables, where we bring you the latest news and updates from the world of sustainable software development. I'm your host, Chris Adams. If you want the way we build software to be more sustainable and more inclusive, one way to improve the chances of this happening is to make it easier to build it that way,so building greener software goes with the grain of the software framework you're using. And one way to do that is update the defaults that prioritize accessibility and sustainability in the framework itself. One of the people I've seen who really exemplifies this idea and this approach is my guest today, Thibaud Colas,a lead developer at the software agency, Torchbox, the current president of the Django Software Foundation and the product lead at the popular Wagtail Content Management System, which is also built on top of Django. The Wagtail CMS powers sites like the NASA Jet Propulsion Labs website, the University of Pennsylvania's website, the Tate Gallery, and even the main NHS website in the UK.So while it might not have the same coverage as WordPress, which covers more than a third of the internet, still powers a large number of, a number of large sites, and changes made in this framework can have a decent reach. So changes made here are worth discussing because the Wagtail CMS docs, in my view, are probably the most advanced talking about sustainability for any open source CMS right now.And there's a clear link between sustainability and embodied admissions of the hardware that you actually, that people need to use to access your websites too. And with that in mind, you can see it's got some of the most developed accessibility features as well. But we're getting ahead of ourselves though, and Thibaud is in a much better place to talk about this than me.So Thibaud, thank you so much for joining us. Can I give you the floor to introduce yourself for our listeners?Thibaud Colas: Hi. It's my pleasure, Chris. Thank you for having me. I'm Thibaud, my pronouns are he/him. And, yeah, I'm the product lead, for the Wagtail CMS at Torchbox. Wagtail is an open source project and products, and Torchbox, we are the original creators of the project and main contributors. And, yeah, as product lead I helped shape the work of Torchbox on Wagtail and of other contributors as well. And, as president of the Jingo Software Foundation, I have similar responsibilities for the Django Project. Django being a big Web framework, one of the biggest on Python. Just to give you a sense of scale, Wagtail, that's on the order of 10 to 20,000 sites out there. And Django, we're talking half a million to a million projects.Chris Adams: Cool. Thank you, Thibaud. And, Thibaud, where are you calling me from today? Because, I,Thibaud Colas: I'm in Cambridge, UK. got started on Wagtail way back in New Zealand,but travels took me back to Europe and UK. I'm from France originally.Chris Adams: Oh, cool. Alright, thank you for that. So I'm Chris Adams. I am the co-chair of the Green Software Foundation Policy Working Group. I'm also one of the, we're also, we also have show notes for this.So all the projects and links that we discuss will be available. So in your quest to basically develop better sustain sustainable software engineering skills, that will all be available for this. So we look up podcast.greensoftware.foundation to find that. Alright, Thibaud, we've got a bunch of questions to get through.Shall we start?Thibaud Colas: Yeah, sure.Chris Adams: Okay. Alright. So one thing that I, that really came up on my radar a few years ago when I saw this, was that Wagtail was one of the few, one of the only projects I've seen so far that actually tried to put together a kind of carbon footprint inventory of all over the websites that it's responsible for.And I remember the posts and we'll share a link to this explaining some of this and some figures for this. Like "we reckon that Wagtail was kind of responsible for around like more than 8,000 tons of CO2 per year from all the sites that we run." Could you maybe talk a little bit about, basically the approach you took for that and why you even did that.'Cause there's probably a few discussions about decisions you had to make and trade offs you had to choose between model uses and coming up with numbers and all that. But maybe we go from the beginning about why you started that. Then we can dive into some of the details.Thibaud Colas: Yeah. Yeah. Well, simply enough, you know, when you start to think about the impact of technology on what we build, as developers, at least we love to try and quantify that impact. You know, put some figures on there. And the carbon footprint of websites, well, when you think of the sites, there are lots of components.There's things that happen in the browser, things that happen server side. And when I say server side these days, you know, the infrastructure is quite varied and somewhat opaque as well. So yeah, server side. So when it comes to Wagtail, with it being an open source project, people are, it's quite interoperable with all sorts of databases and file storage and web browsers obviously. So it becomes quite tricky toactually put a number on the emissions of one site. And I guess that's where we started at Torchbox specifically trying to quantify the emissions of our clients for 50 to a hundred websites. And from there, you know, you realize that, it makes lots of sense to try and do it for the whole white tail ecosystem so that you can make hopefully decisions for the whole ecosystem based on sites out there. So yeah.I think it was back in 2023 that we did this first, and there were definitely lots of ways back then to quantify sites' emissions. We didn't necessarily reinvent any, but we tried and understand, okay, when we have little knowledge of those thousands of websites out there, which methodologies should we be referring to when we try and put those figures together? So I say specifically methodologies because I think that's one of the potential pitfalls for developers starting in there. They assume that, somewhat like performance, you canhave quite finite reproducible numbers, but we're just not there yet with the carbon footprint of websites.So I think it's really important that you combine. So in our case, you combine web sustainability guidelines, related methodologies, so it's called sustainable web design model, and that you also combine things that look more closely at the servers, you know, CPU and resource use,and also other aspects in the browser.Chris Adams: Okay, cool. And one thing that I actually quite appreciated when you did this or when, the, you know, the team you are part of did this, was that you, yeah you shared all these numbers, but you also shared the underlying spreadsheets and the working so that other folks who might be running projects themselves can use as either a starting point or even possibly challenge and propose maybe improvements as we learn more about this because we know thatit's a difficult field to kind of navigate right now, but it is getting a bit easier, and as we learn more things, we are able to kind of incorporate that into the way we kind of model and think about some of the interventions we might make to maybe reduce the environmental footprint or improve it basically?Thibaud Colas: Yeah. Yeah, it's a, you might actually be aware of a project, Chris, the HTTP Archive's Web Almanac. They reviewed the whole of the Web on the other of 20 million websites every year, and they produced numbers based on this data set of websites. So that's kind of, I suppose what I tried to follow with this methodology as well, of sharing our results to the fullest extent so that other people can verify the numbers and potentially also put same numbers togetherfor their own sites, individual sites, or also site ecosystem. So, you know, Wagtail, it's a CMS among many other CMSs. There's lots of competitors in thatspace and nothing would make me happier than seeing other CMSs do the same and hopefully reusewhat we've spent time putting together. And yeah, obviously when we do this once for, Wagtail, we can try and do it also for Django.So there's also these benefits of, across the whole tech stack, having that kind of methodology more nailed down for people who make those decisions. You know, like product level decisions.Chris Adams: Oh, okay, cool. And just like we have release cycles for presumably new websites or like new CMSs and everything like that, as we learn more, we might be able to improve the precision and the accuracy of some of this to refine the assumptions, right. And, you know, many eyes make bugs shallow. So Drupal folks, if you're hearing this, or WordPress folks, yeah.Over to you basically.Thibaud Colas: Exactly. And you know, definitely the methodologies evolve over time. So one of the recent ones I really like is how, with Firefox browser, you can measure the CPU usage to render a single page.And just that is becoming so much more accessible these days that we could potentially do it on every release of the CMS.Chris Adams: Cool. Well, let's come back to that because this is one thing that I found quite interesting about the, some of the work that you folks have been doing is not only were you starting to measure this, but you're looking at actually options you can take to maybe set new defaults or improve some of this stuff.And, as I understand it, Wagtail, you've had some luck actually finding some funding and finding ways to basically cover the cost of people to essentially work on this stuff via things like the Google Summer of Code and things like that. Maybe you could talk a little bit about some of that, because as I understand it, you're in year three of successfully saying, "Hey, this is important.Can someone fund it?" And then actually getting some funding to pay people to work on this stuff.Thibaud Colas: Yeah. Yeah. Well, yeah. So, once you have those numbers in place as to, you know, how much emissions the sites out there produce, try and refine it down to a few specific aspects of the sites that, you know, you go throughthe quick wins, you figure out what you have the most leverage over, and then you realize there's this and that concepts that are potentially quite fundable if youknow just how to frame it and who to talk to. And we, as Torchbox, we have quite a few clients that care about the footprint of their websites,but it's definitely also a good avenue. The Google Summer of Code program you mentioned, it's about getting new people excited with open source as new contributors in the open source space.It's entirely funded by Google. And essentially Google, they trust projects like Wagtail and Django to come up with those ideas that are, you know, impactful, and also sensible avenues for people to get up to speed with open source. And so, yeah, we, it's been three years now that we've done this with a sustainability focus where we try every year to have an idea in this space.And I think it's quite interesting as an option because, few people that come to open source, you know, early in theircareer are aware of sustainability. It's quite a good, opportunity for them to learn something very new, even if they might already know the technology like Django and Wagtail. And for us, it allows us to work on those concepts that, you know, we saw the data, we saw the promise. So I think, the first year we did 2023, we looked at image optimization.It's actually quite a big thing for a CMS, in my opinion at least, that, you know, people wanna add lovely visuals to all of their pages and you know, maybe sometimes there is a case for fewer images if you want to lower the footprints. But it's definitely also a case where you have to have images, you want them to beas low footprint as possible. So for that specific project, we were joined by two contributors, who helped us. One worked on the AVIF support in the CMS. AVIF being one of the newer image formats that promises to have a lower file sizethan the alternative. And the other one helped us essentially make, the APIs we have in Wagtail to generate multiple images, make that more ergonomic. So you'd be able to generate, say, three different variations of an image and then only send to the user the one that fits the best for how the image is displayedso that hopefully it's smaller.So it's this responsive images concept.Chris Adams: Oh, I see. So you're basically are. It may be that the server needs to generate some of these images 'cause you don't have control over who's accessing your website. But when someone's accessing something with maybe a small, like a touch device or something, rather than send this massive thing over the wire, you can send something which is appropriately smaller.So it might take up less space inside the memory and the DOM and less over the wire as well, right.Thibaud Colas: Exactly. You were talking about the grain of Wagtail. Wagtail has very few opinions as far as how you create the pages, but we definitely try and leverage the grain of HTML, so this responsive images pattern is quite well put together in HTML and Web standards and, yeah, really happy with the results.Honestly, I think for the specific trial sites we rolled it out, it was on the other of 30% lower page weight and, for the Wagtail web at large, like every year we see the improvements in those, audits about how much usage there is of modern image format, how much usage there is of responsive images.We see the figures improve. So, really cool.Chris Adams: Cool. We should actually share links to some of these things as well, actually. 'Cause one of the wonderful things about working with an open source project is you can say, well, if you want this to be a norm, then is the PR you could copy basically, right.Thibaud Colas: Yeah. And something like AVIF support, I'm sure we'll talk about it at some points. Definitely. You know, we couldn't create the AVIF decoders and so on ourselves, so we've been relying on the Python ecosystem at large. And yeah. Now those things are in a place where lots of projects have those decoders where available.Chris Adams: Cool. Are there any things, are there any other like, so that's, that was year one and this is year three and I think I can probably share with you is that, so we're a nonprofit organization. We publish a library called CO2.js. We've added, we've managed to get some funding from Google once for the Google Summer of Docs, not Google Summer of Code, where they actually funded us to make some of this library a bit easier for other people to use. And we found that quite helpful because that's been one of the ways people come to this for the first time is they use a library called CO2.js. And that wasn't something we could prioritize. So it's, kind of nice.It just, it would be nice if there's more organizations funding this kind of work rather than just like one Web giant. Like it's nice that Google is doing this, but if you too work in a large tech company and you wanna actually fund this stuff or make it easier for your engineers to do this, then,yeah, it's right there, folks. Okay. So maybe I can ask about some of the other years that you have running, like is there anything else that you'd like, like to talk about or draw people's attention to for some of the other ones?Thibaud Colas: Google Summer of Code is a three month program, but lots of those things, to be honest, they keep chugging along in the backgroundfor quite a while and making improvements. So, year two of this, we worked on the starter project for Wagtail. So a starter website where, just like as you mentioned earlier, the defaults, trying to make sure that it's easier for people to get a site up and running that has all of the right things in place to be low impact.So that time, a contributor, Aman Pandey, helped us with the designsas well as the coding of these templates. And, just from the get go, the idea was let's measure the designs even before they touch a Web browser. Let's make sure that we understand all of the, you know, newer standards, like the Web specific guidelines that those designs have that baked in so that when you generate thesites, you are guaranteed better results. so this template, this project template's still in progress, but the designs at least are super promising. And year three, so year three,starting as of this week, just to be clear, is grid awareness. So grid awareness is a big term. Essentially it means looking at ways that, as the website loads in, your browser, it'll be optimized based on the carbon intensity of your computer and your local grid electricity. So what that means is if it would take, produce lots of emissions for the site to load in your browser, we try and make the website optimized for the emissions to lower. And yeah, so our contributor for this, Rohit, he's been around the Wagtail community for a bit and has this interest in sustainability.And again, I think a great example of something that will tangibly help us reduce the impact of Wagtail websites out there and also make more developers aware of those patterns and, you know, the underlying need for those patterns.Chris Adams: I am glad you mentioned the names actually. 'cause, on the initial year, I was working closely, I was working with Aman Pandey and I think one of your colleagues might be working with Paarth. So, hi Paarth. Hi Aman. I hope you're listening. It's really nice to actually see this. 'Cause these were people who are, like you said, early career didn't get that much exposure, but honestly compared to like the industry, they're relative experts now. And that might say more about the state of the industry is right now, but is, this was something I actually found it quite nice working with someone who was relatively young, who was actually really keen and honestly worryingly productive, did make me worry a bit about my own job going forward.But yeah, this was one thing that was, really cool from that actually.Thibaud Colas: Paarth and Aman are two of the mentors working with me on this Wagtail websitesproject this year. So this is also the other goal of this Google Summer of Code program is retaining those people in the open source world and, yeah, definitely, you know, we are at a point now where we have more and more of those people coming to open source with that realization. There's way more room for this to happen on other projects like Wagtail, but, baby steps. Chris Adams: Oh wow. I didn't realize that you actually had, there was a kind of program to kind of build like, I guess like invest in, provide some of that leadership so people who prioritize this are able to kind of have a bit more of influence inside that project, for example.Thibaud Colas: Yeah, exactly. Well, you know, open source, we have, we have very different incentives compared to the corporates and, yeah, for profit world. So we don't necessarily have, super clear ways to retain people, but definitely people who are interested and have the drive, like we try and retain them by having them move from contributors first time to repeat maintainers, mentors and so on.Chris Adams: Oh, cool. All right, so that is a nice segue to allow us to talk a little bit about, I guess, taking ownership of carbon emissions and like the strategies that you have there. Because, one thing we should add into this list is that there's actually a roadmap for Wagtail specifically.I think it's, is RFC 90 or is there a particular term for like a request for comments or something that you folks use to kind of talk about governance and talk about what you prioritize in this? Thibaud Colas: It's a bit of a running joke. In Python they have the PEPproposals, Python Enhancement Proposal, and in Django they have the DEPs. People have been wondering if Wagtail should have the WEPs,but right now we just have RFC, requests for comments.And Yeah. ,It's just a super, like, simple way for us to invite.It's really rather than, you know, create those governance, or technical architecture decision. Go documents, in, private chats, put them in public, and then invite feedback from others. So, you know, we've had this RFC for, couple years now, I believe. I got some good support from one of the experts out there on open source governance, Lauri Apple.She coached me through, you know, trying to build up community momentum and also trying to find ways to make this reusable again beyond Wagtail and yeah, so this RFC, like, if you're deep in this space, it's nothing super special. It's about building awareness, finding opportunities for fundraising,working on the right concepts, but I think it's quite unique for open source projects to have that kind of clear, like direction for those things. Open source projects don't even necessarily have a roadmap of any kind to start with. And one on specific topics like this I think it's really important. I think there's something Lauri says often, which isif you get your contributors to work on high value and high impact things, that's the best way to motivate them. So that's kind of the idea here is formalize that we have a goal to reduce our footprint. And by virtue of this, we, you know, make it a more impactful thing for people to work onby having those numbers, by communicating this specific change to images, here is the potential for it to reduce emissions.Chris Adams: Oh, I see. Okay. So I've just followed the link to the RFC that you have here, and there's actually quite a lot of stuff here. So I can see a link to the free green software for practitioners course for people who don't know that much about it, I can see that Wagtail itself has a sustainability statement.So like this, these are our priorities. So there's some immediate kind of explicit statement that this is something you care about. And then as I understand it, there's some references to other things. So there's the prior work, with the GSOC, Google Summer of Code. There's references to the W3C Web sustainability guidelines and a bunch of stuff like that.And there's few other. We'll show a link to this because I think it's actually a really good example for other people to be aware of or see, like, this is what a relatively large mature project does, and this is what it looks like when they start prioritizing this. Because, yeah, there are some, there are some organizations that are doing this quite well.I know that there is a .NET based CMS that I've totally forgotten the name, Umbraco CMS, also have some quite strong, have also quite advanced in this. And they're another good example of this, but there's kind of, when you talk about, okay, prioritizing this and responsibility, there's a whole question about, okay, well,whose job is it or who's responsible for this? Because you are building a piece of software and like you might not get that much control over who adopts the software, for example, like I think when you shared this breakdown, we saw like a, I think you mentioned there was one Vietnamese website, Vinmec, that was like making up like a third of the reported emissions. Thibaud Colas: Put me in touch.Chris Adams: Yeah.Thibaud Colas: Yes. So this is a very, with the caveat that carbon accountingisn't my expertise, you know, in the corporate world, we have the very clear, greenhouse gas GHG protocol, and scope one, scope two, scope three standards. And in that corporate world, I think, there's this, I think scope three, category 11, use of Chris Adams: use of products. Thibaud Colas: The use of, it's worse than that. It's use of sold products.Chris Adams: That's it. Yeah. Sold. Yeah.Thibaud Colas: So if you're not a corporation, we're not a corporation, wagtail, we, have about 20 contributors on thecore team. And if you don't sell your product, which standards are you meant to be using, then, to decide essentially which, which emissions we should be reporting on?So the disfigure of the carbon footprint of Watta on the order of five to 10 thousand tons a year. That's assuming, you know, we take some ownership for this usage of Wagtail and of the websites built with it. And it's actually, I think, quite tricky to navigate in the open source world.Understanding, which standards of reporting are, helpful because, you know, in some respects, people who shop for a website builder or CMS or any tech really kind of expect specific standards to be met. You know, you mentioned having a sustainability statement. No one's expecting that just yet in the open source world, but we definitely want things to move that way. And we have to, you know, make sure that when we create those figures they are somewhat comparable to other projects. So, yeah, I guess for Wagtail, you know, there's the fact that you don't control who usesit and you don't control how they use it, either. So, if someone wants to, you know, make a site that's partly bigand it's partly popular in some country, maybeChris Adams: Yeah. Thibaud Colas: adult entertainment websitesthat don't have any. Chris Adams: Does PornHub go on WordPress' ledger? Right? is it on their accounts? Yeah.Thibaud Colas: Exactly. We have a few like this in the Wagtail and Django world and, you know, technology, you know, it's open source license. We have no interest in taking any kind of control or having a more contractual relationship with those projects, but we still need to navigate how to account for their use essentially. What actually got me started on this, Chris,I think it's worth I mentioned, is the work of Mozillaand Mozilla Foundation. They were the first ones I saw, I think back in 2020 reporting the use of Firefox browseras part of the emissions of Mozilla. And it was, I think it was 98% of the emissions of Firefox were like, sorry, the emissions of Mozilla came from Firefox.And it just got me thinking, you know, for Wagtail and Django, obviously it's a similar type of scale.Chris Adams: Also with Firefox, the browser, like you don't necessarily pay Firefox to use it, but you may be paying via the fact that your atten, you know, you kind of pay in your attention. And the fact that when you click on a search, an ad in Google, one of the search services, Firefox is being paid that way.So you're not actually making a direct monetary, like you're not giving them money directly, but there is payment taking place and changing hands. And this is one thing that is actually quite difficult to figure out. Like, okay, how do you represent that stuff? Because like you said, it's not sold per se, or you're not paying in money, but you may be be paying in something else, for example.And, it's almost like you know this, I mean it's, I guess it's a good thing that you do see some of these protocols for reporting being updated because they're not necessarily a good fit for how lots of like new business models on the internet actually work, for example.Thibaud Colas: Yeah. And it's really important for us to get in this space as, open source technologists, I believe. Because I mentioned procurement. Definitely the expectations are rising in Europe, in particular in the EU, on the carbon impact of technology. And I think it's quite a good opportunity for open source.You know, we have very high transparency standards for us to meet those requirements, not necessarily to lower the emissions dramatically, but at least be transparent on the impact of the software.Chris Adams: Yeah, I mean, this is actually, you touched on quite an interesting thing, which is both a link to some of the Mozilla work, but also, in the kind of AI world, which is kind of adjacent to us as like webby people. There's, I know that Mozilla provided a bit of funding to Code Carbon, which is an open source Python library for people to understand the environmental footprint of AI training, and I think these days some inference as well via the kind of Energy Score AI,a project that they have with hugging face, for example. So the, you know, one of the reasons you have that is because, oh God, I'm gonna murder the name. There's a French supercomputer, Jean Paul. Jean. Oh, do you know the one I'm talking Thibaud Colas: No, I don't actually. Chris Adams: Okay. So maybe the thing I'll do is I'll give you a chance to respind to thiswhile I look it up, but I do know that one of the reasons we have any numbers at all for the, environmental footprint of AI was because there was a, you know, publicly funded, supported supercomputer with some work by, some people at hugging face, I forget, the Bloom model. Thibaud Colas: Oh, The Bloom Chris Adams: yeah. Yeah, exactly. That, we have these numbers and there was a paper produced to actually highlight this.Because the supercomputer, the people who are running the super supercomputer are able to share some of these numbers where it's, where traditionally we've had a real challenge getting some of these numbers back. So that's one place where having some open examples, at least give us something like a proxy in the face of like not quite deafening silence from groups like Open AI and Anthropic and stuff like that, but we're not seeing that much in the way of numbers. And given that we're seeing this massive build out, it's definitely something we are, I'm very glad. It's useful to have like open source organization, open source projects, and some, other ways of funding this to actually at least create some data for us to have a kind of data informed discussion about some of this.Thibaud Colas: A hundred percent. Yeah. This Bloom large language model is, I think really, it's really essential for us for, to see this research being done because then when, you know, people talk about adding AI in a CMS or in their Django projects, we can point them to understanding like, you know, what the potential increase in the carbon footprint of the project is, and yeah. You know, in the AI world, there's this whole debate about what open source means for AI models.Definitely it's not, there's lots of gray areas there, but if you wanna reuse their research, it's much easier if there's just a underlying philosophy of open source and open data in those organizations.Chris Adams: Jean Zay, that's the name of the supercomputer in France, which has this, there's actually ones in Boston as well. There is one over there. And the, in the US NREL, the National Renewable Energy Labs folks, they did, they've shared a bunch of information about this as well when they've got access to this, and this is actually providing a bit of kind of light to a discussion, which is mo mostly about heat so far it seems. So that's actually quite kind of useful. You've just made me realize that later on this year, this might be one of the angles that we might see people talking about the use of AI for actually drilling for oil and gas and other kind of stuff which is not great for climate because, NE, which is a nationally, it's a state owned.NE is a state owned energy company in Italy. They are one of the few people who actually have a publicly owned supercomputer. And because Italy is one of the countries that signed the Paris Agreement, there's currently a whole law court case about essentially suing NE to say, well, if you are state owned and, this is, and you've signed this, why the hell are you actually now using AI to drill for oil and gas, for example? And this might be one of the ways that we actually see some numbers coming out of this. 'Cause since 2019, we know that there are companies which are doing things with this.But for example, we know that say companies like Microsoft are involved in helping use these tools to kind of get oil and gas and fossil fuels out this out of the ground. But there's not much visible, there's not much out there right now since the press release has stopped in 2019, and it feels like it's a real gap we have when we talk about sustainability and technology, and particularly AI, I suppose.Thibaud Colas: Yeah, that's really interesting for us to consider for Wagtail as well because, you know, we talk about the carbon footprint of the websites, but it's also important to consider what the website might be enabling or, you know, in positives and negatives. And, yeah, even beyond websites, when I've tried to, you know, take my work from Wagtail to Django and even the Python ecosystem at large, with Python, you have to reckon with the footprint of web services built with Python, but also of all the data science that supports this same, you know, oil and gas industry. So it's tricky.Chris Adams: Yeah, I mean, we've just saw, like we're speaking on the 4th of June and we had there two days ago, and, we've seen like massive drone attack wiping out like a third of Russia's bomber fleet. Right. And that was basically like some Arduino drone pilot software was one of the key pieces that was used inside that.And it's not necessarily like the open source developers, they didn't build it for that. But we are now seeing all this stuff show up and like we haven't figured out ways to kind of talk about where the responsibility lies or how you even think about some of this stuff. Because yeah, this takes the like,we might have words like dual use for talking about these kind of technologies, but in a world of open source, it becomes much, much harder to figure out where some of these boundaries lie and how you actually, well, I guess, set some norms. I mean, maybe this is actually one thing. Yeah, I'll leave you some space then I wanna ask you a little bit about, you mentioned the wider Python ecosystem,'cause I know that's something you've actually been having some conversations with as well.Thibaud Colas: Yeah, well, connecting the dots, you know, it's also the usage, but also as contributors, you have to consider that maybe there are only so many people in the Wagtail or Django worldthat are responsible for how the tech is put together. So maybe in some sense you do share some kind of responsibility personally for the tech you produced out there, even though you don't control how people will ue it. Which is, you know, a whole dimension of how you or how much you take ownership of that. And yeah, in the Python world more widely, you know, Python is the most popular language out there. Even if it might not be the most performance, even if there might be simpler languages that help you get more optimized, lower emissions software, people are gonna use Python in all sorts of ways.And some of them, you agree with it, some you don't. I think that's one of the, you know, realities of open source contribution you have to be aware of.Chris Adams: You've actually said something quite interesting about, okay, yeah, there's a limited number of people inside the Wagtail community and you've been able to have some success in like helping set some norms or helping help kind of set some directions there. And there's maybe a slightly larger group, which is like in the Django land, like when with you in the kind of acting as a president now, I know there's some interest that you have there. And there's groups that I've been involved with, right. But you also mentioned that there's a kind of wider Python ecosystem there, people talking about this, I mean, is this, if someone is actually looking, let's say they're coding on Python, they wanna find out who else is doing this. Like, is there someone you'd look, you'd point people to?Or are there any conversations you're aware of going on right now? Thibaud Colas: The Python ecosystem is big.So one of the big challenges to get started with is just putting enough people together to have those discussions. I have tried on the Python discussion forum. I think it's, "who's working on sustainability in Python?" is the thread I put together. And I guess, I think, to me, what's important at this point is just getting tech people, you know, aware of the fact that we have this climate change challenge and that they can do something about it. And then, you know, realizing that open source has a role to play and as open source contributors we can very much move the needle. So in the Python world, you know, it's being so big and the uses being so different, there are lots of ways to help by working on the performance of Python itself, but there are also lots of ways to help outside that. Even something as simple, you know, as the Python Software Foundation trying to quantify their own organization footprint or the footprint of a conference like PyCon US, that can go quite a long way, I think.Chris Adams: Cool. Thank you for that. Actually, I'm really glad you mentioned PyCon US because there were a number of, talks that I heard other people on other podcasts talking about it. They were really pleased to see. So there, there seemed to be some latent interest there. And what we could do is we'll share a link to some movie videos that were up there, because yeah, I was pleasantly surprised to see them when I saw PyCon's videos come up on YouTube because,wow, it came up really fast. Like there is, you know, really nice things about like design pressure and how to think about like your code. But yeah, there's a few people saying who are totally new to, like, I've been, you know, the existing green software field, there are people who seem to be quite new to it talking about this.So that's, that's encouraging.Thibaud Colas: Yeah. And in some ways, you know, AI, the whole negative impacts of AI, the whole like problem and kind of forms for our whole industry, but with, you know, LLMs being so costly to train, so, you know, energy intensive to train in some ways it also helps people understand better the implications. Yeah, exactly.And just build up awareness. So I think what you're referring to at PyCon US is, the work onChris Adams: Yes. Yeah. Thank you.Thibaud Colas: Yeah, Machine Learning in Python, quantifying the energy impact of that and LM specifically. And, yeah, people like him, you know, he's involved with Google Summer of Code for Django, sodefinitely in the position. Yeah. Yeah. And, I think it's just a, it's a matter of, for us as open source people of, nurturing, you know,those areas of expertise. Making sure we have those people having the conversations and, yeah, also sharing them in a wider sphere of the industry at large.Chris Adams: And I suppose, I mean, one of the other things is that pretty much all the people you've mentioned who are going through the Summer of Code stuff, these are people who are in one of the regions which you're seeing like 50 degrees Celsius heat waves and stuff like that. It, there's kind of like moral weight that comes from someone talking about, they say, "Hey, I'm experiencing this stuff and I'm in an area which is very much exposed to this" in a way that if you are in some way, you are somewhat insulated to, from a lot of these problems, it doesn't, it might not carry the same weight actually.Wow. Thank you. I hadn't realized that.Thibaud Colas: I really liked this parallel that one of my colleagues at Torchbox put together about our work in accessibilityand the war in Ukraine, talking about other big topics, where, you know, practically speaking, there is a war, it's horrendous, people are getting maimsand they don't necessarily have the same life after.And if you invest in accessibility, means being be better able to support. people who go through the conflict with major harm and, yeah, I think it's quite important for us in open source, you know, when I, when Lauri talks about high impact contributions, to hark back to those values you might have about helping others and realize the connection, even though, you know, there are quite a few layers between me, a human contributor, and a Wagtail website, we can have that impact.Chris Adams: Well, I guess that's the whole point of the web, right? The Web is, this is for everyone like London Olympics, Tim, I mean, Tim Berners-Lee, his like massive thing. "This is for everyone" being a kind of, okay, we're getting a bit teary and a bit, get a bit carried away ourselves and we're running short on time, so I should probably kind of wrap this up before we go too, far down that rabbit hole. Thank you so much for coming on for this. As we wrap up, are there any projects or things that you would like to draw people's attention to that you found particularly exciting of late before we wrap up?Thibaud Colas: Definitely. I'd recommend people check out this Grid-Aware websites work that the Green Web Foundation puts together. Chris Adams: I did not tell him to say that. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thibaud Colas: He did not. But you know, it is actually really impactful in my mind to put together multiple CMS partners through this project and, on a personal basis, this type of project,I was really skeptical of the benefits at the beginning, and it's really interesting to get your thought process starting on, yeah, like tangible ways to move the needle on new sites, but also existing ones. So specifically the work we're doing for this project, Google Summer of Code. I think we'll have results to show for it in about a month's time and hopefully it's reusable for other people.Chris Adams: Yeah, there's actually, okay, now that you mentioned this, I've just gotta touch on it. There is actually a grid aware SDK, which is currently out there, and you can think of Grid Aware as being very aware, kind of like quite comparable to carbon aware, basically, but with a few extra different nuances.The thing I should probably share is that this is actually work that has had a degree of funding from SIDN, which is a Dutch foundation that has been trying to figure out what to do in like greening the internet. So there are pockets of interest if you know who to speak to. And hopefully we should see more of these things kind of bearing fruit over the coming months.Alright. I don't wanna spend too much time talking about that, because we're coming up to time. Thibaud, thank you so much for giving us your attention and time and sharing your learnings about, both in the word of Django, Python and in Wagtail. If people are curious about what you're up to, where should people look?Thibaud Colas: I had, simply enough I'd love for them to join yet another thing you didn't ask me to mention, which is the Climateaction.tech Slack. this is my favorite place to, you know, have this tight-knit community of tech people working on this stuff. And just DM me there. And I'll be very happy to answer any questions about any of this or just get you started with your own projects. For me, specifically, otherwise in the Wagtail world, the Wagtail Newsletter is a good place to have this work come to you on a weekly basis. And, yeah, just LinkedIn otherwise.Chris Adams: Brilliant. Thank you so much for this. I hope you have a lovely day and yeah. Hopefully we'll cross paths again soon. All right. Take care of yourself.Thibaud Colas: Pleasure, Chris.Chris Adams: Cheers. Okay, bye.  Hey everyone, thanks for listening. Just a reminder to follow Environment Variables on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And please do leave a rating and review if you like what we're doing. It helps other people discover the show, and of course, we'd love to have more listeners.To find out more about the Green Software Foundation, please visit greensoftware.foundation. That's greensoftware.foundation in any browser. Thanks again, and see you in the next episode. 

Environment Variables host Anne Currie welcomes Jamie Dobson, co-founder of Container Solutions and author of the upcoming book Visionaries, Rebels and Machines. Together, they explore the history and future of cloud computing through the lens of sustainability, efficiency, and resilience. Drawing on insights from their past work, including The Cloud Native Attitude and Building Green Software, they discuss how cloud-native principles can support the transition to renewable energy, the potential and pitfalls of AI, and why behavioral change, regulation, and smart incentives are key to a greener digital future.Learn more about our people:Anne Currie: LinkedIn | WebsiteJamie Dobson: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterResources:The Cloud Native Attitude: Amazon.co.uk | Anne Currie, Jamie Dobson [01:21]Building Green Software: O'Riley | Anne Currie, Sarah Hsu, Sara Bergman [01:38]Visionaries, Rebels and Machines: Amazon.com | Jamie Dobson [03:28]Jevons paradox - Wikipedia [11:41]  If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:Jamie Dobson: We're loaded up all these data centers, we're increasing data sets, but ultimately no matter how much compute and data you throw at an artificial neural network, I think it would never fully replace what a human does. Chris Adams: Hello, and welcome to Environment Variables, brought to you by the Green Software Foundation. In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software.I'm your host, Chris Adams. Anne Currie: Hello and welcome to Environment Variables Podcast, where we give you the latest news and updates from the world of sustainable software development. So this week I am your guest host Anne Currie. And you don't have the dulcet tones of Chris Adams, you're left with me this week. So we're gonna do something a little bit different this week.I have got an old friend and colleague and co-author, Jamie Dobson in to talk about it. So Jamie is the co-founder and CEO of a company called Container Solutions. And he's the author of the soon to be released book; Visionaries, Rebels and Machines, which I've read, and that's what we'll be talking a lot about.And he's also the, one of my co-authors of a book I wrote nearly 10 years ago called the Cloud Native Attitude, which is about the principles of moving into the cloud. And there's an awful lot in there about sustainability with that, there's a lot we need to talk about around that. And it was actually for me, the precursor to the book that I wrote which came out with O'Reilly last year, with co-authors Sarah Hsu and Sara Bergman, Building Green Software, which as I always say every week,everybody listening to this podcast should read because you'll find it very interesting and it is couldn't be more germane. So today we're gonna talk about those three books, really, and the thematic links between them all, which are really about resource efficiency, building at scale without it costing a ridiculous amount of money or using a ridiculous amount of resources.And also resilience, which is something we're gonna really have to focus on when it comes to running on renewable power. So, let me let Jamie introduce himself and maybe tell us a little bit about his new book, Visionaries, Rebels, I can never remember whether it's Rebels, visionaries and Machines.It's Visionaries, Rebels and Machines. Go for it, Jamie.Jamie Dobson: Visionaries, Rebels and Machines. That's correct. Hello Anne. Thanks for having me on the podcast. And hello to all your listeners. who tune in every week? Yeah. So my name is Jamie. I am indeed the co-founder of a company called Container Solutions. But it's no longer, I'm no longer, I should say, the chief exec,'cause I handed that role over about a year ago, which is probably why, or, you know, it explains why I could find the time to finish writing this damn book. So Container Solutions is a company that specializes in cloud transformation, helping customers, you know, get off whatever infrastructure they're running on now and get onto, you know, efficient cloud infrastructure.And if we do that right, then it's kind of green and sustainable infrastructure, but it's hard to get right, which I'm sure we're gonna discuss today. Anne Currie: Indeed. Yes. Yes. So, so you've got a book that's about to come out, which I have read, but it's not yet available in, the, in the stores, but it will be available on, in all good book bookstores, Visionaries, Rebels and Machines. And I, the reason why I asked you to come on is because I think there are a lot of ideas in there that would, that we need to be talking about and thinking about.So, so tell us a little bit about Visionaries, Rebels and Machines, and then I'll tell you why I think it's interesting.Jamie Dobson: Absolutely. Yeah. So, so Visionaries, Rebels and Machines, we have to start at a point in time. And that point in time is about four or five years ago. And I was asked the question, "what's the cloud?" It was, the person asking me, it was a junior colleague, new to Container Solutions. And, you know, I started to answer, or at least I opened my mouth,and of course I can answer that question, but I can't answer it necessarily succinctly. So I was asked the question, I think probably around about June, so maybe about five years ago today actually. And over the summer period I was thinking, "God, how do you answer that question? What is the cloud?" And so I started to creep backwards in time.Well, the cloud is, you know, there's a bunch of computers in a warehouse somewhere. But what's a computer? And then once I asked that question. Well, computers are things made up of transistor. Well, what's a transistor? And what I came to the conclusion over the summer, was the following:The cloud can only really be understood in its own historical context. And so interestingly, once we got to the point of, you know, answering the question, what is the cloud? The arrow was already flying. You know, there was a, an arrow was shot round about the late Victorian time at Thomas Edison's Menlo Park facility in New Jersey, and that arrow flew all the way through the last century through the web, through cloud computing, and it continues to fly with the rise of artificial intelligence. And so the last part of the book is, okay, now we know what the cloud is and what it does, where might it take us next in regards to artificial neural networks and all of that stuff? So that was the book. The Visionaries and the Rebels of the people who built teams, built teams that were innovative. All of them had psychological safety even though the, that concept wasn't known at the time. And so, these historical figures are not just ancient history, like not just Thomas Edison, but also the Jeff Bezos's of the world, the Reed Hastings's, and the modern figures of cloud computing. The visionaries and the rebels can teach the rest of us what to do with our machines, including how to make 'em sustainable. Anne Currie: And that is the interesting thing there. So I enjoyed the book. It's, it is quite, it is a readable romp. And I very much connect with your, with your initial motivation of trying to explain something that sounds simple, but actually you realize, oh gosh, I'm gonna have to write an entire book to even get my own head around this rather than, you know, 'cause that was true for, well, when we wrote, it's actually a, Cloud Native Attitude, which was the book that we wrote together started off 10 years ago, was pretty much for the same, it was kicked off in the same way. We were, we were saying, well, what is cloud native? What, what are people doing it for, and why are they doing it this way? And quite often, and Building Green Software,the O'Reilly book, which is really germane to this, to this podcast, was again, the same thing. It's what is, what does the future look like for systems to be sustainable? How do we align, and make, what is the future gonna look like? And, where, and that's always seated in the past. What has been successful?How did we get here? Jamie Dobson: Absolutely. So you can't move into the future unless you understand your past. And I think the similarities between the Cloud Native Attitude and Visionaries and Rebels is the tone. So my book deals with horrible things, child poverty, exploitation of people, and the truth is that a reader will put up with that for maybe one paragraph.So if you want to, if you want to teach computing and how it can enslave the human race or not, or how it can liberate them and touch all of these really difficult themes, you've got to do it in a pretty lighthearted manner. And the reason people are saying, "oh, it's a page turner. it's entertaining, it's a bit of a rump,"it's because we focus on the characters and all the things that happens to them. And I think that started with a cloud-native attitude because unless you can speak quite lightheartedly, you so quickly get bogged down in concepts that even for people like us who work in computing and are passionate about computing, it's just extremely boring. And there are some fantastic books out there right now about artificial intelligence, but they're so dry that the message fails to land. And I think I was trying to avoid that. Anne Currie: And you know for, 'cause we wrote Cloud Native Attitude together. But it is, if these, books are ideally a form of leadership. When you write a book, you are either, you are kind of saying, look, this is what I want to happen in the future.You're trying to lead people and explain and reason and inspire. But you have to inspire. If it's boring, you're not gonna lead anyone. No one wants to follow you to the boring location they want to follow you to the exciting location.Jamie Dobson: No. Exactly. And I think the problem is computer people, most of us have been to university, so we're on the academic path. And what happens is you forget to tell stories. So everything becomes about what the research says, "research indicates." So it's all exposition and no narrative. And the problem that is people switch off very quickly, and the paradox is that you don't make your point because you've bored your reader to death.Anne Currie: Yeah. And this is something that's, that comes up for me over and over again in the green software movement that we quite often, we tell the story of it's being, everything being very sad. And everybody goes, "well, I don't wanna be there in that sad world." And, but it's not a sad story. I mean, it is like climate change is a really sad story.It's terrible. It's something we need to avoid. We're running away from something, but we're also running towards something. Because there's something amazing here, which is renewables are so cheap. If we can build systems that run on solar and wind, and a little bit of storage, but not, but much less storage than we currently expect,then we have a world in which there's really loads more power. We can do so much more than we do now, and it's just a matter of choosing what we do with it. It is a, we are not just running away from something. We're running towards something, which is amazing. And, so yeah, we tried to keep that tone.And Building Green Software is designed to be funny. You are. It's the only O'Reilly book. One of, one of my reviewers says it's the only O'Reilly book where you actually get, you laugh out loud whilst reading it. You could read it on the beach.Jamie Dobson: This is exactly why we created a conference at Container Solutions called WTF. What The F is Cloud Native? And it's basically because if you cannot entertain, you'll never get your message across. I've got a question for you, Anne, this wonderful future that we're heading towards, I see it as well. But in the research for visionaries and rebels, there was a big chapter I had on Henry Ford, and in the end it didn't, quite make it into the book, but basically, once Edison had created electricity, then all of a sudden you had elevators for the first time. So the New York landscape did not become a thing till we had electricity because there was a limit on how big the buildings could be. And that exact moment Henry Ford came in with the motorcar, and he was so successful in getting it off the production line cheaply, the beautiful boulevards of New York, of American cities, New York, St Louis, and places like that ended because basically people said, "well, we don't need to be in the city.We can drive to the suburbs." And a lot of historians were saying if Henry Ford had just gone a bit slower, we would've adapted to the motor car quicker and therefore the cities of today would look very different. And one of my concerns with green software is,the speed of which we're moving with data centers and AI is so quick.I wonder if we're having another motor car moment. the future's within grasp, but if we go too quick, might we screw it up on the way?Anne Currie: So I think what you are circling around here is the idea of, it is something that comes up quite often, which is Jevons Paradox, which is the idea that, as you get better at using something, you use more of it, it becomes cheaper, because actually because there's untapped demand.So where there's, where people are going, "gee, you know, I really want to live in a high rise city because then naturally everybody can live together and it will be vastly better for us and we'll prefer it. And therefore we take more elevators and we go up because we've got elevators."And people really want cars. I mean, it's one of the things, I don't drive. but everybody loves to drive. There's no point in, tying green with like nobody driving because they love to drive. And there was untapped demand for it, and therefore it was met. And remember at the time there was really, but back then we didn't consider there to be any problem with using more petrol. We didn't consider there to be any problem with using fossil fuels. And everybody went, "yeah, hooray! Let's use more and more of it."But it did massively improve our quality of life. So I think all green messages we have to say, well, we want the improvement in quality of life, but we also want a planet and we have to optimize both of those in parallel.We can't say that you're trading off. And this, I know that people have a tendency to look down on efficiency improvements, but efficiency improvements are what has driven humanity up until now. And efficiency improvements are so much more powerful than we think. We just don't understand how much more efficient things can get.Jamie Dobson: Yeah. Anne Currie: And therefore we go, oh, well, you know, we, if people have 10 times as many cars or whatever, probably not 10 times as many. Well, compared to back to Henry Ford's days, we've got a lot more cars. We've got a lot more mobility. There is a almost seemingly limitless, demand for cars. But there are plenty of other areas of life where efficiency has outstripped the demand.So in terms of electricity use, household electricity use in the west in the past 20, 30 years, household electricity use, despite the fact that everybody has automated their houses we've got, everybody's got washing machines and dishwashers and tumble dryers and TVs, and electricity use has still gone down.And the reason why it's gone down is because all of those devices appeared, but then became more and more efficient. And efficiency improvements really are extraordinarily powerful. Much more than people realize. And if we force people to put the work in, and it's not free, it requires an enormous amount of work, but if people are motivated and incentivized to make those efficiency improvements, we can do an awful lot.We can get.Jamie Dobson: My suspicion is the world will change. So not many people realize that the car was actually very good for the environment. All around London, my children ask me, what's that thing outside the house?" It's a scraper for your feet, for your boots. And that's because all the streets of London were caked two inch shit deep of horse manure.And at the end of every single street, the way it was piled high. So the public health issues with horses was an absolute nightmare. Not to mention the fact that people used to get kicked in the head or pulled into ditches. Fatalities from horses was, you know, a weekly account in New York City. But so it changed. So once we got the electricity, we got the lifts, the horses went away. My suspicion is right now we cannot run a sustainable culture or city without radically changing things. So, for example, did you ever stop to wonder why is your power pack warm? You know, when you charge your phone or your laptop, why does it get warm? Do you know what the answer to that question is?Anne Currie: No, I don't actually. That's a very good question.Jamie Dobson: There you go. So who won? Who won the battle? Tesla or Edison. So.Anne Currie: Tesla. Jamie Dobson: Tesla did win. So it's basically AC versus DC. What's the best system to have? Well, DC, direct current kills you if you touch it direct current by accident and the voltage is right, you die. But what you feel on the back of your charger is heat, which is a side effect of converting AC back to DC because computer devices don't work on AC because it, the current has to go round and round, like water, in a fountain because that's the only way transistorized things work. So now people are saying, well, actually, arguably we should have a DC grid because globally we are wasting so much electricity because of this excess heat that is produced when we go from AC back to DC. So, and I get the feeling, and do you remember when we were kids, if you put your washing on at three in the morning, you got cheaper electricity.I cannot help but think it's not just about renewable energy, but it's also the way we consume energy to make that more effective.Anne Currie: Yeah.Jamie Dobson: And I think if that doesn't change, I basically think, when Edison arrived, society as we knew it absolutely changed. We had no refrigerators and that changed our behaviors.Now, some people would say, well, you became a slave to the machine. I think that's a little bit too far, but we certainly went into some sort of analog digital relationship with the machines we work, all of which drive efficiencies. I think the next chapter for sustainable energy and computing will be a change in our habits, but I can't, I don't know exactly what they're gonna be.Anne Currie: Oh, that's definitely a thing. It's something I've talked about on the podcast before. It's the mind shift from fossil fuels, which are kind of always on, you know, easy to dispatch, so easy to turn on, easy to turn off to something, to solar and wind, which is really expensive to store,really cheap if you use it as it is generated. But grids were designed, in many ways this is the same kind of things that you talk about in your book. Grids were originally designed specifically to provide power that was easily dispatchable, you know, that it was fossil fuels.And that means that the whole of the philosophy of the grid is about something called supply side response. And that is all that is basically saying, "do you know, users, you don't need to worry." Flick of a switch, the electricity will always be there and it's the responsibility of the dev, of the providers of the electricity, of the grids to make sure that the electricity is always there to meet your demand.You never have to think about it. But for renewables it's generally agreed that what we're gonna have to do is move to something called demand side response, where users are incentivized to change their use to match when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing. As you say, when we were kids in the UK, we used to have something called economy seven.You had seven hours a day, which was usually at night. where, because it was all, because back in then, I'm guessing, 'cause it was a coal fired power station. Coal fired power stations were not so easy to turn off and on again, which gas is. So we don't have it anymore. And it's, and, but in those days you say the coal fired power station was running during the night and nobody was using the power.So we wanted to actually get people to try and use the power during the night. And we used effectively what are now called time of use tariffs to incentivize people to use spare power, which was during the night in the UK. Jamie Dobson: It sounds like a huge dislocation to life, but when I first came to London, the London Mayor or the authorities made an announcement that when something like this, "oh, air pollution's really bad today. Don't go out running, close your windows. Old people don't go out, don't do any exercise."And I remember thinking "this can't be real. Is this some sort of prank?" But this is a thing in London. And I remember thinking, but at no point would the Mayor of London say, "okay, the air pollution's bad. You're not allowed to drive your car today," right? And it showed where the priorities lie. But it wasn't that difficult.So everybody just shrugs their shoulders and says, "oh, well, okay, I just won't do any out outdoor activities today." So I think that demand side response is possible. I do wonder what happens though if, let's say, obviously the sun's shining, so that's the time you should run your data centers. What happens when the sun's not shining?Are the cloud providers gonna be happy to have an asset sat there doing nothing when it's dark, for example, or when the wind's not blowing?Anne Currie: Well, it's interesting. I think it depends how much, if, it's all about what is the level of difference in electricity cost between the time when the sun is shining or the wind's blowing, and the time when it isn't. I'm massively impressed by work that India is doing at the moment on this, on time of use tariffs because they have tons of, or and they know what they're looking forward, they already know they're one of the fastest growing. So India is one of the fastest growing countries in the world for rolling out solar power. Unsurprisingly, 'cause it's pretty sunny in India. So they're looking forward and they're thinking, well, hang on a minute.You know, we are gonna have this amazing amount of solar power in the future, but we are going to have to change people's behaviors to make sure that they run on it, not the other thing. So, the way they're doing that is that the strategy that they're adopting for incentivizing people to change their behavior.And as you say, actually people will change behavior. They just need a little bit of a push and some incentives and they will change their behavior. The incentive they're using is time of use tariffs. And India is pushing out all of the province, the states in India to introduce time of use tariffs which reflect the actual cost of electricity and push people towards times of the day when they're, when they'll be. And it's, it is a gradual process, but you can see that it will roll on and on and they're, looking at a tenfold difference that what they're saying is. That the difference should be tenfold between when your electricity is generated from the sun and when it isn't.And a tenfold difference in price does justify a lot of behavioral change. You might as say, you might not want to turn off your, your data center during the night. But some people will go, well, hang on a minute. If it's literally, because for most data centers, the main cost is electricity. If there's a tenfold difference in electricity cost between, the day and the night, then they'll start to adapt and start to do less and start to turn things down.Necessity is the mother of invention. If you don't, if you give a flat tariffs to everybody, they're not gonna make any changes. But if you start to actually incentivize response, demand side response, it will happen.Jamie Dobson: Then of course then that comes back to regulation, doesn't it? Because I think of the things that Edison, well actually it was his colleague, Samuel Insull, realized if you're gonna, it makes no sense to run the grid unless it's some sort of public utility or a natural monopoly. And you can only really fairly run a natural monopoly if the price is a negotiated and set in public and all the industries regulated. So do you think the, that these tariffs, the time of use tariffs, will become part of the regulatory framework of the governments.Anne Currie: Oh, yeah, I mean, it already is. I was saying it's, in India. It's a regulatory thing. It is part of the industrial strategy of India. There are.Jamie Dobson: Then indirectly, then indirectly the cloud providers will be regulated because they'll be regulated through the supply of electricity.Anne Currie: Indeed. Yeah. I mean it's interesting. there's a battle in, so some European countries, it's happening at the moment. I think, Spain already has time of use tariffs. There are other countries that have time of use tariffs and it changes behavior. And in the UK there is a battle at the moment, over, between suppliers about where the time of use tariffs are introduced.So that battle is kind of being spearheaded by the CEO of in the UK it's Octopus Energy. Greg Jackson isn't it, I think is really saying, "look, this is what we need to do." Because, I mean, in the UK it is ridiculous that the government really doesn't want, they fear that everybody will be panicked and not be able to handle a time of use tariff.And, but even though we used to have them not very long ago.Jamie Dobson: It's ridiculous. People always panic about the public sentiment, but you just need to look at COVID, how flexible people can be when they understand the need for it. That's number one. And number two, when I was a kid, and that's only 40 years ago, we used to tend to lights off 'cause it was too expensive.So we did have different behavior in the evening when we needed more electricity than in the daytime when we didn't. It's not that difficult to imagine. You know what? Do you know? What made me laugh is the average serving of meat, I think in the 1970s was 200 grams. And if you look at 200 grams, it's actually quite tiny.It sits on your plate like a little slither of lamb. I was like, "oh my God, that's not enough. That's not enough food." But then you realize that is what we all used to eat, only 30 or 40 years ago. And so we've slowly been sort of, you know, everything's been supersized, including what we expect from the electricity companies. I think a gradual shifting back, you would, you'd barely notice it. And that's exactly how the government took salt out of our diet. That just slowly regulated how much salt could be in processed food until it had gone all together.Anne Currie: Yeah, but I think you have to be careful about how you pitch this. Well, I think one of the issues with green is that it's pitched as, it's a reduction in meat and it's a reduction in, there's a reduction in that. I don't think it only has to be a sad story. It has to be a good story.Something we're, a hill that we're, that we want to take because it's worth taking, not just something that we're, we are running away from that. I like the time of use tariff approach in India because it's saying, if you do this, you'll get electricity, which is a 10th the price, you know that it is something, it's a win.It's not just like run away from the bad thing. It is run towards the good thing. And it with a minor, and you're not saying, "change your behavior because we're ordering you to do it" or because we're going to make electricity much more expensive. Although inevitably, electricity, fossil fuel, electricity will become more expensive because it is naturally more expensive these days.Renewables have become so cheap. Jamie Dobson: Could cloud computing become a forcing function for cheaper electricity? Because the cloud providers need so much electricity, could this possibly accelerate the sort of the raise to green energy? Anne Currie: Well, it definitely can, and it has done in the past. I mean, it in, the early days, the well, so until maybe five years ago or so, the biggest non-governmental purchaser of renewable power in the world was Google. And they were buying renewable power, they were buying and, bankrolling renewable power for their data centers.And they, so they're not the biggest, non-governmental purchaser of renewables anymore because it is now amazon to power their data centers because they got a long way behind and we all made a giant fuss about it and said, well, why aren't your data centers green? And so they put a whole load of money into renewables.A lot of the reason why there's enormous amount of renewables these days and enormous amount of investment has gone into it, was because of the cloud vendors. Now, that is not because the cloud vendors are all secretly social justice warriors. I mean, they did it for their own benefit. But they did do it.Jamie Dobson: That's another pattern that reoccurs is so, at the turn of the last century, so many entrepreneurs were sat on so much money that class unrest was really bubbling. So all of a sudden you got the subway in New York, subway in Paris, the municipal control of transportation, all kinds of stuff.And then you're left thinking, "oh, was, were, they all do-gooders? Was that the reason they did that?"Some of them may have been, but mainly they were trying to avoid class unrest. And so it's interesting that these, a good outcome can come on the back of self-interest, that is true, isn't it?Anne Currie: Yeah, it is true. I it, and it's very hard to know what the unintended consequences, positive and negative of, all behaviors are. So, a lot of investment in early stuff becomes wasted later. So, you, like, you mentioned, subways, railways in the UK and worldwide.Lots of early investment in railways resulted in loads of over provisioning of railways. And then as things got a bit more efficient and everybody goes, well actually you only need one train to go between London and Edinburgh and not 16 different trains on different lines. You get some kind of consolidation down and improvements in efficiency and that's how actually things become cost effective because actually overprovisioning is very cost ineffective.Jamie Dobson: Well, that's true, but that is a very cheeky way to transfer money from rich people to poor people, because obviously what happened is, rich people invested in the railways, railways were over provisioned, those people never got a return. The rest of us were left with cheap railway infrastructure. Exactly the same happened with internet. Everyone's like, right, we gotta wrap the world up in optic fibers. Private companies came in, private investors came in, paid for all of that. Then we had way too many optic fiber cables, and now we've all got practically free internet access. So that occasionally it, it goes either way.Anne Currie: Yeah, and I have to say, I, and I see the same thing with AI. So AI is interesting 'cause on the one hand I rail against how, and AI is unbelievably inefficient at the moment that there's an awful lot of talk about, oh, we'll have to build nuclear because we need it for AI and all that kind of stuff and we'll build all the nuclear and we'll build all the, you know, and hopefully, we'll we need to try and steer people towards doing with nuclear and doing it with solar and wind rather than, rather than fossil fuels. But at the end, it's going to be, there's so much wasted inefficient code in AI. AI is going to need a fraction of the power that we eventually build, we initially build to power the AI. I mean, because at the moment I'm talking to people who are doing measurements and differences between different AI models that do, you know, an equivalent amount of stuff.The ones that are optimized, 10,000 times more efficient, 600,000 times more efficient. I've even heard a million times more efficient. There's so much waste in AI at the moment.Jamie Dobson: Absolutely, and I think people don't, are not focused particularly on theoretical breakthroughs. So Jeffrey Hinton came up with the back, back propagation of errors in neural networks. I think it was about 1983. That's in the book by the way. And that was a breakthrough. That breakthrough, that theoretical breakthrough's got nothing to do with computing power or anything. It's a theoretical breakthrough. Right now we're desperate for something like that. So we're loaded up all these data centers, we're increasing data sets, but ultimately no matter how much compute and data you throw at an artificial neural network, I think it would never fully replace what a human does. So I think it's nice to know that as we lay, you know, we lay down this computing infrastructure and fingers crossed all of its powered by, you know, renewable energy, in the background, researchers will be chipping away at the next theoretical And I think they have to come with artificial intelligence because I think there will be limits to what you can do with generative AI.And I think we're probably reaching them limits right now.Anne Currie: Well, improving AI efficiency does not require massive theoretical breakthroughs. It just, it can be done using the same techniques that we've used for 30 years to improve the efficiency of software. It is just software. I mean, if you look at, DeepSeek, for example, DeepSeek did, have done, I think, so DeepSeek had to make their AI more efficient because the Biden administration said they can't have the fancy chips.So they just went, "oh, we can't have the fancy chips, so we're just gonna make some software changes." And they did it like that, effectively. They're a tiny company and they increased the efficiency tenfold pretty much instantly. And they used three different methods, all of which, well, one of which is probably Max House and it's probably was probably most of the 10 x.The others, there's still so much room for additional efficiency improvement with them. They did, they got rid of over provisioning. They moved from 32 bits of precision to eight bit precision 'cause they didn't need the 32 bit. That was a classic case of over provisioning. So they've removed the over provisioning and that's been known about for years.That's not new. AI engineers have known that 32 bit is, over egging it. And they could run on 8 bit for years. So they didn't do anything new. They didn't have to do any new research. All they had to do was implement something that has, that was well known, but people just couldn't be assed doing. Jamie Dobson: Yeah, all of this noise will soon die down and people behind the scenes away from the attention grabbing headlights will continue to crack on with these things. And so my prediction is that everything's going to, everyone's gonna be pissed off in the next six to 12 months. "AI failed to deliver,"but in the background, use cases will get pieced together.People will find these optimizations, they'll make it cheaper. And I do reckon, ultimately, generative AI will sink into the background just in the same way that nobody really talks about the internet, right? It's the Web or it's mobile phone applications that do something sat on top of the computer network infrastructure. I think that's probably what's gonna happen.Anne Currie: I suspect that generative AI is not going to entirely disappear just because, so I used to work, many years ago, I worked in the, in the fashion industry. I was, I worked for a company that was one of the first in pure play internet e-commerce companies. And because it was fashion, we used a lot of photography.An awful lot of photography, and a lot of it, we had a whole team of editors. So, you know, I can see companies that work with photography, they have, a surprisingly large number of people in the world edit photographs. And so you know that there's a huge, demand for making that easier.The downside is that you then, even now, all photo, all photographs that you see online represent people who do not exist. You know, they, it is like all models you see, it's probably not, that model kind of is kind of based on a person, but.Jamie Dobson: lots of people, isn't it? So I think that generative AI stuff will remain, but I think it will become specific. So for example, I saw yesterday that the government are piecing together a number of different tools that's, let's call that the substrate, but on top of that, it's to give civil servants conversational interface about what was our policies,can you summarize this for me, can you suggest a new policy, which is dangerous because anything, any decision based on past data, it's a reflection of and not necessarily a vision of what could be. So I think that's probably what's gonna happen, but I could be wrong and because the truth is none of us actually know.It's all speculation at this point. Anne Currie: Yeah, so, so before we, well actually we've still got a bit of time, but before we go, I want to focus a little bit on what I see are the themes that run through the creation of the internet and the creation of modern technology in Visionaries, Rebels and Machines, and the Cloud Native Attitude, and Building Green Software.And I think a lot of the themes there are, trying to de deliver your results, the thing that you want, the thing that's gonna improve your life, or the thing that people think is gonna improve their life on fewer resources with fewer resources, because that's the only way it scales. The cloud was all essentially all about how do we deliver our Google's, I mean, it was the cloud was, came outta Google. And it came outta Google, which was the first hyperscaler, and Google was saying, well, actually we really need to deliver our services at incredible scale, but we can't spend the, you know, there's a limit to how much money we can spend on doing it.So we have to do it using operational efficiency and code efficiency so that we deliver this service on fewer resources and also resilience, you know, because things fail at scale and therefore we need to be resilient to failure. But that efficiency and that ability to respond to changing circumstances is exactly what we need to handle the energy transition.Jamie Dobson: So I think the common theme that goes all the way from Thomas Edison to the teams building systems using AI now is that technologies change, but human nature doesn't. So, so the way those teams were managed has been absolutely consistent. I think one of the great contributions of Visionaries and Rebels is to show to people, you don't need to change the way you manage your techies because actually these, this is of success stories that lasted 150 years. Second theme is that once the foundations are laid, it's not the creators of a technology that dictate its destiny, but the users. So once we had a grid, boof, people started inventing applications. Exactly the same once the internet was there, people started inventing web applications. And once the cloud was there, we had Netflix, and then we had Starling Bank and all the things built on top of the substrate. So I think for sure what's gonna come next for sustainable computing will not necessarily be dictated by those building cloud infrastructure. The teams out there, the safe teams, the innovative teams taking risks. I think they will find the use cases. They will dictate what happens next.Anne Currie: Well, so that's interesting 'cause that actually instantly reminds me of the approach that India, which we already talked about, that India are taking where you say, well look, we'll incentivize people to stick a whole load of renewable power into the local grid, into the grid. We've got the grid.The grid just distributes the power and we introduce those incentivizing time of use tariffs, and we say, look, you know, there's really cheap energy at these times. Fill your boots. You decide what you're gonna do with it. And then just leaving the users of the grid, the users of those time of use tariffs to work out what's gonna happen.Jamie Dobson: And I think people will look to India. I think everybody looks at other countries that are doing these experiments. So if it works out in India, then of course you could imagine that other countries might say, "oh, well, that's actually worked out over there. We can copy that as well." But ultimately they're building on existing infrastructure.You know, they say, well, this is what we've got, what, you know, how can we, what does that interface between our users look like? And by making a change there, they will change user behavior somewhere else. Anne Currie: Yeah.Jamie Dobson: It's hard to predict, though. It's hard to predict.Anne Currie: it is hard to predict it. it's kind of, it's an interesting, something that comes up in grid discussions about this, quite often, is this whole kind of idea that, in some ways countries that are less developed than America and the UK are in a much better position for the energy transition because governments can go, we'll have time of use tariffs in every day.We'll, it's not that far. For, you know, the people quite used to microgrids, they're quite used to things being fluctuating. They're not, they haven't got used to everything being available at the flick of a switch and a hundred percent reliable. Reliability, to a certain extent, breeds fragility. It breeds people who've forgotten how to handle change.Jamie Dobson: Yeah. So of course there are places in the world that have got cell phone infrastructure, but they don't have any telecommunications infrastructure, because by the time they came around to installing it, cell phones were a thing, so they just completely skipped. That whole step in technology. We've still got phone boxes in the UK that we, nobody knows what to do with. They're on the street corners, growing moss, and that's a legacy, exactly like what I mentioned earlier, the mud scrapers outside of people's houses. These are a legacy of previous sort of infrastructure. Horses in the case of the scraper and then the telephone boxes in case in the case of cellphones. So I think that's true that india probably has got places that are either off grid or nowhere near as reliable as what we have, for example, in the UK. So then it makes sense that the government can be more experimental because the people are not gonna lose anything. There's nothing to lose.There's only gains. Anne Currie: Indeed. Yes. And in fact, actually, I mean, it is interesting that time of use tariffs being introduced in the UK is now controversial because we have become strategic snowflakes. We can't. We can't, they fear that we can't change, although I think they're wrong. And in fact, time of use tariffs were totally fine 30 years ago.And nobody died as a result of economy seven heating.Jamie Dobson: There's an absolute relationship between the reliability of a system and how spoiled its users has become. So if you, when I first went to the Netherlands, the train would be two minutes late and people would literally slam their feet on the ground in anger, right? And swear in Dutch about the state of the NS. Coming from the UK it's like, "well, whatever."Now, exactly the same happened when, when the video store came along. Most people were used to consuming media as and when, you know, they chose to. But with the video shop, they only had limited editions of new releases. The frustration that created in users of video stores is exactly what led to Netflix's creation. So the more reliable something is, the more complacent, and the higher the expectations its users have of the system. But I think COVID taught the UK government that we could be way more flexible than they fear we are. Anne Currie: Yeah. I agree. And, except actually I don't think they learned that lesson because they immediately forgot it again. Jamie Dobson: Apparently there's loads of lessons they didn't learn. 'Cause apparently we're less ready for a pandemic now than we were before COVID.Anne Currie: Yeah. It is a, it is amazing how many lessons we didn't learn that, but, I think that takes us through a final thing that we should discuss, which I think comes out of what you've just said there about resilience, which is some, and it's something that is a modern thing that we talk about a little bit in the book, in all those three books, which is Chaos Engineering, which is the modern approach to resilience, which is that you get more, ironically, you get more resilient systems by building them on top of systems that you don't expect to be a hundred percent resilient.The expectations of, of a hundred percent availability, supply side response builds, in the end, more fragile systems. Jamie Dobson: The fragility has to go somewhere. So the more resilient the system is, the more fragile the users are. And then the converse of that is true. The more a system fails, the more flexible its users become, and the more workarounds they have because they're not sure if it's gonna be ready. I do know one of the key lessons I took while whilst putting Visionaries and Rebels together could be distilled into one sentence. A system that doesn't fail during its development will fail catastrophically in production. And so what you're left with is electricity grid, the internet, the cloud computing, they're so amazingly, you know, resilient and reliable, they are literally are literally always there. You start to take, you do start to take them for granted. but the paradox is that if you want to create resilient systems, you've got to simulate, stimulate failure in order to learn how to deal with failure, therefore avoid it in the future. It's all a little bit circular really.Anne Currie: Yeah. Yeah. So the irony is that exposing end users to the fluctuation in the availability and price of electricity for renewables, it sounds scary, but it will produce, in the end, a more resilient society. A more resilient system on a countrywide scale.Jamie Dobson: And in your opinion, what's the relationship between this, these type of tariffs and demand side behavior and cloud computing? Where is the link there?Anne Currie: Well, I mean, data centers are users of a grid. They are users that, they are prime users of electricity. If we make a tenfold difference, and I don't think it's gonna, it's gonna affect, it is gonna work for anything less than a tenfold difference in price, we will start to see behavioral change.We will start to see data centers go, "do you know, is there a way that we can, we can reduce the number of machines that are running," because at that point the cost will start. So we need to get it to a point where the cost, the different time of use tariff costs make it worthwhile switching to operations to when the sun is shining the winds blowing.But that is what we have to do, because we need the demand side response behavior. We need the change of response from users. So we have to make it worth their while.Jamie Dobson: You're gonna use economic nudges to make data centers consume green energy, right? So that's the energy side of the equation. What do we do about water supply? So, I don't know if you realize, but lots of data have been refused planning permissionbecause they will drain fresh water from people's houses governments, quite, you know, are not ready to sort of take that on the chin.So what are your thoughts on the water issue?Anne Currie: Well, again, that's, that is a known issue. If we actually, at the moment, if they don't have to do it, they won't do it. So if it will, cooling using water is very cheap and easy. And therefore they do, that's what they do.That is the default. But there are alternatives. I mean, if you look at more modern chips that are, I mean Intel, it's a bit of an old fashioned chip these days, it's very hot. The Nvidia chips are very hot, but there are chips that are coming out that are much more efficient, that're much cooler, that, and that are often designed to be air cooled, not water cooled.So, if we move towards, so it is not unknown, the technology exists for chips that don't get so hot that they require water cooling. The future is chips that can be air cooled. And if they can be air cooled, they're cooled with aircon. And aircon can be fueled by solar power, because obviously, you know, it's when it's hot and it's sunny that you have the biggest problem with heating, it's when it's not sunny and warm,it's less of an issue. So, the future here, the solution is better and more efficient chips hardware that can be air cooled. That that is for most hardware. I think that has to be, that is at least a big part of the solution.Jamie Dobson: Does the future involve huge data centers that fall under government regulation? Because one of the reasons why the electricity grid became a natural monopoly, is 'cause it made no sense to put six sets of cables down. There wouldn't've been enough space in the street and actually the electricity providers couldn't get economies of scale and therefore could not pass on cheap electricity to its users and therefore electricity would never be become widespread.So is there a similar argument for the cloud providers presently?Anne Currie: I have to say I'm a huge believer that we just do it through pricing, that we want data centers to be closed. So in Scotland, and we throw away, we turn off wind, we pay wind farms to turn off. We spend billions and billions of pounds every year to paying wind farms to turn off because there is no user for that power within easy reach of that wind farm.And we're only talking about Scotland. We're not talking about Siberia. Jamie Dobson: I think we could build a data center there.Anne Currie: Why don't we build a data center there?Jamie Dobson: They've got plenty of wind and water.Anne Currie: And an extremely well educated workforce. And it's a bit cooler up there as well, so you don't need to do quite so much cooling anyway. So, but there's no incentive. So while there's no incentive,people won't act. Once there is incentive and a really juicy incentive in place, you know, a 10 x difference in price, we will see behavioral change. Because we do. People, humans are very good at changing their behavior, but only if there's a good reason to do so.Jamie Dobson: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah.Anne Currie: And actually that kind of brings us to the end of our hour.And we, I think we've had a really interesting discussion. I hope the readers of the listeners and potentially in the future readers have enjoyed the discussion. All the links for everything we talked about, all the books, all the comments, will be in the show notes below, so you can go and have a look.And you have to, yeah, actually, you know, you can pre-order Jamie's book, Visionaries, Rebels and Machines on Amazon or any good bookshop, now. You can also buy the Cloud Native Attitude or Building Green Software, which you can also read for free if you have an O'Reilly subscription. And when I get round to it, I'm eventually going to create a commons Building Green Software and I kick me.Everybody should be kicking me all the time to do that because it's just bit work that I need to do. Anyway, so Jamie, thank you so much for being on the podcast. I've really enjoyed our chat. Is there anything final you wanna say before we disappear off?Jamie Dobson: Nothing final for me. The book launch, there'll be a launch party in London at some point. It's available on Kindle, but for now, I'm just happy to get you know, feedback and it's been great to talk to you today, Anne, and I really hope your listeners took something away from this.Anne Currie: So I hope people enjoyed the conversation. It was a bit, a little bit of an author's book club, so a bit different to normal. But I hope you enjoyed it and let us know if you want to hear more of this kind of discussion. Thank you very much and, until we meet again, goodbye from me. Chris Adams: Hey everyone, thanks for listening. Just a reminder to follow Environment Variables on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And please do leave a rating and review if you like what we're doing. It helps other people discover the show, and of course, we'd love to have more listeners.To find out more about the Green Software Foundation, please visit greensoftware.foundation. That's greensoftware.foundation in any browser. Thanks again, and see you in the next episode. 

Host Chris Adams speaks with James Martin about how to communicate the environmental impact of software to a general audience. Drawing on his background in journalism and sustainability communications, James shares strategies for translating complex digital sustainability issues into accessible narratives, explains why AI's growing resource demands require scrutiny, and highlights France’s leadership in frugal AI policy and standards. From impact calculators to debunking greenwashing, this episode unpacks how informed storytelling can drive responsible tech choices.Learn more about our people:Chris Adams: LinkedIn | GitHub | WebsiteJames Martin: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterNews:Environmental Footprint Calculator | Scaleway [14:19]AI on a diet: how to apply frugal AI standards? - Schneider Electric Blog [26:03] Frugal AI Challenge | Hugging Face [33:33]Greening digital companies: Monitoring emissions and climate commitments Resources:Why Cloud Zombies Are Destroying the Planet | Holly Cummins [14:47]European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) [21:22]EcoLogits [21:54]Empire of AI - Wikipedia [29:49]Hype, Sustainability, and the Price of the Bigger-is-Better Paradigm in AI | Sasha Luccioni et al. [30:38] Sam Altman (@sama) on X [31:58]Référentiel général d'écoconception de services numériques (RGESN) - 2024 [37:06] Frugal AI If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:James Martin: When I hear the term AI for Good, which we hear a lot of at the moment, I would say that I would challenge that and I would encourage people to challenge that too by saying "are sure this AI is for good? Are you sure this tech is for good? Are you sure that the good that it does, far outweighs the potential harm that it has?"Because it's not always the case. A lot of the AI for good examples see at the moment are just, they can't be backed with scientific data at all.And that comes back to another of my points. If you can't prove that it's for good, then it's not, and it's probably greenwashing.Chris Adams: Hello, and welcome to Environment Variables, brought to you by the Green Software Foundation. In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software.I'm your host, Chris Adams. Welcome to Environment Variables, where we bring you the latest news and updates from the Board of Sustainable Software Development. I'm your host, Chris Adams. Our guest today is James Martin, a content and communications expert who has spent years translating complex text strategies into compelling narratives that drive change.From leading communications with a special focus on sustainability at Scaleway, to founding BetterTech.blog, James has been at the forefront of making green tech more actionable and accessible. He's spoken at major climate and tech events, most recently ChangeNOW. He's written a comprehensive white paper on green IT, and played a key role in Gen AI Impact a French NGO working to measure the impact of AI. And also he's a Green Software Foundation champion.So, James, thank you so much for joining the podcast. Really lovely to see you again after we last crossed paths in, I guess Paris, I think. Maybe I've tried to introduce you a little bit, but I figure there's maybe some things you might wanna talk about as well. So, can I give you the floor to just like introduce yourself and, talk a little bit about yourself?James Martin: Yeah, thanks very much, Chris. First and foremost, I just wanted to say I'm really happy to, be on this podcast with you because, this podcast is one of the things that really got me excited, and it started me off on my green IT adventure. So, thanks to you and Anne for putting all, putting out all these amazing episodes.Basically what I'm speaking today in the name of BetterTech, which is my blog, which I founded 2018. So I've been a, I've been a journalist for most of my career. And, so for about 15 years I was writing for a French cultural magazine. I had a page in that two weeks. And I started off writing out, "here's a new iPhone, here's a new console." And after that I got a bit bored of just saying the same thing every time. So I was drawn towards more responsible topics, like how do you reduce your screen time, how do you protect your data?And also, of course, what is the impact of technology on the planet? So that started in that, in that magazine, and then I got so into it, i founded my own blog on the topic.And then that was pretty much when an opportunity came up, in 2020, 2021 to work at Scaleway. I thought that sounds really interesting because, that is a European cloud provider, so not American. And also they were already very, communicating a lot about the sustainable aspect of what they do. So, yeah, I was very happy to join them and lead their communications from 2021 with this huge focus sustainability.Chris Adams: Ah.James Martin: Yeah, that's how, that's basically where it started. At that time, Scaleway had its centers and one of them called DC five, which is one of the most sustainable Europe because it doesn't have air conditioning, so it uses a lot less energy. That's it. It has adiabatic cooling. So we focused a lot of communication efforts on that. But then after year or two, Scaleway decided to sell its data centers. I had to look at are the other ways I could talk about sustainability in the cloud? So from digging around into green IT, especially into some green Software Foundation resources,I basically understood that not just data centers, it's hardware and software. So I also, with a bit of help from one of a pivotal meeting, was meeting Neil Fryer from who the Green Software Foundation at a conference. I got him to come and speak at Scaleway to people like me were sort of concerned about the impact of tech. And then that led to the white paper that you mentioned that I erase in 2023, which is basic. It's basically how engineers can reduce the impact of of technology. So, and then that led to speaking opportunities and then to realize that, yeah, I'm not a, I'm not a developer. I'm not an engineer. I may be the first non-developer on this podcast. So I can't build Green Tech, but I can explain how it works and I think that's an important thing to be able to do, if we want to convince as many people as possible of how important this is, then it needs to be communicated properly.And, yeah, so that's what I've been doing ever since.Chris Adams: Okay, thanks. Okay, so I'm, I appreciate that you're coming here as not as a non, as someone who's not like a full-time techie who's like using GitHub on the daily and everything like that, because I think that means you, you get a bit of a chance to like see how normal people see this who aren't conversant in like object storage or block storage or stuff like that.So maybe we can talk a little bit about that then, because when people start to think about, say, the environmental footprint of digital services, right? It's often coming from a very low base. And it's like people might start thinking about like the carbon footprint of their emails, and that's like the thing they should be focusing on first.And like if you do have a bit of domain knowledge, you'll often realize that actually that's probably not where you'd start if you have a kind of more, more developed understanding of the problem. Now you've spent some of your time being this translator between techies and like people who are not full, you know, who, who aren't writing code and building applications all day long, for example.So maybe we could talk a little bit about like the misunderstandings people have when they come to this in the first place and how you might address some of this because this seems to be your day job and this might be something that could, that might help who are other techies realize how they might change the way they talk about this for other people to make a bit more accessible and intelligible.James Martin: Yes. So, thank you for mentioning day job first and foremost, because, so Scaleway was my former day job and I have another day job working for another french scale app. But here I'm very much speaking in the name of my blog. It's because I care so much about topics that I continue to talk about them, to write about them on the side because it's just, I just think something that needs to be done. So this is why today with my BetterTech hatChris Adams: Hat on. Yeah.James Martin: so yeah, just wanted to make that clear. The first thing that people do when people misunderstand stuff, the first thing I want to say is it's not their fault. Sometimes they are led down the wrong path. Like,  a few years ago, French environment Minister said people should stop trying to send so many funny email attachments.Chris Adams: Oh, really? James Martin: Like when you send a joking video to all your colleagues, you should stop doing that because it's not good for the planet. It honestly, the minister could say something that misguided because that's not where we, you and I know, not where the impact is. The impact is in the cloud.The impact is in hardware. So it is sort of, about the communication is repetition and I always start with, digital is 4% of global emissions, and 1% of that is data centers, 3% of that is hardware, and software is sort of all over the place. That's the thing I, the figure I use the most to get things started. I think the, there's number one misconception that people need to get their heads around is the people tend to think that tech is, immaterial. It's because of expressions like the cloud. It just sounds,Chris Adams: Like this floaty thing rather than massive industrial concrete things. Yeah.James Martin: Need to make it more physical. If, I can't remember who said that if data centers could fly, then it would make our job easier. But no, that's where you need to always come back to the figures. 4% is double the emissions of planes. And yet, the AIrline industry gets tens of hundreds times more hassle than the tech industry in terms of trying to keep control of their emissions. So what you need is a lot more examples, and you need people to explain this impact over time, so you need to move away from bad examples, like funny email attachments or the thing about, we keep hearing in AI is, one ChatGPT prompt is 10 times more energy than Google. That may or may not be true, but it's a bit, again, it's a bit of the, it's the wrong example, because it doesn't. It doesn't focus on the bigger picture. Chris Adams: Yeah. That kind of implies that if I just like reduce my usage of this, then I'm gonna have like 10 times the impact. I'm gonna, you know, that's all I need to, that feels a bit kind of individual, a bit like individualizing the problem, surely. Right?James Martin: And it's putting it on people's, it's putting the onus on the users, whereas it's not their fault. You need to see the bigger picture. And this is what I've been repeating since I wrote that white paper actually, you can't say you have a green IT approach if you're only focusing on data centers, hardware or software. You've got to focus on, yeah, exactly. Holistically.That said, you should also encourage people to have greener habits because that's, me stopping using ChatGPT just on my own won't have much impact, but it will if I can convince, if I can tell my family, if I can tell my friends, if I can talk about it in podcasts and conferences, then maybe the more people question their usage, then maybe the providers of that tech start providing more frugal examples. ButChris Adams: Ah, I see. So that's like maybe almost like choice architecture, giving people like, you know, foregrounding some of the options. So, you know, making it easier to do, possibly the more sustainable thing, rather than making people at the right, at the end of the process do all the hard work. You, it sounds like you're suggesting that okay, as a professional, part of my role is to kind of put different choices in front of someone who's maybe using my service to make it easier for them to do more sustainable things, rather than like things which are much more environmentally destructive, for example.James Martin: Yes. And I would add a final thing, which is sort of super important because people, there are a topics like electric cars for example, which people get really emotional and angry about, 'cause people are very attached to their cars and yet cars are the number one source of emissions in most Western countries. The way around the emotion is to use, I really focus on only using science-based facts. If it's from the IPCC, if it's from the IEA, if it's like really serious scientific studies then you can use it. If it's just someone speculating on LinkedIn, no. So I always make sure that data I use as fully backed by science, by a sort of by all the GHG protocols, looking at all three scopes all that sort of thing. Because otherwise you just can't, it could be greenwashing.Chris Adams: Okay. Alright, so maybe this is actually a nice segue for the next question because when people talk about, say, well basically in footprint from here, one of the challenges people have is like, like having some numbers, having tr, having some figures for any of this stuff. For example, if I'm using maybe a chat bot, i-, it's very hard for me to understand what the footprint might be. So in the absence of that, you can kind of see how people end up with an idea saying, oh yeah, every query is the same as a, you know, bottle of water, for example. Simply because there is a kind of dearth of information. And this is something that I think that I remember when you presented at Green IO, a conference around kind of green IT, you were talking about how this is actually something that you've had quite a lot of firsthand experience with now, particularly when you're working at Scaleway because there's like new calculators published and stuff like that. I mean, we can talk about the AI thing in a bit more detail later and, but I wanted to ask you a little bit about the impact calculators that I saw you present before.So are there any principles or any kind of approaches that you think are really helpful when you're helping people engage with a topic like this when they're trying to use a calculator to kind of modify or like improve the footprint as like a professional.James Martin: Yes. Well, one of the things that sort of peaked my curiosity when we were looking into the topic at Scaleway is, what percentage of servers or instances are really used?And I was inspired by that, by the work of Holly Cummins from, from Red Hat, who famously said that instances possibly represent around 25% of cloud activity. When I asked around, do cloud providers in general try and identify that, that zombie activity and to just to shut it down, the, from asking around various cloud providers, the consensus I seem to get was, well, no, because people are paying for those instances. So we are just gonna, we are just going to, why would we flag that sort of thing?So that also shows this sort of, the sort of pushback that a, that an environmental calculator might get. Even though, I mean, you could argue that, the fact that there are zombie instances is potentially more the client's fault than the cloud provider's fault. But yeah, the, building a project like that is just to say that you're going up against of habits where people haven't really, if you want more resources, you can have them, even if you've got too many. It's aChris Adams: Yeah, I guess the incentives. James Martin: Yeah, the cloud has been a, pretty much a all you can eat service in general for since it was invented. So going sort of try and get to get people to use it more responsibly can be seen a bit as going against the grain, but the good news is, it was, got lots of really positive feedback from clients about it and, I don't know how it's doing now, but I'm sure it's doing some really useful work.Chris Adams: So you said, so I just wanna check one thing, 'cause we, you, we said, this idea of zombie instances. My, my guess when you say that is, that's basically a running virtual machine or something like that, that's consuming resources, but it doesn't appear to be doing any obviously useful work. Is that what a zombie is in this context?Right. Okay, cool. And, I can kind of see like why you might not want to kind of turn people's stuff off, along that, because if you are, I mean, if you are running a data center, you're kind of incentivized to keep things up and if you're selling stuff, you're kind of incentivized to kind of make sure there's always stuff available.Right. But I do, I, kind of see your point, like if you, if you're not at least making this visible to people, then yeah, how are people able to make kind of maybe any responsible choices about, okay, is this really the right size, for example? And if like a chunk of your revenue is reliant on that, that's probably another reason that you might not wanna do some of that stuff, so. Oh, okay. Alright. So there's like a change of incentives that we may need to think about, but I know that one thing that I have seen people talking about in France a lot is actually not just looking at energy and, yeah, okay, France has quite a clean grid because there's lots of things like low carbon energy, like nuclear and stuff like that, but is there something else to that? Like why, is it just because the energy's clean, there's nothing else to do? Or is there a bigger thing that you need to be aware of if you are building a calculator or making some of these, figures available to people?Is energy the full picture or is there more to it that we should be thinking about?James Martin: No. Exactly. That was the, that was really the real unique point about Scaleway's calculator, is it wasn't just the carbon calculators and so not just energy and emissions, but also the impact of hardware and also the impact of water, how much water is your data center using? And was a really important part of the project. And I remember my colleagues telling me the most challenging part of the project was actually getting the hardware data off the manufacturers. 'Cause they don't necessarily declare it. Nvidia, for example, still gives no lifecycle analysis data on their GPUs. So, it's incredible. But, there it is. So basically, what Scaleway set out to do is the opposite of what AWS does, which is, AWS says, we've bought all this green energy, renewable energy, we've bought enough carbon credits to cover us for the next seven years. Therefore, your cloud is green.Chris Adams: Nothing to do. No changes. Yeah.James Martin: Yeah. Which is completely false because it's ignoring the scope three, which is the biggest share of emissions, the emissions. So all of that is ignored. I worked out from a report a while ago that nearly 65% of the tech sector's emissions are unaccounted for. It's a complete, in the dark. Then if you consider that only 11% of tech impacts our emissions, the rest is hardware,then we're really, what the information that we've got so far is like, it's portion of the real impact. So that was why, it was such a big deal that Scaleway was setting out to, to cover much of the real impact as possible. Becauseonce you have as broad a picture of as possible of that impact, then you can make the right decisions. As you were saying, Chris, the, then you can choose, I'm going to go for data centers in France because as they say, as you, they, because they have this lower carbon intensity, I might try and use this type of product because it uses less energy. I'd say that is a, that is an added value provider can bring that should attract more clients, I'd have thought, with what with, you've got things like CSRD and all sorts of other Chris Adams: Yeah, it's literally written into the standards that you need to declare scope three for cloud and services and data centers now. So if getting that number is easier, then yeah, I can see why that would be helpful actually.James Martin: Absolutely.Chris Adams: All right. We'll share a link to that specific part of the European Sustainability reporting standards. 'Cause it kind of blew my mind when I saw it actually. Like I didn't realize it was really that explicit. And that's something that we have.  So you mentioned Nvidia and you mentioned there's a kind of like somewhat known environmental footprint associated with the actual hardware itself. And as I understand it, you mentioned GenAI Impact, which is an organization that's been doing some work to make. Some of these numbers a bit more visible to people when they're using some of that. Maybe, I could just ask you a little bit, and I know as I understand it, is GenAI impact, is it based primarily in France? Is thatJames Martin: Yeah. So the sort of my origin story for that was, it was again, Green IO more hats off to Gael. So that was at Green IO Paris 2023. It ended with a, from, Théo Alves Da Costa, who is the co-president of Data for Good, is ONG, which has this like 6,000 data scientists, engineers who are all putting their skills to for good, basically as volunteers. And so he did it this presentation, which, notably drew on a white paper from Data for Good, which said that we didn't really know that much at the time, but that the impact of inference could be anything from 20 to 200 times more than the impact of training.And he showed it with these bubbles, and you just, and I just looked at it and went, oh my God, this is beyond the, this goes way beyond any level of cloud impact that we've been used to before. So, yeah, that drew me to get interested in, I went to Data for Good's next meeting launched, GenAI Impact, which is the, project which ended up producing Ecologits.ai, which is a super handy calculator for.Chris Adams: this is a tool to give you to like plugs into like if you're using any kind generative AI tools it as I understand it, like, 'cause we looked through it ourselves. Like if you're using maybe some Python code to call ChatGPT or Mistral or something, it will give you some of the numbers as you do it and it'll give you like the hardware, the water usage and stuff like that.It gives you some figures, right?James Martin: Exactly. And the way it does it is, pretty clever so it will mostly measure open source models, easy because you know what their parameters are all the data is open. And it will compare that with closed models. So it will be able to give you an estimation of the impact closed models like ChatGPT so you can use it to say, what is the impact of writing a tweet with, chat g PT versus what is the impact of doing it with llama or whatever? And, because big tech is so opaque, and this is one of my big, bug bears, it means that it gives us a sort ofChris Adams: That's the best you've got to go on for like me. Yeah.James Martin: very educated guess, and which is something that should, people to use frugal, AI. That's the idea.Chris Adams: Okay. So I, this is one thing that I'm always amazed by when I go to France because there seems to be the, field seems to be further along quite a, definitely in Ger than Germany, for example. And like for example, France had the AI Action Summit this year. It's the only country in the world where the kind of government supported frugal AI channel.You've mentioned this a few times and I'm, might give you a bit of space to actually tell people what frugal AI actually is. I mean, maybe we could talk, how does a conversation About AI spec, for example, how does it differ in France compared to maybe somewhere else in the world, like, that you've experienced because I, it does feel different to me, but I'm not quite sure why.And I figure as someone who's in France, you've probably got a better idea about what's different and what's driving that.James Martin: Yeah, it's, it really is a, it is the place to be. So let's say. If you've seen that the Paris just moved ahead of London as the sort of one of the best places for startups to be at the moment. And one of the reason for that is that very strong AI ecosystem. Everyone thinks of Mistral first and foremost, but are lots of others. But yeah, I just wanted to talk first, before I get into that, I wanted why do we need frugal AI? Because, it's not something that people think about on a daily basis, like I was saying before. you can, My wife the other day was, she's a teacher and she was preparing her, she was using ChatGPT to prepare help prepare her lesson. And I was like, no, don't use that. There are lots of, there are lots of other alternative, but to her it's just of course, there and to 800 million people who use every week. They do it because it's free and they do it because works really well. But, what they don't know is that because of tools like, like ChatGPT and we know that ChatGPT is amongst the highest impact of, model. Data center energy consumption is going to triple or maybe even quadruple by the end of the decade. And data center water consumption is going to quadruple by the end of the decade. And there are lots of very serious studies which all, they all came out at the end of last year. Most of them, they all concur that this is, or, all of these, if you put all of their graphs together, they are very, they're very similar and the scariest thing about them, in fact, is that they show that data center energy consumption has been pretty much flat for the past years because whilst cloud usage has been surging something like 500%, the data center operators like Scaleway and lots of other companies have been able to optimize that energy usage and keep it flat. The problem is that AI is, because this has all been based on CPUs, because AI uses GPUs, which use four times more energy and heat up 2.5 times more than CPUs, the curve has gone like this. It's done a complete dog leg.The consumption of GPUs is just on a such a different scale that the tricks to keep it under control before don't work anymore. So we are really in a sort of, we've reached a tipping point. And it is because, partly people are like generating like millions of Ghibli images, starter packs or, I'm simplifying a lot, but my, I'm, what I'm questioning is, how, when you look at that graph, how much of this activity is really useful? How much of it is curing cancer or, or the greatest joke of all, fixing climate change? When it's, happening is it's making it worse. And that this, again, this dog leg is so sharp that we can't build nuclear power quickly enough to fill up this demand. So what's happening is that, coal burning energy generators, or gas, are being kept open so that we can keep, making those images and doing our homework and all that sort of thing. So that is in a nutshell is, is why we need frugal AI. And we need it also because the, it has been built in a way.If you, if you haven't read, book Empire of AI yet, by Karen Hao, it's very strongly recommended, because of the things it explains is that the genesis of OpenAI, at some point they decided, that bigger your model is, the more, basically the more compute power it uses, the better it will be. And they've just been built building on that premise ever since the launch of ChatGPT. Whereas the fact is, the most recent versions of ChatGPT or GPT, actually hallucinate more than the less powerful version. So why do we need to throw all that power at it? When, as we see from talking to people like the amazing Sasha Luccioni, with LLMs for example, you have models that are 30 to 60 times smaller, which can do just a, just as well a job, just as good a job. So these are the sort of conversations that you can have a lot, in France, which is really sort of standing out today as a frugal AI pioneer. The fact that the, over 90% of French electricity is carbon free is, that helps a lot. That's something that Mistral in particular, on a lot, say, we've got clean energy, therefore we are green. Watch out for the AWS effect. But it is a very important point, because all the ChatGPT and other impact that's happening in America. And so I was very happy to see because of, big tech's opacity, Ecologits, which as you mentioned is a Python library, it very quickly became a global reference because that's all we had.Chris Adams: Okay, so when the bar's on the floor, it doesn't need to be very high, right? James Martin: Yeah exactly. It's like, my favorite tweet, I think my favorite tweet of the year so far is Sam Altman. I can even share the link to the tweet because I love slash love it so much. It basically said when all these hundreds of thousands of millions of Ghibli images happened, and he joked that GpUs were melting. He said, he shared this completely ridiculous graph, which said, this is the water impact of one ChatGPT query, is the water impact of one Burger.Chris Adams: Yeah.James Martin: Sam Altman's comment in the tweet was. Anti AI people making up shit about the impact of ChatGPT whilst eating burgers. And I just found it so cynical because A, I'm not anti AI, I'm just, I'm anti waste. And the, so that's the third point. the reason that people have to make shit up is because they don't declare access to any of the numbers. Yeah. if they did, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. We would be able to say, ChatGPT is this, is this, Llama is this. And we'd be able to compare everyone on a, on the same playing field. ButChris Adams: On their merits. Yeah.James Martin: Yeah. So coming back to France. Because I'm wary of going off on a rant. The French government is really, sort of, has been incredible on this topic. So they, around the time of that AI Action Summit, they supported A frugal AI challenge whereby people were encouraged to complete AI tasks across audio, text, and image. And they, you would win the challenge by doing, completing the tasks, whilst using x times less energy than the big LLMs. And so the projects that won, they used 60 times, one of them used 60 times less energy big LLM. Proving that these big LLMs are not necessary.Chris Adams: And it was solving the same task. 'cause I think from memory, there was like, there was a few challenges which were like, you know, combat disinformation online, discover something useful there. The things like, which were, they weren't, they weren't something which was like, you know, these were considered socially useful problems, but people were free to use any kind of approach they were gonna, they were to take. And what, so what you're saying is that okay, you could use an LLM to solve one of them, but what, solve it one way, but there's other ways that they solved it. And some of the winners were quite, you know, 60 times more efficient, essentially 60 time less consumptive.Right.James Martin: Exactly. So, yeah, it's great to have projects like that. The French Government is also has obtained funding for around a dozen frugal AI projects, which are being run by municipalities all over France. So they're using it to optimize energy usage or to detect garbage in the street or that sort of thing. So that's great. The French government also supports the frugal AI guidelines of AFNOR. AFNOR is France's International, sorry, is France's Official Standards Organization, and what they've done is like basically to say for your AI to be frugal, it needs to correspond with these criteria. The first criteria, which I love is, can you prove that this solution cannot be solved by anything else than AI? And it's pretty strict. There are three first steps, but then it goes into a lot of detail about what is or is not frugal AI, and that's such pioneering work it's on track to become EU standard. That's some really some great work there. But I think, for me, one of the best arguments that I use about why should you bother with frugal AI is, very simply, the French Ministry for the Environment has said to startups, if you want to work with us, you have to prove that your AI is frugal first. So,Chris Adams: Oh, okay. So it's like they're creating demand pool then essentially to like, so like, you know, this is how this is your carrot. Your carrot is a fat government contract, but you need to demonstrate that you're actually following these principles in what you do.James Martin: I love that because it shows that doing things frugally can actually be good for your business.Chris Adams: Okay. Alright. So, wow. I think we should definitely make sure we've got some links for a bunch of that stuff. 'Cause I wasn't aware that there were, I know that France in the kind of world of W3C, they have, I can never put, I never, it's the RGESN and I forget I'm not gonna, yeah. I'm not gonna butcher the pronunciation, but it broadly translates to like a general policy for EcoDesign, and I know that's like a standards track for Europe. James Martin: Yes. Chris Adams: If I can find the actual French words, I might try to share it, but, or maybe you might be to help me with that one because my French is not as, is, nowhere good enough to spell it properly. But I'm also aware that France is actually one of the first countries in the world to actually have like a digital sustainability law. There was one in 2020, the REEN, the Oh yeah.James Martin: That's it. That's it. Yeah. I was very focused on AI with all those examples. But yeah, France is the only country which has a Digital Responsibility Act, called REEN, basically says, for example, that any municipality with over 50,000 inhabitants has to publish their digital responsibility strategy, even if it's just, we are going to buy older, we are going to keep our PCs going for longer or, sort of simple stuff like that. They, the, this French law demands that localities, municipalities, only make an effort on these things, but they show that they are making an effort. So Chris Adams: I see.James Martin: in a sort of a great incentive.Chris Adams: Ah, okay. So that I now understand. So the, with the RGESN, as I understand it, that was essentially something like a guide sort of guidelines for France. Ah, so,James Martin: yeah, it's two different things. RGSN, the guidelines for econ conception. so the how to make your website not only more energy efficient, but also more accessible to people of varying abilities. There's also a law that just came into effect here in France to make websites more accessible. So that, it is great to see those two things going hand in hand. They also announced at the AI Action Summit that they were going to invest hundred billion in new data centers for AI by the end of the decade. You win some, you lose some. But maybe better to do that here with lower carbon than in the states, which is generally speaking, 10 times more carbon in the electricity.Chris Adams: Okay. It sounds like there's a lot happening in France. So not only that, are they talking, so there is this whole, not only is this, there's an idea of like frugal AI in digital sobriety, which is this other French term, which when translated in English, always sounds really strange to my ears, but there's actually quite a lot of, for want of a better word, like policy support behind this stuff to actually encourage people to work in this way, basically, huh?James Martin: Absolutely. And again, I would give a, another heads up to Data for Good for that because they were instrumental in that frugal AI challenge along with Sasha Luccioni.Chris Adams: Okay.James Martin: By the way, we'll be, we'll be speaking at Viva Tech. So, Viva Tech is France's biggest tech event. It's actually one of the biggesttech events in Europe. Unfortunately, they had Elon Musk as their keynote last year and the year before. Fortunately they won't this year.Chris Adams: Yeah.James Martin: Sasha is going to be one of their keynotes this year, which is also great, I think it's a good sign.And she will also be speaking on a panel as part of a sustainability summit with Kate Kallot, which is of Amini AI. And I'll be that conversation. So I'm happy these sort of conversations are happening. NotChris Adams: But more mainstream by the sounds of things.James Martin: Not only between, people like you and me who care, and are, who understand all the tech. But it's super important, as I was saying at the beginning, to be having these conversations with as broad an audience as possible, because otherwise nothing's gonna change.Chris Adams: Okay, so we've spoke about, we've gone quite deeply into talking about AI and hardware and water and stuff like that. If we pull back out. So you are, we talk about how people might engage with this topic in the first place.If there's one thing you could change about how people talk about sustainability, particularly in technology, what would you change, James?James Martin: I suppose I'd presume it as, don't believe the hype. And the hype tech is usually, bigger is better. What I would like people to try and really integrate is that bigger isn't always better. As we said before, it is very important to look at the holistic picture of impacts rather than just the individual ones. It's more important to pressure companies to change as you see with that French government example, rather than making users feel guilty because again, it's not their fault. And I just think people, what I try, what I'm trying to do as often as I can, Chris, is just bring people back to that sort of gold standard of green IT, which is only use the right tools for the right needs.This is why this sort of bigger is better thing is just so irritating to me. The way AI is being done right now, it's a classic in tech. It's using a bazooka to swat a fly. It's not necessary. And it's actually, not only is it ridiculous, but it's also very bad the planet. So, if you only need to do this much, you only need a tool that does this much, not this much. And that's one of the reasons that why,when I hear the term AI for Good, which we hear a lot of at the moment, I would say that I would challenge that and I would encourage people to challenge that too by saying, "are sure this AI is for good? Are you sure this tech is for good? Are you sure? That the good, that it does, far outweighs the potential harm that it has?"Because it's not always the case. A lot of the AI for good examples see at the moment, are just. they can't be backed with scientific data at all.And that comes back to another of my points. If you can't prove that it's for good, then it's not, and it's probably greenwashing.Chris Adams: Okay. So show us your receipts then. Basically, yeah.James Martin: Yeah. Chris Adams: Okay. Well thanks for that, James. James. we're just coming up to time now. So if people have found this interesting and they wanted to learn more about either your writing or where you'll be next, where should people be looking? Is there like, maybe, I mean, you mentioned the website for example, is there anywhere else people should be looking to kind of keep up with, like updates from you or anything like that?The website is BetterTech.blog. So yeah, that's the main, that's where you can find a lot more resources about my work on the impact AI and on other things. I also post frequently on LinkedIn about, about this sort of thing, like things like the last one was about frugal prompting.James Martin: That's, my latest discovery. and, yeah, those are the two, main sources. And, I'll work together to make sure that the.Chris Adams: We have all the links for the show notes and everything like that.James Martin: of this, of this episode.Chris Adams: Brilliant. Well, James, thank you so much for giving me the time, and to everyone's listening, for all of this. And I hope you enjoy the rest of the day in what look appears to be sunny Paris behind you.James Martin: It is been, it's been sunnier, but it's fine.Chris Adams: Okay.James Martin: It's still Paris, so grumble. Thanks very much.Chris Adams: Indeed.James Martin: Thanks very much, Chris. It's like I said, it's been a real honor to be on this podcast and I hope we've been able that's useful for people.Chris Adams: Merci beaucoup, James. James Martin: Merci as well, Chris. Chris Adams: Hey everyone, thanks for listening. Just a reminder to follow Environment Variables on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And please do leave a rating and review if you like what we're doing. It helps other people discover the show, and of course, we'd love to have more listeners.To find out more about the Green Software Foundation, please visit greensoftware.foundation. That's greensoftware.foundation in any browser. Thanks again, and see you in the next episode. 

Chris Adams is joined by Zachary Smith and My Truong both members of the Hardware Standards Working Group at the GSF. They dive into the challenges of improving hardware efficiency in data centers, the importance of standardization, and how emerging technologies like two-phase liquid cooling systems can reduce emissions, improve energy reuse, and even support power grid stability. They also discuss grid operation and the potential of software-hardware coordination to drastically cut infrastructure impact. Learn more about our people:Chris Adams: LinkedIn | GitHub | WebsiteZachary Smith: LinkedIn | WebsiteMy Truong: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterResources:Hardware Standards Working Group | GSF [06:19]SSIA / Open19 V2 Specification [12:56]Enabling 1 MW IT racks and liquid cooling at OCP EMEA Summit | Google Cloud Blog [19:14] Project Mycelium Wiki | GSF [24:06]Green Software Foundation | Mycelium workshop EcoViser | Weatherford International [43:04]Cooling Environments » Open Compute Project [43:58]Rack & Power » Open Compute Project Sustainability » Open Compute Project 7x24 Exchange [44:58]OpenBMC [45:25]If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:Zachary Smith: We've successfully made data centers into cloud computing over the past 20 or 25 years, where most people who use and consume data centers never actually see them or touch them. And so it's out of sight, out of mind in terms of the impacts of the latest and greatest hardware or refresh. What happens to a 2-year-old Nvidia server when it goes to die? Does anybody really know Hello, and welcome to Environment Variables,Chris Adams: brought to you by the Green Software Foundation. In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software.I'm your host, Chris Adams. Hello and welcome to Environment Variables, the podcast where we explore the latest in sustainable software development. I'm your host, Chris Adams. Since this podcast started in 2022, we've spoken a lot about green software, how to make code more efficient so it consumes fewer resources or runs on a wider range of hardware to avoid needless hardware upgrades, and so on.We've also covered how to deploy services into data centers where energy is the cleanest, or even when energy is the cleanest, by timing compute jobs to coincide with an abundance of clean energy on the grid. However, for many of these interventions to work, they rely on the next layer down from software,the hardware layer, to play along. And for that to work at scale, you really need standards. Earlier this year, the SSIA, the Sustainable and Scalable Infrastructure Alliance, joined the Green Software Foundation. So now there's a hardware standards working group for HSWG within the Green Software Foundation too.Today we're joined by two leaders in the field who are shaping the future of sustainable software. So, oops, sustainable hardware. We've got Zachary Smith formerly of Packet and Equinix, and My Truong from ZutaCore. We'll be discussing hardware efficiency, how it fits into the bigger sustainability picture, the role of the Open19 standard, and the challenges and opportunities of making data centers greener.So let's get started. So, Zachary Smith, you are alphabetically ahead of My Truong, Mr. Truong. So can I give you the floor first to introduce yourself and tell a little bit about yourself for the listeners?Zachary Smith: Sure. Thanks so much, Chris. It's a pleasure being here and getting to work with My on this podcast. As you mentioned, my name's Zachary Smith. I've been an entrepreneur, primarily in cloud computing for, I guess it's about 25 years now. I went to Juilliard. I studied music and ended up figuring that wasn't gonna pay my rent here in New York City and in the early two thousands joined a Linux-based hosting company. That really gave me just this full stack view on having to put together hardware. We had to build our own computers, ran data center space, oftentimes helped build some of the data centers, connect them all with networks, travel all around the world, setting that up for our customers. And so I feel really fortunate because I got to touch kind of all layers of the stack. My career evolved touch further into hardware. It just became a true passion about where we could connect software and hardware together through automation, through accessible interfaces, and other kinds of standardized protocols, and led me to start a company called Packet, where we did that across different architectures, X86 and ARM, which was really coming to the data center in the 2014/15 timeframe. That business Equinix, one of the world's largest data center operators. And at that point we really had a different viewpoint on how we could impact scale, with the sustainability groups within Equinix as one of the largest green power purchasers in the world, and start thinking more fundamentally about how we use hardware within data centers, how data centers could speak more or be accessible to software users which as we'll, unpack in this conversation, are pretty disparate types of users and don't often get to communicate in good ways. So, I've had the pleasure of being at operating companies. I now invest primarily businesses around the use of data centers and technology as well as circular models to improve efficiency and the sustainability of products.Chris Adams: Cool. Thank you Zachary. And, My, can I give you the floor as well to introduce yourself from what looks like your spaceship in California?My Truong: Thanks. Thanks, Chris. Yes. So pleasure being here as well. Yeah, My Truong, I'm the CTO at ZutaCore, a small two-phase liquid cooling organization, very focused on bringing sustainable liquid cooling to the marketplace. Was very fortunate to cross over with Zach at Packet and Equinix and have since taken my journey in a slightly different direction to liquid cooling. Super excited to join here. Come from, unfortunately I'm not a musician by a classical training. I am a double E by training. I'm joining here from California on the west coast of the Bay Area.Chris Adams: Cool. Thank you for that, My. Alright then. So, my name is Chris. If you're new to this podcast, I work in the Green Web Foundation, which is a small Dutch nonprofit focused on an entirely fossil free internet by 2030. And I'm also the co-chair of the policy working group within the Green Software Foundation.Everything that we talk about, we'll do our best to share links to in the show notes. And if there's any particular thing you heard us talking about that you're really interested that isn't in the show notes, please do get in touch with us because we want to help you in your quest to learn more about green software and now green hardware.Alright then looks like you folks are sitting comfortably. Shall we start?Zachary Smith: Let's do it.Chris Adams: All right then. Cool. Okay. To start things off, Zachary, I'll put this one to you first. Can you just give our listeners an overview of what a hardware standards working group actually does and why having standards with like data centers actually helps?I mean, you can assume that our listeners might know that there are web standards that make websites more accessible and easier to run on different devices, so there's a sustainability angle there, but a lot of our listeners might not know that much about data centers and might not know where standards would be helpful.So maybe you can start with maybe a concrete case of where this is actually useful in helping make any kind of change to the sustainability properties of maybe a data center or a facility.Zachary Smith: Yeah. That's great. Well, let me give my viewpoint on hardware standards and why they're so critical. We're really fortunate actually to enjoy a significant amount of standardization in consumer products, I would say. there's working groups, things like the USB Alliance, that have Really provided, just in recent times, for example, standardization, whether that's through market forces or regulation around something like USB C, right, which allowed manufacturers and accessories and cables and consumers to not have extra or throw away good devices because they didn't have the right cable to match the port.Right? And so beyond this interoperability aspect to make these products work better across an intricate supply chain and ecosystem, they also could provide real sustainability benefits in terms of just reuse. Okay. In data centers, amazing thing, being that we can unpack some of the complexities related to the supply chain. These are incredibly complex buildings full of very highly engineered systems that are changing at a relatively rapid pace. But the real issue from my standpoint is, we've successfully made data centers into cloud computing over the past 20 or 25 years, where most people who use and consume data centers never actually see them or touch them. And so it's out of sight, out of mind in terms of the impacts of the latest and greatest hardware or refresh. What happens to a 2-year-old, Nvidia server when it goes to die? Does anybody really know? You kind of know in your home or with your consumer electronics, and you have this real waste problem, so then you have to deal with it.You know not to put lithium ion batteries in the trash, so,you find the place to put them. But you know, when it's the internet and it's so far away, it's a little bit hazy for, I think most people to understand the kind of impact of hardware and the related technology as well as what happens to it. And so that's, I'm gonna say, one of the challengesin the broader sustainability space for data center and cloud computing. One of the opportunities is that maybe different from consumer, we know actually almost exactly where most of this physical infrastructure shows up. Data centers don't move around usually. Um, And so they're usually pretty big. They're usually attached to long-term physical plants, and there's not millions of them. There's thousands of them, but not millions. And so that represents a really interesting opportunity for implementing really interesting, which would seem complex, models. For example, upgrade cycles or parts replacement or upskilling, of hardware. Those things are actually almost more doable logistically in data centers than they are in the broader consumer world because of where they end up. The challenge is that we have this really disparate group of manufacturers that frankly don't always have all the, or aligned incentives, for making things work together. Some of them actually define their value by, "did I put my, logo on the left or did I put my cable on the right?" You have, a business model, which would be the infamous Intel TikTok model, which is now maybe Nvidia. My, what's NVIDIA's version of this?IDK. But its 18 month refresh cycles are really like put out as a pace of innovation, which are, I would say in many ways quite good, but in another way, it requires this giant purchasing cycle to happen and people build highly engineered products around one particular set of technology and then expect the world to upgrade everything around it when you have data centers and the and related physical plant, maybe 90 or 95% of this infrastructure Can, be very consistent. Things like sheet metal and power supplies and cables and so like, I think that's where we started focusing a couple years ago was "how could we create a standard that would allow different parts of the value chain throughout data center hardware, data centers, and related to, benefit from an industry-wide interoperability. And that came to like really fundamental things that take years to go through supply chain, and that's things like power systems, now what My is working on related cooling systems, as well as operating models for that hardware in terms of upgrade or life cycling and recycling. I'm not sure if that helps but, this is why its such a hard problem, but also so important to make a reality.Chris Adams: So if I'm understanding, one of the advantages having the standards here is that you get to decide where you compete and where you cooperate here with the idea being that, okay, we all have a shared goal of reducing the embodied carbon in maybe some of the materials you might use, but people might have their own specialized chips.And by providing some agreed standards for how they work with each other, you're able to use say maybe different kinds of cooling, or different kinds of chips without, okay. I think I know, I think I know more or less where you're going with that then.Zachary Smith: I mean, I would give a couple of very practical examples. Can we make computers that you can pop out the motherboard and have an upgraded CPU, but still useLike the rest of the band. Yeah.the power supplies, et cetera. Is that a possibility? Only with standardization could that work. Some sort of open standard. And standards are a little bit different in hardware.I'm sure My can give you some color, having recently built Open19 V2 standard. It's different than the software, right? Which is relatively, I'm gonna say, quick to create,quick to change.And also different licensing models, but hardware specifications are their own beast and come with some unique challenges.Chris Adams: Cool. Thank you for that, Zach. My, I'm gonna come bring to the next question to you because we did speak a little bit about Open19 and that was one thing that was a big thing with the SSIA. So as I understand it, the Open19 spec, which we referenced, that was one of the big things that the SSIA was a kind of steward of. And as I understand it, there's already an existing different standard that def, that defines like the dimensions of like say a 19 inch rack in a data center.So, need to be the same size and everything like that. But that has nothing to say about the power that goes in and how you cool it or things like that. I assume this is what some of the Open19 spec was concerning itself with. I mean, maybe you could talk a little bit about why you even needed that or if that's what it really looks into and why that's actually relevant now, or why that's more important in, say, halfway through the 2020s, for example.My Truong: Yeah, so Open19, the spec itself originated from a group of folks starting with the LinkedIn or organization at the time. Yuval Bachar put it together along with a few others.As that organization grew, it was inherited by SsIA, which was, became a Linx Foundation project. What we did when we became a Linux Foundation project is rev the spec. the original spec was built around 12 volt power. It had a power envelope that was maybe a little bit lower than what we knew we needed to go to in the industry. And so what we did when we revised the spec was to bring, both 48 volt power, a much higher TDP to it, and brought some consistency the design itself.So, as you were saying earlier, EIATIA has a 19 inch spec that defines like a rail to rail, but no additional dimensions beyond just a rail to rail dimension. And so what we did was we built a full, I'm gonna air quote, a "mechanical API" for software folk. So like, do we consistently deliver something you can create variation inside of that API, but the API itself is very consistent on how you go both mechanically, bring hardware into a location, how you power it up, how do you cool it? For variations of cooling, but have a consistent API for bringing cooling into that IT asset. What it doesn't do is really dive into the rest of the physical infrastructure delivery. And that was very important in building a hardware spec, was that we didn't go over and above what we needed to consistently deliver hardware into a location. And when you do that, what you do is you allow for a tremendous amount of freedom on how you go and bring the rest of the infrastructure to the IT asset.So, in the same way when you build a software spec, you don't really concern yourself about what language you put in behind it, how the rest of that infrastructure, if you have like, a communication bus or is it like a semi API driven with a callback mechanism? You don't really try to think too heavily around that.You build the API and you expect the API to behave correctly. And so what that gave us the freedom to do is when we started bringing 48 volt power, we could then start thinking about the rest of the infrastructure a little bit differently when you bring consistent sets of APIs to cooling and to power. And so when we started thinking about it, we saw this trend line here about like. We knew that we needed to go think about 400 volt power. We saw the EV industry coming. There was a tread line towards 400 volt power delivery. What we did inside of that hardware spec was we left some optionality inside of the spec to go and change the way that we would go do work, right?So we gave some optional parameters the, infrastructure teams to go and change up what they needed to go do so that they could deliver that hardware, that infrastructure a little bit more carefully or correctly for their needs. So, we didn't over specify, in particular areas where, I'll give you a counter example and in other specifications out there you'll see like a very consistent busbar in the back of the infrastructure that delivers power. It's great when you're at aChris Adams: So if I can just stop for you for a second there, My. The busbar, that's the thing you plug a power thing instead of a socket. Is that what you're referring to there?My Truong: Oh, so, good question Chris. So in what you see in some of the Hyperscale rack at a time designs, you'llsee two copper bars sitting in the middle of the rack in the back delivering power. And that looks great for an at scale design pattern, but may not fit the needs of smaller or more nuanced design patterns that are out there. Does that make sense?Chris Adams: Yeah. Yeah. So instead of having a typical, kinda like three-way kind of kettle style plug, the servers just connect directly to this bar to provide the power. That's that's what one of those bars is. Yeah. Gotcha.My Truong: Yep. And so we went a slightly different way on that, where we had a dedicated power connection per device that went into the Open19 spec. And the spec is up, I think it's up still up on our ssia.org, website. And so anybody can go take a look at it and see the, mechanical spec there.It's a little bit different.Chris Adams: Okay. All right. So basically previously there was just a spec said "computers need to be this shape if they're gonna be server computers in rack." And then Open19 was a little bit more about saying, "okay, if you're gonna run all these at scale, then you should probably have some standards about how power goes in and how power goes out."Because if nothing else that allows 'em to be maybe some somewhat more efficient. And there's things like, and there's various considerations like that, that you can take into account. And you spoke about shifting from maybe 48 volts to like 400 volts and that there is efficiency gained by, which we probably don't need to go into too much detail about, when you do things like that because it allows you to use, maybe it allows you to move along more power without so much being wasted, for example.These are some of the things that the standards are looking into and well, in the last 10 years, we've seen a massive, we've seen a shift from data center racks, which use quite a lot of power to some things which use significantly more. So maybe 10 years ago you might had a cloud rack would be between five and 15 kilowatts of power.That's like, tens of homes. And now you we're looking at racks, which might be say, half a megawatt or a megawatt power, which is maybe hundreds if not thousands of homes worth of power. And therefore you need say, refreshed and updated standards. And that's where the V2 thing is moving towards.Right.My Truong: Okay.Chris Adams: Okay, cool. So yeah.Zachary Smith: Just, the hard thing about hardware standards, where the manufacturing supply chain moves slowunless you are end-to-end verticalizer, like some of the hyperscale customers can really verticalize. They build the data center, they build the hardware, lots of the same thing.They can force that. But a broader industry has to rely upon a supply chain. Maybe OEMs, third party data center operators, 'cause they don't build their own data center,they use somebody else's. And so what we accomplish with V2 was allow for this kind of innovation within the envelope and do the, one of our guiding principles was how could we provide the minimal amount of standardization that we would allow for more adoption to occur while still gaining the benefits?Chris Adams: Ah.Zachary Smith: And so that it's a really difficult friction point because your natural reaction is to like, solve the problem. Let's solve the problem as best we can.The that injects so much opinion that it's very hard to get adopted throughout the broader industry. And so even things like cooling,single phase or two phase, full immersion or not, this kind of liquid or this way, different types of pressure, whatever. There's all kinds of implications, whether those are technology use, those are regulatory situations across different environments, so I think like that's the challenge that we've had with hardware standards, is how to make it meaningful while still allowing it to evolve for specific use cases. Chris Adams: Alright. Okay. So, I think I am, I'm understanding a bit now. And like I'll try and put it in context to some of the other podcast episodes we've done. So we've had people come into this podcast from like Google for example, or Microsoft, and they talk about all these cool things that they're entirely vertically designed data centers where they're in the entire supply chain. They do all these cool things with the grid, right? But all those designs, a lot of the time they, there's maybe these might be custom designs in the case of Google when no one gets to see them. Or in some cases, like say Meta or some other ones, it may be open compute, which is a, it's a different size to most people's data centers, for example. So you can't just like drop that stuff in, like there's a few of them arouned, but it's still 19 inches that's the default standard in lots of places. And if I understand it, one of the things that, one of the goals of Open19 is to essentially bring everyone else along who already have standardized on these kind of sides so they can start doing some of the cool grid aware, carbon aware stuff that you see people talking about that you probably don't have that much access to if you're not already meta Google or Facebook with literally R&D budgets in the hundreds of millions.Zachary Smith: Yeah, maybe add some zeros there.Yeah, I think absolutely, right, which is democratizing access to some of this innovation, right? while still relying upon and helping within the broader supply chain. For example, if EVs are moving into 400 volt, like we can slipstream and bring that capability to data centre hardware supply chains.'Cause the people making power supplies or components or cabling are moving in those directions, right? But then it's also just allowing for the innovation, right? Like, I think, we firmly seen this in software. I think this is a great part of Linux Foundation, which is, no one company owns the, you know, monopoly on innovation. And what we really wanna see was not to like, can we make a better piece of hardware, but can we provide, some more foundational capabilities so that hundreds of startups or different types of organizations that might have different ideas or different needs or different goals could innovate around the sustainability aspect of data center hardware and, I think what we're focused on now within GSF is really taking that to a more foundational level. There's just a huge opportunity right now with the data center construction industry happening to really find a even more interesting place where we can take some of those learnings from hardware specifications and apply it to an even broader impact base Chris Adams: Ah, okay. Alright. I'll come back to some of this because there's, I know there's a project called Project Mycelium that Asim Hussain, the executive Director of the Green Software Foundation is continually talking about. But like we've spoken a little about, you mentioned, if I understand it, like, this allows you to maybe have more freedom to talk about maybe, instead of having like tiny fans, which scream at massive, thousands and thousands of RPM, there's other ways that you could maybe call down chips for example. And like, this is one thing that I know that the hardware standards working group is looking at, is finding ways to keep the servers cool, for example. Like as I understand it,using liquid is, can be more efficient, quite a bit more efficient than having tiny fans to cool at massive RPM to cool things down. But also, I guess there's a whole discussion about, well there's different kinds of, there's different ways of cooling things which might reduce the kind of local power draw, local water usage in a data center, for example.And like, maybe this is one thing we could talk a little bit more about then, 'cause I dunno that, we've had people talk about, say, liquid calling and things like that before, as like, these are some alternative ways to more sustainably cool down data centers in terms of how much power they need, but also what their local footprint could actually be.But we've never had people who actually have that much deep expertise in this. So maybe I could put the questions to one of you. Like, let's say you're gonna switch to liquid calling, for example, Instead of using itty bitty fans or even just bigger, slightly bigger fans, running a little bit slower. Like, how does that actually improve it? Maybe you could, maybe I could put this to you, My. 'Cause I think this is one thing that you've spent quite a lot of time looking into, like, yeah, where are the benefits? Like what, how does, how did the benefits materialize if you switch from, say, air to a liquid calling approach like this?My Truong: Yeah, so on the liquid cooling front, there's a number of pieces here. The fans that you were describing earlier, they're moving air, which is effectively a liquid when you're using it in a cooling mode at 25,000 RPM, you're trying to more air across the surface and it doesn't have a great amount of, Zachary Smith: Heat transfer capability. My Truong: removal and rejection. Yeah. heat transfer capabilities. Right. So in this world where we're not moving heat with air, we're moving it with some sort of liquid, either a single phase liquid, like water or a two-phase liquid taking advantage of two phase heat transfer properties.There's a lot of significant gains and those gains really start magnifying here in this AI space that we're in today. And I think this is where Project Mycelium started to come into fruition was to really think about that infrastructure end to end. When you're looking at some of these AI workloads, especially AI training workloads, their ability to go and move hundreds of megawatts of power simultaneously and instantaneously becomes a tricky cooling challenge and infrastructure challenge. And so really what we wanted to be able to think through is how do we go and allow software to signal all the way through into hardware and get hardware to help go and deal with this problem in a way that makes sense.So I'll give you a concrete example. If you're in the single phase space and you are in the 100 megawatt or 200 megawatt data center site, which is, this is what xAI built out Memphis, Tennessee. When you're going and swinging that workload, you are swinging a workload from zero to a hundred percent back to zero quite quickly. In the timescale of around 40 milliseconds or so, you can move a workload from zero to 200 megawatts back down to zero. When you're connected to a grid, when you're connected to a grid,Chris Adams: right.My Truong: that's called a grid distorting power event, right?You can go swing an entire grid 200 megawatt, which is, probably like, maybe like a quarter of the LA area of like the ability to go and distort a grid pretty quickly. When you're an isolated grid like Ercot, this becomes like a very, tricky proposition for the grid to go and manage correctly. On the flip side of that, like once you took the power you, created about 200 megawatt of heat as well. And when you start doing that, you have to really think about what are you doing on your cooling infrastructure. If you're a pump based system, like single phase, that means that you're probably having to spool up and spool down your pump system quite rapidly to go respond to that swing in power demand. But how do you know? How do you prep the system? How do you tell that this is going to happen? And this is where we really need to start thinking about, these software hardware interfaces. Wouldn't it be great if your software workload could start signaling to your software or your hardware infrastructure? "Hey I'm about, to go and start up this workload, and I'm about to go and swing this workload quite quickly." You would really want to go signal to your infrastructure and say, "yes, I'm about to go do this to you," and maybe you want to even signal to your grid, "I'm about to go do this for you" as well. You can start thinking about other, options for managing your power systems correctly, maybe using like a battery system to go and shave off that peak inside of the grid and manage that appropriately. So we can start thinking about this. Once we have this ability to go signal from software to hardware to infrastructure and building that communication path, it becomes an interesting thought exercise that we can realize that this is just a software problem.have been in this hardware, software space, we've seen this before. And is it worth synchronizing this data up? Is it worth signaling this correctly through the infrastructure? This is like the big question that we have with Project Mycelium. Like, it would be amazing for us to be able to do this.Chris Adams: Ah, I see.My Truong: The secondary effects of this is to really go think through, now, if you're in Dublin where you have offshore power and you now have one hour resolution on data that's coming through about the amount of green power that's about to come through, it would be amazing for you to signal up and signal down your infrastructure to say, you should really spool up your workload and maybe run it at 150% for a while, right?This would be a great time to go really take green power off grid and drive your workload on green power for this duration. And then as that power spools off, you can go roll that power need off for a time window. So being able to think about these things that we can create between the software hardware interface is really where I think that we have this opportunity to really make game changing and really economy changing outcomes. Chris Adams: Okay. Zachary Smith: I have a viewpoint on that, Chris, Chris Adams: too.Yeah, please do.Zachary Smith: My TLDR summary is like, infrastructure has gotten much more complicated and the interplay between workload and that physical infrastructure is no longer, "set it in there and just forget it and the fans will blow and the servers will work and nobody will notice the difference in the IT room."These are incredibly complex workloads. Significant amount of our world is interacting with this type of infrastructure through software services. It's just got more complicated, right? And what we haven't really done is provide more efficient and advanced ways to collaborate between that infrastructure and the kind of workload. It's, still working under some paradigms that like, data centers, you put everything in there and the computers just run. And that's just not the case anymore. Right. I think that's what My was illustrating so nicely, is that workload is so different and so dynamic and so complex that we need to step up with some ways to, for the infrastructure and that software workload to communicate.Chris Adams: Ah, I see. Okay. So I'll try and translate some of that for some of the listeners that we've had here. So you said something about, okay. A 200 megawatt like power swing, that's like, that's not that far away from a half a million people appearing on the grid, then disappearing on the grid every 14 milliseconds.And like obviously that's gonna piss off people who have to operate the grid. But that by itself is one thing, and that's also a change from what we had before because typically cloud data centers were known for being good customers because they're really like flat, predictable power draw.And now rather than having like a flat kind of line, you have something more like a kind of seesaw, a saw tooth, like up, down, up, down, up, down, up, down. And like if you just pass that straight through to the grid, that's a really good way to just like totally mess with the grid and do all kinds of damage to the rest of the grid.But what it sounds like you're saying is actually, if you have some degree of control within the data center, you might say, "well, all this crazy spikiness, rather than pulling it from the grid, can I pull it from batteries, for example?" And then I might expose, or that I might expose that familiar flat pattern to the rest of the grid, for example.And that might be a way to make you more popular with grid operators, but also that might be a way to actually make the system more efficient. So that's one of the things you said there. So that's one kind of helpful thing there. But also you said that there is a chance to like dynamically scale up how, when there is loads and loads of green energy, so you end up turning into a bit more of a kind of like better neighbor on the grid essentially.And that can have implications for the fact that because we are moving to a, like you said before, there's complexity at the power level and it allows the data centers to rather than make that worse, that gonna address some of those things. So it's complimentary to the grid, is that what you're saying?My Truong: Yeah. I think you got it, Chris. You got it, Chris. Yeah.Exactly. So that's on the power side. I think that we have this other opportunity now that as we're starting to introduce liquid cooling to the space as well, we're effectively, efficeintly removing heat from the silicon. Especially in Europethis is becoming like a very front and center, conversation of data centers operating in Europe is that this energy doesn't need to go to waste and be evacuated into the atmosphere. We have this tremendous opportunity to go and bring that heat into local municipal heat loopsand really think about that much more, in a much more cohesive way. And so this is again, like where we really, like, as Zach was saying, we really need to think about this a bit comprehensively and really rethink our architectures to some degree with these types of workloads coming through. And so bringing standards around the hardware, the software interface, and then as we start thinking through the rest of the ecosystem, how do we think through bringing consistency to some of this interface so that we can communicate "workload is going up, workload is going down. The city needs x amount of gigawatt of power into a municipal heat loop," like help the entire ecosystem out a little bit better. In the winter, probably Berlin or Frankfurt would be excited to have gigawatts of power in a heat loop to go and drive a carbon free heating footprint inside of the area. But then on the flip side of that, going and building a site that expects that in the winter, but in the summer where you're not able to take that heat off, how do we think about more innovative ways of driving cooling then as well? How do we go and use that heat in a more effective way to drive a cooling infrastructure?Chris Adams: So, okay, so this is that. I'm glad you mentioned the example, 'cause I live in Germany and our biggest driver of fossil fuel use is heating things up when it gets cold. So that's one of the good, good ways to, like, if, there's a way to actually use heat, which doesn't involve burning more fossil fuels, totally. Or I'm all for that. There is actually, one question I might ask actually is like, what are the coolants that people use for this kind of stuff? Because the, when you, I mean, when we move away from air, you're not norm, you're not typically just using water in some, all of these cases, there may be different kinds of chemicals or different kinds of coolants in use, right?I mean, maybe you could talk a little bit about that, because I know that we had switches from when we've looked at how we use coolant elsewhere, there's been different generations of coolants for our, and in Europe, I know one thing we, there's a whole ongoing discussion about saying, "okay, if we're gonna have liquid cooling, can we at least make sure that the liquid, the coolants we're using are actually not the things which end up being massively emitting in their own right," because one of the big drivers of emissions is like end of life refrigerants and things like that. Maybe you could talk a little bit about like what your options are if you're gonna do liquid cooling and like, what's on the table right now?To actually do something which is more efficient, but is also a bit more kind of non-toxic and safe if you're gonna have this inside a, in inside a given space.My Truong: Yeah. So in liquid cooling there's a number of fluids that we can use. the most well understood of the fluids, as used both in the facility and the technical loop side is standard de-ionized water. Just water across the cold plate. There's variations that are used out there with a propylene glycol mix to manage microbial growth. The organization that I'm part of, we use a two-phase approach where we're taking a two-phase fluid, and taking advantage of phase change to remove that heat from the silicon. And in this space, this is where we have a lot of conversations around fluids and fluid safety and how we're thinking about that fluid and end of life usage of that fluid. Once you're removing heat with that fluid and putting it into a network, most of these heat networks are water-based heat networks where you're using some sort of water with a microbial treatment and going through treatment regimes to manage that water quality through the system.So this is a very conventional approach. Overall, there's good and bads to every system. Water is very good at removing heat from systems. But as you start getting towards megawatt scale, the size of plumbing that you're requiring to go remove that heat and bring that fluid through, becomes a real technical challenge.And alsoat megawatts. Yeah. Yeah.Zachary Smith: If I'm not mistaken.Also, there's challenges if you're not doing a two-phase, approach to actually removing heat at a hot enough temperature that you can use it for something else, right?My Truong: Correct. Correct, Zach. It's, so there's, like, a number of like very like technical angles to this. So as you're, going down that path, Zach, so in single phase what we do is we have to move fluid across that surface a good enough clip to make sure that we're removing heat keeping that silicon from overheating. Downside of this is like, as silicon requires colder and colder temperatures to keep them operating well, their opportunity to drive that heat source up high enough to be able to use in a municipal heat loop becomes lower and lower. So let's say, for example, your best in class silicon today asking for what's known as a 65 degree TJ. That's a number that we see in the silicon side. So you're basically saying, "I need my silicon to be 65 degrees Celsius or lower to be able to operate properly." flip side of that is you're gonna ask your infrastructure go deliver water between 12 to 17 degrees Celsius to make sure that, that cooling is supplied. But the flip side of that is that if you allow for, let's say, a 20 degree Celsius rise, your exit temperature on that water is only gonna 20 degrees higher than the 70 degrees inlet, so that water temperature is so lowAnd that's not a very nice shower, basically. Yeah.You're in a lukewarm shower at best.So, we have to do, then we have to tr spend a tremendous amount of energy then bring that heat quality up so that we can use it in a heat network. And two phase approaches, what we're taking advantage of is the physics of two-phase heat transfer, where, during phase change, you have exactly one temperature, which that fluid will phase change.To a gas. Yeah. Yeah.To a gas. Exactly.Yeah.And so the easiest way, like, we'll use the water example, but this is not typically what's used in two phase tech technologies, is that water at a atmospheric pressure will always phase change about a hundred degrees Celsius. It's not 101, it's not 99. It's always a hundred degrees Celsius at hemispheric pressure. So your silicon underneath that will always be at a, around a hundred degree Celsius or maybe a little bit higher depending on what your heat transfer, characteristics look like. And this is the physics that we take advantage of. So when you're doing that, the vapor side this becomes like a very valuable energy source and you can actually do some very creative things with it on two phase.So that's, there's some, every technology has a, is a double-edged sword and we're taking advantage of the physics of heat transfer to effectively and efficiently remove heat in two-phase solutions.Chris Adams: Ah, so I have one kind of question about the actual, how that changes what data center feels like to be inside, because I've been inside data centers and they are not quiet places to be. Like, I couldn't believe just how uncomfortably loud they are. And like, if you're moving away from fans, does that change how they sound, for example?Because if, even if you're outside some buildings, people talk about some of the noise pollution aspects. Does a move to something like this mean that it changes some of it at all?Zachary Smith: Oh yeah.My Truong: In inside of the white space. Absolutely. Like one of the things that we fear the most inside of a data center is dead silence.You might actually be able to end up in a data center where there's dead silence, soon.And that being a good thing. Yeah.With no fans. Yeah. We'd love to remove the parasitic draw of power from fans moving air across data centers, just to allow that power to go back into the workload itself.Chris Adams: So for context, maybe someone, if you haven't been in a data center... I mean, it was around, I think it felt like 80 to 90 decibels for me, which felt like a, I mean, defects have aYeah, plus could have been more actually. Yeah. So I mean, it was a, I mean, if you have like an, if you have a something on a wearable, on a phone, as soon as it's above 90 degrees, 90 decibels, that's likelouder than lots of nightclubs, basically. Like maybe there's a comp. So this is one thing that I fell and this sounds like it does, like it can introduce some changes there as well rather than actually just, we're just talking about energy and water usage. Right.Zachary Smith: Yeah, most data center technicians wear ear protectors all the time, can't talk on the phone, have to scream at each other, because it's so loud. Certainly there's, some really nice quality of life improvements that can happen when you're not blowing that much air around and spinning up multiple thousandMy Truong: 25,000 to 30,000 RPM fans will, require you double hearing protection to be able to even function as out of the space.Yeah, that's the thing.A lot of energy there.Chris Adams: Oh, okay. Cool. So, so this is the, these are some of the, this is some of the shifts that make possible. So the idea, you can have, you might have data centers of what you're able to be more active in terms of actually working with the grid because for all the kind of things we might do as software engineers, there's actually a standard which makes sure that the things that we see Google doing or Meta talking about in academic papers could be more accessible to more people.That's one of the things that having standards and for like Open19 things might be because there's just so many more people using 19 inch racks and things like that. That seems to be one thing. So maybe I could actually ask you folks like. This is one thing that you've been working on and My, you obviously running an organization, Zuta Core here, and Zach, it sounds like you're working on a number of these projects.Are there any particular like open source projects or papers or things with really some of these. Some of the more wacky ideas or more interesting projects that you would point people to? Because when I talk about data centers and things like this, there's a paper from, that's called the Ecoviser paper, which is all about virtualizing power so that you could have power from batteries going to certain workloads and power from the grid going to other workloads.And we've always thought about it as going one way, but it sounds like with things like Project Mycelium, you can go have things going the other way. Like for people who are really into this stuff, are there any, are there any good repos that you would point people to? Or is there a particular paper that you found exciting that you would direct people to who are still with us and still being able to keep up with the kind of, honestly, quite technical discussion we've had here.?Zachary Smith: Well, I would, not to tout My's horn, but, reading the Open19 V2 specification, I think is worthwhile. Some of the challenges we dealt with at a kind of server and rack level, I think are indicative of where the market is and where it's going. There's also great stuff within the OCP Advanced Cooling working group. And I found it very interesting, especially to see some of what's coming from Hyperscale where they are able to move faster through a verticalized integration approach. And then I've just been really interested in following along the power systems, and related from the EV industry, I think there's, that's an exciting area where we can start to see data centers not as buildings for IT, but data centers as energy components.So when you're looking at, whether it's EV or grid scale kind of renewable management, I think there's some really interesting tie-ins that our industry, frankly is not very good at yet.Ah.Most people who are working in data centers are not actually power experts from a generation or storage perspective.And so there's some just educational opportunities there. I've found, just as one resource, My, I don't know if they have it, at the, the seven by 24 conference group, which is the critical infrastructure conference, which everything from like water systems, power systems to data centers, has been really a great learning place for me.But I'm not sure if they have a publication that is useful. We, have some work to do in moving our industry into transparent Git repos.My Truong: Chris, my favorite is actually the open BMC codebase. It provides a tremendous gateway where this used to be a very closed ecosystem, and very hard for us to think about being able to look through a code repo of a redfish API, and able to rev that spec in a way that could be useful and, implementable into an ecosystem has been like my favorite place outside of hardware specifications likeChris Adams: Ah, okay. So I might try and translate that 'cause I, the BMC thing, this is basically the bit of computing, which essentially tells software what's going on inside of data, how much power it's using and stuff like that. Is that what you're referring to? And is Open BMC, like something used to be proprietary, there is now a more open standard so that there's a visibility that wasn't there before.Is that what it is? My Truong: Right. that's exactly right. So there you have to, in years past, had a closed ecosystem on the service controller or the BMC, the baseboard controller dule inside of a server and being able to look into that code base was always very difficult at best and traumatic at worst. But having open BMC reference code out there,being look and see an implementation and port that code base into running systems has been very useful, I think, for the ecosystem to go and get more transparency, as Zach was saying, into API driven interfaces.oh.What I'm seeing is that prevalence of that code base now showing up in a, number of different places and the patterns are being designated into, as Zach was saying, power systems. We're seeing this, become more and more prevalent in power shelves, power control, places where we used to not have access or we used to use programmable logic controllers to drive this. They're now becoming much more software ecosystem driven and opening up a lot form possibilities for us.Chris Adams: Okay. I'm now understanding the whole idea behind Mycelium, like roots reaching down further down into the actual hardware to do things that couldn't be done before that. Okay. This now makes a lot more sense. Yeah.Peel it back. One more layer.Okay. Stacks within Stacks. Brilliant. Okay. This makes sense. Okay folks, well, thank you very much for actually sharing that and diving into those other projects.We'll add some, if we can, we'll add some links to some of those things. 'Cause I think the open BMC, that's one thing that is actually in production in a few places. I know that Oxide Computer use some of this, but there's other providers who also have that as part of their stack now that you can see.Right.My Truong: We also put into production when we were part of the Packet Equinix team. So we have a little bit of experience in running this tech base in, real production workloads.Chris Adams: Oh wow. I might ask you some questions outside this podcast 'cause this is one thing that we always struggle with is finding who's actually exposing any of these numbers for people who are actually further up the stack because it's a real challenge. Alright. Okay, we're coming up to time, so, I just wanna leave one question with you folks, if I may.If people have found this interesting and they want to like, follow what's going on with Zach Smith and My Truong, where do they look? Where do they go? Like, can you just give us some pointers about where we should be following and what we should be linking to in the show notes? 'Cause I think there's quite a lot of stuff we've covered here and I think there's space for a lot more learning actually.Zachary Smith: Well, I can't say I'm using X or related on a constant basis, but I'm on LinkedIn @zsmith, connect with me there. Follow. I post occasionally on working groups and other parts that I'm part of. And I'd encourage, if folks are interested, like we're very early in this hardware working group within the GSF.There's so much opportunity. We need more help. We need more ideas. We need more places to try. And so if you're interested, I'd suggest joining or coming to some of our working group sessions. It's very early and we're open to all kinds of ideas as long as you're willing to, copy a core value from Equinix,as long as you can speak up and then step up, we'd love the help. there's a lot to do.Brilliant, Zach. And My, over to you.My Truong: LinkedIn as well. Love to see people here as part of our working groups, and see what we can move forward here in the industry.Chris Adams: Brilliant. Okay. Well, gentlemen, thank you so much for taking me through this tour all the way down the stack into the depths that we as software developers don't really have that much visibility into. And I hope you have a lovely morning slash day slash afternoon depending on where you are in the world.Alright, cheers fellas.Thanks Chris.Thanks so much.  Hey everyone, thanks for listening. Just a reminder to follow Environment Variables on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And please do leave a rating and review if you like what we're doing. It helps other people discover the show, and of course, we'd love to have more listeners.To find out more about the Green Software Foundation, please visit greensoftware.foundation. That's greensoftware.foundation in any browser. Thanks again, and see you in the next episode. 

Host Anne Currie is Joined by the esteemed Charles Humble, a figure in the world of sustainable technology. Charles Humble is a writer, podcaster, and former CTO with a decade’s experience helping technologists build better systems—both technically and ethically. Together, they discuss how developers and companies can make smarter, greener choices in the cloud, as well as the trade-offs that should be considered. They discuss the road that led to the present state of generative AI, the effect it has had on the planet, as well as their hopes for a more sustainable future.Learn more about our people:Anne Currie: LinkedIn | WebsiteCharles Humble: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterNews:The Developer's Guide to Cloud Infrastructure, Efficiency and Sustainability | Charles Humble [01:13] Charles Humble on O'Riley [01:50] Building Green Software [Book] [02:09]Twofish Music [48:03]Resources:User Interface Design For Programmers – Joel Spolsky [12:03] Environment Variables Episode 100: TWiGS: Sustainable AI Progress w/ Holly Cummins [18:12] Green Software Maturity Matrix [19:09] Writing Greener Software Even When You Are Stuck On-Prem • Charles Humble • GOTO 2024 [23:42]Electricity Maps [23:57]Cloud Carbon Footprint [36:52] Software Carbon Intensity (SCI) Specification | GSF [37:06]ML.energy [38:31]Perseus (SOSP '24) - Zeus Project | Jae-Won Chung [41:26] If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:Charles Humble: In general, if you are working with vendors, whether they're AI vendors or whatever, it is entirely reasonable to go and say, "well, I want to know what your carbon story looks like." And if they won't tell you, go somewhere else. Chris Adams: Hello, and welcome to Environment Variables, brought to you by the Green Software Foundation. In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software.I'm your host, Chris Adams. Anne Currie: Hello and welcome to Environment Variables, where we bring you the latest news and updates from the world of sustainable software development. Today I'm your guest host Anne Currie, and we'll be zooming in on an increasingly important topic, cloud infrastructure, efficiency and sustainability.Using the cloud well is about making some really clever choices, really difficult choices upfront. And they have an enormous, those choices an enormous impact on our carbon footprint, but we often just don't make them. So our guest today is someone who's thought very deeply about this.So Charles Humble is a writer, podcaster, and former CTO who has spent the past decade helping technologists build better systems, both technically and ethically. He's the author of The Developer's Guide to Cloud Infrastructure, Efficiency and Sustainability, a book that breaks down how cloud choices intersects with environmental impacts and performance.So before we go on, Charles, please introduce yourself.Charles Humble: Thank you. Yes, so as you said, I'm Charles Humble. I work mainly as a consultant and also an author and a technologist. I have a, my own business is a company called Conissaunce, which I run. And I'm very excited to be here. I speak a lot at conferences, most recently, mainly about sustainability. I've written a bunch of stuff with O'Reilly, including a series of shortcut articles called Professional Skills for Software Engineers, and as you mentioned most recently, this ebook, which I think is why you've invited me on.Anne Currie: It is indeed. Yes. So, to introduce myself, my name is Anne Currie. I've been in the tech industry for pretty a long time. Pretty much the same as Charles, about 30 years. And I am one of the authors of O'Reilly's new book, building Green Software, which is entirely and completely aimed at the folks who will be listening to this podcast today.So if you haven't listened to it, if you haven't read it or listened to it because it is available in an audio version as well, then please do so, you'd enjoy it. So, let's get on with the questions that we want to ask about today. So, Charles, you've written this great ebook, which is also something everybody who's listening to the podcast should be reading.And we'll link to it in the show notes below. In fact, everything we'll be talking about today will be linked to in the show notes below. But let's start with one of the key insights from your book, which is that choices matter. Things like VM choices matter, but they're often overlooked when it comes to planning your cloud infrastructure.What did you learn about that? What do you feel about that, Charles? Charles Humble: it's such an interesting place to start. So I think, when I was thinking about this book and how I was putting it together, my kind of starting point was, I wanted like a really easy on-ramp for people. And that came from, you know, speaking a lot at conferences and through some of the consulting work I've done and having people come up to me and say, "well, I kind of want to do the right thing, but I'm not very clear what the right thing is." And I think one of the things that's happened, we've been very good about talking about some of the carbon aware competing stuff, you know, demand shifting and shaping and those sorts of things. But that's quite a, quite an ambitious place to start. And oftentimes there are so many kind of easier wins, I think. And I kind of feel like I want to get us talking a little bit more about some of the easy stuff. 'Cause it's stuff that we can just do. The other thing is, you know, human beings, we make assumptions and we learn things and then we don't go back and reexamine those things later on. So I've occasionally thought to myself, I ought to write a work called something like Things That Were True But Aren't Anymore or something like that because we all have these things. Like my mental model of how a CPU works until probably about two years ago is basically a Pentium two .And CPUs haven't looked like a Pentium two for a very long time, and I have a feeling I'm not the only one. So, you were specifically asking about like CPUs and VM choices, and I think a lot of the time, those of us, certainly those of us of a certain age, but I don't think it's just us, came through this era where Windows and Intel were totally dominant. And so we naturally default to well, "Intel will be fine"because it was right for a long time.Anne Currie: Yeah.Intel Charles Humble: was the right Anne Currie: Who could ever have imagined that Intel would lose the data center? It's Charles Humble: Absolutely it is extraordinary. I mean obviously they lost mobile mainly to ARM and that was very much a sort of power efficiency thing. Fair enough. But yes, the idea that they might be losing the data center or might have lost the data center is extraordinary. But you know, the reality is first of all, if you are thinking about running your workloads. So, AMD processors, more or less how a cross compatible of Intel wants. It's not totally true, but it kind of is. So they have an X86 compatible instruction set. So for the most part, your workloads that will run on Intel will run on AMD.But not only will they run on AMD, they will probably run on AMD better.Again, for the most part, there are places where Intel probably has an edge, I would think. If you're doing a lot of floating point maths, then, maybe they still have an edge. I'm not a hundred percent sure, but as a rule of thumb, AMD is going to be, you know, faster and cheaper. And the reason for that has a great deal to do with core density. So AMD has more cores per chip than Intel does, and what that means is you end up with more processing per server, which means you need fewer servers to run the same workload. I ran some tests for the ebook and that came out,so I had a 2000 VM instance and we had 11 AMD powered servers. So running, epic, the AMD Epic chips and we needed 17 Intel powered servers to do the same job. Right? So that's roughly 35% fewer servers. It's not, by the way, 35% less power use. It's actually about 29%, something like that, less power use 'cause the chips are quite power hungry, but still that's a big saving, right? And it's also, by the way, a cost saving as well. So the other part of this is, you know, it is probably about 13% cheaper to be running your workload on AMD than Intel. Now obviously your mileage may vary and you need to verify everything I'm saying.Don't just assume, "well, Charles Humble said it's true, so it must be." It'll be a foolish thing to do, but as a rule of fault, the chances are in most cases you're better off and I'll wager that you are a lot of the time when you are setting up your VMs on your cloud provider, your cloud providers probably default to Intel and you probably just think, "well, that'll be fine."Right?So kind of a case of trying to flip that script. So maybe you default to AMD, maybe you evaluate whether ARM processors will work. We are seeing another surge of ARM in datacenters. Though, as I said, that comes with some it. In mobile, the trade offs are pretty straightforward with ARM to anything else. In data centers it is a little bit more nuanced. But basically it's that, and I think it's, I think it's this thing of, as I say, of these assumptions that we've just built up over time that we don't, we're not very good at going back and reexamining our opinions or our assumptions. And then the other thing that I think feeds into this is we build layers of abstractions, right? That's what computer science does, and we get more and more abstracted away from what the actual hardware is doing. I found myself this morning when I was thinking about coming on the show, thinking a bit about some of the stuff Martin Thompson's been talking about for years, about mechanical sympathy.I'm sure you have experiences of this, and I know I have,where, you know, I've been brought into a company that's having performance problems. And you look at, there's one that I actually remember vividly from decades ago, but it was, an internet banking app. So it was a new internet bank that was written in visual basic, weird choice, but anyway, go with me here. And they were reading. It was all MQ series, so IBM MQ series under the hood, right? So basically you've got messages that were written in XML being passed around between little programs. It looks a bit like microservices, but 20 years ago before we had the term roughly. And what they were doing, so when you read a message off an MQQ, you read it off essentially one byte at a time.And what they were doing in a loop in Visual Basic was they were basically saying string equals string plus next byte. Does that make sense? So, string equals string plus new string. That kind of idea. Now under the cover, they're doing a deep string copy every single time they do that. But they had no idea 'cause they were visual basic programmers and didn't know what a deep string copy even was.Fair enough. And then they were going, "why is our audit process grinding to a halt?"And the reason is, well, 'cause you'll, we just need like an API. But what I'm getting at is we have these, we get very abstracted away from what the hardware is doingbecause most of the time that's fine, right?That's what we want, except that our abstractions leak in weird ways. And so sometimes you kind of need to be able to draw on this is what's actually happening to understand. So as I say, in the case of,in the case of CPUs, if you haven't been paying attention to CPUs for a while, you probably think Intel still has the edge, but right now, sorry, Intel, they don't.Hope that changes. Competition is always good. But you know, it's just a great example of, you probably don't even think about it. You probably haven't thought about it for years. I know, honestly I hadn't.Anne Currie: Yeah.Charles Humble: But then you start running these numbers and go, "gosh, that's, you know, like a 30% power saving."That's, at any sort of scale, that's quite a big deal. And so a lot of the things that I was trying to do in the book was really that. It was just saying, well, what are some of the things that we can do that are easy things,that make a massive difference?Anne Currie: It's interesting. What you're saying there reminds me a little bit of somebody who was a big name in tech back in our early, you'll remember it very well. Joel Spolsky used to write a thing about, you know, what would Joel do? He used to work on, do a lot of work on usability, studying usability.And he'd say, well, you're not looking for, to change the world and rewrite all these systems. You are often just looking for the truffles, the small changes that will have an outsize effect. And what you're saying is that, for example, moving from Intel to AMD is a small truffle that will have an outsized effect. If you do it at the right time,it's, actually you could probably, it's not so much, as you say, the trouble with go with going to an ARM ship or, you know, Graviton servers that's been pushed very heavily by AWS at the moment. Big improvement in energy use and reductions in cost. But that is not a lift, that's not an instantoh, flick of switch and you go over. They, you know, there are services that are no longer available. There are, you know, you're gonna have to retest and recompile and do all the things, but it's not such an obvious truffle. But you are saying that really that the intel AMD might be a really easy win for you.Charles Humble: Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. It's funny you mentioned Joel Spolsky there. 'Cause actually his, so I read his User Interface Design for Programmers, I think the book is called, about 30 years ago probably. It's just, I still, like everything I know about user interface, I swear it comes from that like book.It was such a brilliant, it's also hysterically funny. It has all sorts of examples of just, it's very wittily written and has some wonderful examples of, you know, just terrible bits of user interface. Like the Windows 95 start button, which is in the bottom left hand corner. Except that if you drag to the bottom left hand corner of the screen, which is one of the easy places on a screen to hit, you miss the start button because aesthetically it looked wrong without a border around it.But then no one thought, well, maybe we should just make it so if you miss, but you are there, you know, like it's full of just examples like that. It's very funny. And yeah, absolutely. This, business of, as I say, so much of, we have as an industry, been very profligate, right? We've been quite casual about our energy use and ourhardware use. So there's another example, which is to do with infrastructure and right sizing.Again, this is just one of those things, it's such an easy, quick win for peopleand it's another thing that connects to this business of our old assumptions. So when I started in the industry, and probably when you started in the industry and we ran everything in our own data centers, procurement was very slow, right?If I needed a new server, I probably had to fill in a form and 10 people had to sign it, and then it would go off to procurement and it would sit doing, heaven knows what for a couple of months, and then eventually someone might get around to buying a server and then they'd install the software on it and then it would get racked.And you know, like six months of my life could have gone by, right.And so what that meant was if I was putting a new app in, and at some point someone would come along to you and go, "we're putting this new app in. How many servers do you need?" And what you do is you'd run a bunch of load tests on, I dunno, load runner or something like that.You'd work out what the maximum possible concurrent, like, oh, sorry, concurrent was a poor choice of word there.Simultaneous number of users on your system, rather.Yeah.Right. You simulate that loads, that would tell you how many boxes you needed. So suppose that said four servers, you go to procurement and you go "eight, please."Anne Currie: Indeed. Charles Humble: Right. And no one would ever say "why do you need eight?" Because, right. And that's just. That's just what we do. And what's weird is we still do it, right. Even though elastic compute on the cloud means surely we don't need to. We kind of have this mindset of, "well, I'll just, I'll add a bit more just to be on the safe side 'cause I'm nottoo confident about my numbers.Anne Currie: There is a logic to it if it's easy because it, the thing that you fear is that you'll under provisioning and it'll fall over. So there's a big risk to that. Over provisioning, yes, it cost you more, but it's hard. It's really hard to get the provisioning perfect.So we over provision and then you always intend to come back later and right size. And of course you never do because you never get a chance to come back and do things later. Charles Humble: Something I say a lot to the companies that I consult to is "well just run an audit."Anne Currie: Yes, indeed. Yeah.Have Charles Humble: a three month process or a, you know, like a three month or a six month mission where we are gonna do a right sizing exercise. We're gonna look for zombie machines. So those are machines that were, you know, once doing something useful but are doing nothing useful anymore. And also look for machines that are just sitting idle and get rid of them. You actually have an amazing story in the, in your O'Reilly book, the Building Green Software book from Martin Lippert. So he was tools and lead sustainability for VMware, Broadcom, part of the old Spring team.He talks about, so in 2019, I think it was in VMware, they consolidated a datacenter in Singapore. They were moving the data center and basically they found that something like 66% of all the host machines were zombies. 66%.Yeah. And that's untypical. Anne Currie: No, it's not.Charles Humble: I've gone and done audits. 50% plus is quite normal. So I have this like thing that I quite often say to people, I reckon you can halve your carbon emissionsin your IT practice just by running an audit and getting rid of things you don't need. And it may even be more than that. Anne Currie: Yeah, indeed. As VMware discovered, and people do it at a time when they move data centers. I often think this is probably a major reason why when people go, "oh, you know, I repatriated, I moved away from the cloud back in and I saved a whole load of money."Yeah, you would've made, saved that money doing that kind of exercise in the cloud as well. Probably more because the cloud, the trouble with the cloud is both amazing, it has amazing potential for efficiency because it has great servers that are written to be very efficient and you wouldn't be able to write them that efficiently yourselves.So there's amazing potential. Spot instances, burstable instance types, serverless, you know, there's loads of services that can really help you be efficient. But it's so easy to overprovision that inevitably everybody over provisions massively. And especially if you lift and shift into the cloud, you massively over provision.Charles Humble: There's a related thing there as well because it's so easy toand then you just forget about it. Evevn on my own, like sort of, you know, personal projects, I've suddenly got a bill from Google or something and I've been like, "oh hello, that then?"And you know, it's something that I spun up three months ago for an article I was writing or something and I'd just totally forgotten about. And it's been sitting there running ever since, you know, like, and you could imagine how much worse that is as an enterprise, this is just like me on my own doing it.And it's that kind of thing. I think. So thinking about things like auto sizing, you know,scaling up remembering, to scale back down again. People often scale up and don't scale down again. There's some of the Holly Cummings stuff around Lightswith Ops. This idea of, you know, basically you want to be able to spin your systems back up again really easily.That sort of stuff. Again, this is all stuff that's quite easy to do, relatively speaking.Anne Currie: Relatively. So much easier than rewriting your systems in Rust or C, I can assure you of that.Charles Humble: Well, a hundred percent, right? And, again, you know, I've made this, I've made this joke a few times on stage and it's absolutely true. We kind of, because we're programmers, we automatically think, "oh, I'll go and look at a benchmark that tells me what the most efficient language is," and it will be C or C++ or something.And like "we will rewrite everything in C or C++ or Rust." Well that would be insane. And your company would go bust and nobody is gonna sponsor you to do that for very good reason. Andwhat you want to be doing is you want to be saying, "well, you know, what are the pragmatic things we can do that will make a huge difference?"And a lot of those things are. You know, rightsizing. It's a really good example. Anne Currie: Yeah, I mean, I clearly we're, this is something that you and I have discussed many times and it was one of the reasons why at the end of Building Green Software, we devised the Green Software Maturity Matrix that we donated to the Green Software Foundation, Charles Humble: Yes. Anne Currie: because the, what we found over and over again when we talked to conferences, went out and spoke to people is that they had a tendency to leap right to the end, rewrite things in.You know, they say, "well, we couldn't rewrite everything in C or Rust or we'd go outta business, so we won't do anything at all." And they step over all the most important, they step over all the truffles, which are switching your CPU choice, switching your VM choice, doing a right sizing, audits, doing a basic audit of your systems and turning off stuff, doing a security audit because a lot of the, these zombie systems actually should be turned off in a security audit because if they're there and they're running and they're not being patched and nobody owns them anymore, nobody knows what they're doing anymore, they will get hacked.They are the ways into your system. So sometimes the way to pitch this is a security audit.Charles Humble: Absolutely. Yes, and I do, I use the Maturity Matrix quite a lot in this ebook. Actually, it's one of the things that I reference all the way through it for exactly this reason, because it's, as I said, I think we tend to go to the end a lot. And actually a lot of the stuff is so much earlier on than that.And I think it's just a, yeah, I think it's a really important thing to realize that there's a huge amount you can do. And actually as well, it's gonna save you an awful lot of money. And given the kind of very uncertain business environment that we're in, and people are very kind of worried about investing at the moment for all sorts of quite sensible reasons, this is one of those moments where actually if you're thinking about "I want to get my business onto a more, or my IT within my company onto a more sustainable footing," this is absolutely the right time to be having those conversations with your CFO, with your execs because, you know, this is the time where businesses need to be thinking, "well, how do I cut cost?" And there's a huge amount of waste. I guarantee you if you've not looked at this, there will be a huge amount of waste in your IT you can just get ofand be a bit of a hero and, you know, do good by the planet at the same time.It's like, what's not to like?Anne Currie: Yeah, because I mean, different companies, different enterprises, different entities have different roles in the energy transition. For most enterprises, your role is to adopt modern DevOps practices really, it's a new start. You don't mean you don't have to start there. You can start with the, as you say, manual audit.Sometimes I've heard it called the thriftathon, where you just go through and you go, "do you know that machine? Turn it off." You know, you can use that kind of, they use the screen test method of "you don't think anyone's using it, turn it off. Find out if anybody was using it." And then you can use that to kind of step yourself up to the next level.You and I both know holly Cummins, who was a guest, cut two back, one back, on this podcast. And she introduced the idea of, Lightswitch Ops, which is the, first kind of automation. If you haven't done any automation up till now and you want to learn how to do automation, a really good bit of automation is the ability to turn machines off automatically, maybe for a period overnight or, and you try that out on machines like your test suites, to just get yourself into the, to the simplest form of automation. It can also, if you are on the right, it depends if you're on the right models and you're in the cloud potentially, or you have the rightinfrastructure, then that can save you money. It might not always save you money because you have to have made the right infrastructure choices. It might just that be that the machine sits on and doesn't really do anything. You've just turned off your application. But you really want to be turning things off to save power.You know, and it's a really good way of getting you into the DevOps mindset, which is where everybody needs to be with so many payoffs.Charles Humble: Yes.Anne Currie: But yes. So, we'll go back to, do ask the questions. So, in part of, in, well, one of your talks is writing greener software, even when you are stuck on prem, and you talk about the fact that not everybody has the option to move into the cloud.So what, then? What do you do if you can't move into the cloud?Charles Humble: Yeah, that's, it is such an interesting question, that. So obviously there are things you can't do or can't do very easily, and one of the most obvious of those is you can't choose green locations on the whole if you're running stuff in your own data centers. So again, going back to these easy wins, an easy win is to use something like Electricity Maps, which is a tool which basically tells you what the energy mix is in a given region.Oh.And then you say, "I shall run my workloads there 'cause that looks good." There's a little bit more to it than that. You kind of want a location that not only has the greenest energy mix at the moment, but also has like credible plans for that to keep improving.Anne Currie: Yeah.Charles Humble: Obviously that's really hard to do with your own data centers.Anne Currie: Yeah.Charles Humble: As a rule of thumb, you probably don't want to be building new data centers if you can help it because, pouring concrete is not great. There's a lot of costs associated. That said, you do have some advantages in your own data centers 'cause you have some things that you can control that people on cloud can't. I would say, I mean, you know, like being honest about it, if you can move things to public cloud, that's probably going to be better. But if you can't, there are still things you can do. So one of those things is you have control over the lifetime of your hardware. This gets a little bit complex, but it's basically down to, so hardware has an embodied carbon cost.That's the cost that it takes to construct it, transport it, dispose it at the end of its use, like useful lifetime. I mean, it also has the cost it takes to charge it. Now for your laptops, your mobile phones, your end user devices, the embodied carbon absolutely dwarfs the carbon cost used to charge it in its lifetime.Anne Currie: Yeah.Charles Humble: What we talk about with end user devices is like basically extend the life. Say, you know, 10 years or something like that, keep it. We want to make less of them, is really the point. Servers and TPUs and GPUs and those sorts of things, it's a bit more complicated. The reason it's a bit more complicated is because we are getting an awful lot better at making more efficient servers for all sorts of reasons. so what that means is the trade-offs with each new generation is more complicated. As an example, a lot of your energy use in your data center is actually gonna be cooling. So a CPU or a TPU that's running less hot requires less cooling. That's a big win. These sorts of things are sufficiently important that actually, until gen AI came along, so really three or four years ago, though we were adding massive amounts of compute, the emissions from our data centers was pretty flat. I mean, it was climbing, but not much. So the point here with your own data centers is you have control over that lifetime. So what you can do is you can do the calculations, assuming you can get the embodied carbon costs from your suppliers, you can do the calculations and think about, "well, how long do I keep this piece of hardware going before I turn it over?" Now, I don't want to give you a heuristic on that because it's kind of dangerous, but it's probably not 10 years, right?It's probably five years-ish. Maybe something like that, but run the maths. But it's absolutely something you can do. You can also take advantage of things like your servers will have power saving modes that you probably don't turn on because we used to worry about that kind of thing.'Cause we have this like, again, one of our old assumptions. We used to imagine that if you power a server down, it might not come back quite the same. Actually that's kind of still true, but, you know, it's fixable, right? So enable power saving across your entire fleet, that will make a huge difference, particularly if you've over provisioned, like we were saying earlier, right? 50% of your servers are idle. Well, they can be asleep all the time, and that helps. It's not the same as turning 'em off, but helpful. You can also look at voltage ranges. So your hardware will have a supported voltage range, and you've probably never thought about it, and I'll admit I hadn't until quite recently.But actually again, if you're running at scale, if you send the lowest voltage that your servers will support, at a big scale that will a considerable difference. And then again, some of the other things we talked about, your CPU choice again, will make a difference. So think about, you know, "do I need to be buying Intel servers all the time, or could I be buying AMD ones or ARM ones?"And also look at your cooling. But that's a whole, that's a whole nother complicated topic for all sorts of reasons. Often, well, in brief, some of the most energy efficient methods of cooling have their own set of problems, which make the trade offs really hard. So, like water-based cooling tends to be very efficient,tends not to be great for local water tables.Anne Currie: Yeah.Charles Humble: It's, complicated. But, yeah, as I say, there are, so, there are a lot of things are that are definitely harder. And if you have a choice, if you're running in like a hybrid environment, chances are if you have a choice of going public cloud or own data center, public cloud is probably better. It's absolutely in Google and AWS and Microsoft's interests to run their data centers as efficiently as possible. 'Cause that's where their cloud profit margin is, right?Anne Currie: Absolutely.Less Charles Humble: it's costing them to run the, you are still paying the same amount, the more money they make. Anne Currie: Well, I, and I think I always laugh when I see the numbers on Graviton. So when AWS attempt to, persuade you quite correctly to, if you can move from Intel chips to run on, to run your applications onto ARM chips. They say, "oh, this will save, 40% on your hosting bill and 60% on your carbon emissions."And you think, I think you've just pocketed quite a lot, a big. That suggest to me you've just pocketed quite a nice upgrade in your, in your, profitability. And I have no problem with that whatsoever, as things get better, I have no problem with making profits out of it. So I'm gonna pick you up on something that, I think everything you've said there is very true.And I'm gonna take a slightly different take on it, which is that remember what that, what Charles is saying, there is quite detailed stuff about not everybody here will be a hardware person and that you will have specialists within your organization who can do all these hardware judgements.The interesting thing is that they can. And it is always the case that if you can, if you have specialists in your organization, the best way to do better is to persuade them that they want to do better. So, if, you could persuade your specialists that actually to actually take an interest in this and to find ways of improving the efficiency of your systems, cutting the carbon emissions, they will do better at it than you will.Charles Humble: 100%.Anne Currie: Best thing you could do is persuade them to focus their in giant specialist brains on the subject because the likelihood is that the real issue is they probably aren't thinking about it, or they probably don't, you know, they, it is not top of their mind. They maybe think they're not even allowed to start thinking about it.If it at a high level, you can actually get your specialists to turn their attention to these. efficiency issues to these carbon reduction issues, that's so much more effective than you going and reading up on it yourself. Get them involved. Go out and talk to people. Persuade, use your powers of persuasion, because, what you should take away from Charles, what's lots of people listening should take away from what Charlesjust said then is that there is a lot of stuff that can be done by your specialist teams that they might not be thinking about doing, or they might not be, they might feel they don't have the time or focus to do. You can potentially help them by focusing them or giving them some budgets or some time to work on it.Charles Humble: Definitely. Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. No, I'm a big believer in specialization in our industry, and I think actually this idea that we are almost know everything isn't, is not helpful. Like absolutely, if you've got hardware people, go and tell the hardware people, and it's a thing of incentivizing.It's like, you know, "we can save money by doing some of these things, or we can reduce our carbon by doing some of these things, and those are good things to do." Yeah, a hundred percent agree with all of that. No disagreements at all.Anne Currie: Yeah, no, it's interesting isn't it, that most of human progress has come from the realization that specialists kick the butt of generalists. And I'm a generalist, so you know, I wish it wasn't true. My job is to kind of encourage specialists to be specialists and, you know, this is not new news.It was the, it's the theme of Adam Smith's the Wealth of Nations that he wrote in the 1770s about why the industrial revolution was happening. It wasn't to do with any kind of technology or anything else. It was the discovery that specialists kick the butt of generalists.Charles Humble: Hundred percent, yes.Anne Currie: But now we're gonna get to the final tricky question that we have for you, Charles, that you'll be thinking about. You've been thinking about, so I'm, your work often emphasizes the importance of transparency, knowing the carbon footprint of what we build. What tools and practices do you recommend for people to do that? Charles Humble: Oh, that is a hard question. Yes. Frustratingly hard actually, we, so the first thing is we often end up using proxiesand the reason we end up using proxies is 'cause measurement is genuinely quite difficult. So cost is a quite a good proxy. In Bill Gates' book, blanking on the name of the book, oh, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster, Anne Currie: Oh yeah. Which is excellent. And again, everybody listening to this should be reading it. Yeah.Charles Humble: Absolutely. So he, in that book, he does a bunch of calculations, which he calls green premiums and they'rebasically the cost of going green.Now, He doesn't do one for our industry, but I would wager, because we are also profligate, I would wager that our green premium, and I haven't worked this out, I will admit it, but I would think our green premium is probably a negative number.So, that's to say,going green is probably cheaper for us. Right.Anne Currie: I agree.Charles Humble: So cost is a very good proxy. It is an imperfect proxy. One of the reasons it's an imperfect proxy is because, for example, if you're running a green energy mix, that's not going to be reflected in your electricity bill at the moment. That may change, but at themoment it doesn't happen.Right. So it is imperfect, butAnne Currie: Well, it doesn't happen in some places and in other places it does. So if you are on prem and you're in a country with dynamic pricing like Spain or zonal pricing, like talking about the UK having in future, that's still very up in the air, then it does. But if you're in the cloud, even in those areas, it doesn't at the moment.Charles Humble: Absolutely. But nevertheless, 'cause as I was saying, you know, like probably half of your servers are doing nothing useful. So cost is a pretty good starting point. Another thing is CPU utilization. So there's something we haven't really talked about, which is this idea, Google calls it energy proportionality,Anne Currie: Yeah.Charles Humble: the observation that when you turn a machine on, you turn a server on, it has a static power draw, and that static power draw is quite a lot. How much depends on how efficient the server is, but it might be 50% or something like that. So when it's sitting idle, it's actually drawing a lot of power. The upshot of this is you'd usually have like an optimum envelope for a given server, and that might be somewhere between 50 and about 80%.It may be a bit lower than that depending on how good the chips are. Above about 80% you tend to get key contention and those sorts of things going on. Not great. But around and about that operating window. So it's again, keeping your CPU utilization hard but not, high rather, but not maxed out is another good one.Hardware utilization is another good one. Beyond that, so all of the cloud providers have tools of varying usefulness. Google's carbon footprint tool is probably best in class, at least in my experience. I think they take this stuff very seriously and they've done a lot of very good work.Microsoft Azure tools are also pretty good. AWS's ones, so they have just released an update literally as we're recording this, and I hadn't had a chance to go and look at what's in the updated version. I'm going to say I think AWS is still a long way behind their competitors in terms of reporting.Anne Currie: Yeah.With Charles Humble: a slight proviso that I hadn't looked at what's in the new tool properly. But again, there, there are all things there that you can use. There's a tool called Cloud Carbon Footprint, which is an open source thing, by ThoughtWorks and that's quite good. It will work across different cloud providers, so that's kind of nice. You could probably adapt it for your own data centers, I would imagine. Of course the GSF has a formula for calculated carbon intensity as well. So that's more of a sort of product carbon footprint or lifecycle assessment type approach. It's not really suitable for corporate level accounting or reporting or that sort of thing, but that's quite a good tool as well. And there are a variety of other things you can use, but as I say, if we're talking the very beginnings, you probably start with the proxies. If you've got a choice of cloud provider, think about the cloud provider that gives you the tooling you need.And you know, that might, again, going back to our assumptions, time was you would choose AWS. Maybe you shouldn't be choosing AWS now, or at least maybe you should be thinking about is AWS the right choice.At least until they, you know, until they sort put their house in order a bit more. These are things, questions that we can reasonably ask. And in general, if you are working with vendors, whether they're AI vendors or whatever, it is entirely reasonable to go and say, "well, I want to know what your carbon story looks like." And if they won't tell you, go somewhere else. In the case of AI, none of the AI companies will tell you. They absolutely won't. And so my advice, if you're looking at running generative AI, other than. Everything we just said applies to AI, like it applies to everything else. There are a bunch of very specific AI related techniques, distillation, quantization, pruning, those sorts of things. Fine. But really my advice is well, using an open source model, and look at something like the ML leaderboard from ml.energy leaderboard, which will give you an idea of, what the carbon cost looks like. And don't use AI from a company that won't tell you, would be my advice. You know, and maybe we can embarrass some of these companies into doing the right things. You never know.Anne Currie: Be nice, wouldn't it? It's so, it's interesting, the, this, so in April, Eric Schmidt got up in front of the US government in one of their, in one of their, committees and said, well, you know, if we, at the current rates, AI is going to take up 99% of the grid electricity in the US.And you think "it's interesting, isn't it," because that's not a law of nature. There are plenty of countries that are looking at more efficient AI, so China, are certainly looking at more efficient AI. They don't want, they want to compete. They wanna be able to run AI because in the end, the business that's going to collapse if AI requires 99% of the US grid is AI because it cannot, you know, it's kind of, if something cannot go on, it will stop. Charles Humble: It's a desperate source of frustration for me because it is completely unnecessary.Anne Currie: Well, it's, you just have to be a bit efficient.Charles Humble: Just in brief, 'cause again, this is like a whole separate podcast probably,but just in brief, there are a bunch of things that you can doAnne Currie: Absolutely.Charles Humble: that make a huge difference, both when you are collecting your data, when you are training your models, when you're running them in production afterwards. I have just done a piece of work for the News Stack on federated learning, and in the process of doing that, I talked to somebody called Professor Nick Lane, who is at Cambridge University, and he talked about, so one of the solutions to the data center cooling problem, which we touched on earlier, is basically what you do with the waste heat. And there are lots of companies in Europe that are looking at using it for things like heating homes or using, you know, heating municipal swimming pools, that sort of thing, right? You can't do that with an Amazon or a Google or a Microsoft facility, because you have to construct the data center close to where the waste is gonna be used.But there are lots of these small data centers, particularly in Europe. There are companies like T Loop that are doing a lot of this work. And he made the point that with federated learning, you can actually combine these smaller facilities together and then, you know, be training potentially very large models on much, much smaller data centers, which I thought was fascinating. There's a guy called, Chung is his surname, and apologies to him, i'm blanking on Jae-Won Chung. He's done some extraordinary work looking at, so when we split stuff across GPUs,that has to be synchronized, right? So we divide the workload up because it's too big to fit in a GPU and we split it across a bunch of different GPUs and we run all of those GPUs at full tilt, but we don't have to. Because we can't divide the workloads up evenly.So you have some workloads that are tiny but this GPU is still running at full power, and what he worked out was, well, if we slow those GPUs down, the job will still end at the same point, but it'll use a lot less energy. So he's built something called Perseus, on his tasks with things like Bloom and GPT-3, they're about, it's about 30% less energy use just from using thatfor exactly the same throughput. So there's no throughput loss, there's no hardware modification. The end results are exactly the same, and you just save 30% of your energy bill, which is a big deal.Then you go, as I say, things like distillation and quantizing and pruning and shrinking your model size, all of that stuff.So it frustrates me because it's so unnecessary. I think we need a carbon tax and I think the carbon tax needs to be prohibitive. And I think, you know, bluntly, I think companies like OpenAI should be pushed outta business if they don't get their house in it's time. I thrilled.Hannah Richie's book, not The End of the World, which is my, possibly my favorite book on climate. And again, it's a book, everyone haven't read it, go and read it. She has a wonderful quote in there where she says, "I've talked to lots of economists and all of the economists I've spoken to agree that we need some sort of carbon tax."And then she goes on to say, "it's maybe the only thing that economists agree on," which I thought was a fine and excellent line.Anne Currie: It is really interesting 'cause I, we disagree slightly on, you're not a huge AI fan. I'm a massive AI fan. I want AI and I also want a livable climate. And they are not mutually exclusive. They can be done. I mean, you have, you don't love AI, you don't love AI as much as I love AI, but we are both in agreement that it is not physically impossible to have AI and effective control of climate change because as you were saying about the federated learning and, you know, optimizing your GPU towards the bottleneck tasks and then things like that, as long as you, workloads that are time insensitive that can be shifted in time and maybe delayed and maybe separated and then glob together again,they're very good workloads to run on renewable power, which is variably available. So in fact, AI is potentially incredibly alignable with the energy transition. The fact that we don't always do it is a travesty and it's so bad for AI as well as being bad for the planet.Charles Humble: I want to push back slightly on you saying I'm not a fan of AI. So I have. Quite strong concerns specifically about generative AI that are ethical and moral as well as environmental.Anne Currie: Which I can see.Charles Humble: And in essence it comes down to the fact you are taking a bunch of other people's work and you are building a machine that plagiarizes that work and you are not compensating those people for it. And you are also, basically you have to do tuning of the model. So reinforcement learning with human feedback and the way that, that's done is pretty horrifying when you dig into it. It usually involves, you know, people in places like Kenya being paid $3 an hour to look at the worst contents of the internet for day after day.I mean, one can imagine what that does to you. So I have quite specific reservations with generative AI, the way that we are doing it. As it goes, I think there are ways that we could build generative AI that wouldn't, I wouldn't have these ethical problems with, that we're not doing. More generally, think generative AI is interesting. I don't know that it's useful, but I do think it's interesting. And more broadly, I'm not against AI at all. I'm like, you know, I've done work with a company that, for example, is using AI to look at, , increase the window that you can treat stroke patients with, by like hours.And it's amazing. Amazing work. So they're basically doing image processing to identify different types of stroke. And some stroke patients, the window is much wider. So, you know, wethink of it as being 4.5 hours but it's much bigger. Stuff likethat. There's, and, as you say, like grid balancing is gonna get more complicated with renewables, and AI probably has a role to play there.And I'm not anti. I'm not anti, I just think that there are things that we are doing as an industry which are reckless and ill-judged and you know, in my tiny little way I want. I mean, I'm aware that it's like, you know, blowing a kazoo in a thunderstorm, it's quite amusing, but it doesn't actually do much for anybody. But I, in my own little way, I want to be sort of beating the drum. As an industry, I think we need to get better. Right. And part of the reason I think we need to get better is because the work that we do has a huge impact on the whole planet now and on society and all sorts of things. And we are still like acting like we're a little cottage industry and what we do is inconsequential but it's not true. So my reservations with gen AI is, I think it's being done in a desperately irresponsible way, but that doesn't mean it has to be. It just means that's what we're doing. And hey, I might be wrong. You know, I'm not an ethicist. I just like, I just have reservations. Also, I am a writer. And a musician, right?So, you know, like I do have skin in the game. I kind of want generative AI not to work. 'Cause otherwise I don't really have a living anymore, which is a bit of a worry. So, you know, I'm not a neutral observer on this at all, but I just think the way we're doing this is morally, ethically dubious, as well as being very bad for the climate. And I don't think it has to be any of those things.Anne Currie: Yeah, I, so it's an interesting, we have a slightly different, 'cause I'm also a writer and a painter. but I've always been so rubbish at making money out of writing and painting that I don't really, don't have anything to say. So we have, that's, but that is my own fault.A little bit. Charles Humble: The last question, I'm looking at your script now. Sorry. 'cause it's a shared Gigle doc, and your last question is about, so I write in my free time in a band called Twofish. And the question is, if you could score the soundtrack for a more sustainable future, what would it sound like? Anne Currie: I forgot about the question. Yeah.Charles Humble: Interesting have get it in. So we did the opposite thing actually. We did, so there's a piece on the last two Fish album, called Floe, and that was my kind of, I started, everything is written as, by two of us. But I started that one and when I started it, what I was trying to do is describe what climate breakdown might sound like in music.That was kind of my starting point. Not sure anyone hearing it would get that, but what I did was I went and recorded a bunch of like, field recordings. So, you know, California wild fires and that sort of thing. Tune them all to A flat minor as you do, and then wrote this very dark, scary,that gets a bit drum and bassy as it goes on. It's very black and industrial and dark and quite grim and I rather like it. So I think we just have to go the opposite, right? We'd have to go the other end of this. Anne Currie: So Twofish, what's the name of your last album? In fact, which album would you recommend? Charles Humble: It's called At Least a Hundred Fingers. That's the last album. And, yeah, Twofish is the band, TWA as in the encryption algorithm, fellow nerds. So yeah, so with this one, the climate break, with the sustainable future one, I think some of my favorite composers, classical composers, would be like early, late 19th, early 20th century.People like that. They were very inspired by the natural world, and they tended also to draw a lot on their, the folk tunes of the countries where worked. So I think melodically your, my starting point might be to go to a folk tune, and then use very traditional instruments. So have like a, maybe a string section, you know, sort of violins, violas, cello. So try and get some of that lift and air and that sort of thing into it. And then have the, more electronic stuff for stuff that I typically do, be very kind of intricate, interconnected, kind of supporting lines so that you have something melodic that is folk, quite traditional instruments, and then this kind of sense of interconnectedness and sort of mechanisms working, something like that. I might have a go at that actually. Perhaps there'll be a third Twofish album that has that on it. You never know. Yeah, that. If you want to look my stuff up, so my website, my company is Conissaunce com, www.conissaunce.com. I'm Charles Humble on LinkedIn. I'm alsoAnne Currie: There will be, we'll have links below in the show notes.Charles Humble: So yeah, you can find me on all of those. And you can find the music there as well.Anne Currie: Excellent. And I really recommend the albums. I like them a lot. They're great. Charles Humble: Thank you.Anne Currie: So thank you very much, and thank you to all the listeners today. As reminder again that all the links that we've talked about today, we have slightly overrun, will be in the show notes below. So, until the next time, thank you very much for listening and happy building Green Software.Charles Humble: Thank you very much indeed for having me. It's been a pleasure. Thanks for listening and goodbye.Anne Currie: Goodbye. Chris Skipper: Hey everyone, thanks for listening. As a special treat, we're going to play you out with the piece that Charles was talking about, Floe by Twofish. If you want to listen to more podcasts by the Green Software Foundation, head to podcast.greensoftware.foundation to listen to more.Bye for now. 

In this special backstage episode of Environment Variables, producer Chris Skipper spotlights the Green AI Committee, an initiative of the Green Software Foundation launched in 2024. Guests Thomas Lewis and Sanjay Podder share the committee’s mission to reduce AI's environmental impact through strategic focus on measurement, policy influence, and lifecycle optimization. The episode explores the committee’s approach to defining and implementing “green AI,” its contributions to public policy and ISO standards, and collaborative efforts to build tools, best practices, and educational resources that promote sustainable AI development.Learn more about our people:Chris Skipper: LinkedIn | WebsiteThomas Lewis: LinkedIn | WebsiteSanjay Podder: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterResources:Green AI Committee [00:00]Green AI Committee Manifesto [03:43]SCI for AI Workshop [05:28]Software Carbon Intensity (SCI) Specification [05:34] Green Software for Practitioners (LFC131) - Linux Foundation [13:54]Events:Carbon-Aware IT: The New Standard for Sustainable Tech Infrastructure (May 5 at 6:00 pm CEST · Virtual) [15:53]Inside CO2.js - Measuring the Emissions of The Web (May 6 at 6:30 pm CEST · Hybrid · Karlsruhe, BW) [16:11]Monitoring for Software Environmental Sustainability (May 6 at 6:30 pm CEST · Virtual) [16:45]Green IO New York (May 14 - 15 · New York) [17:02]If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:​Chris Skipper: Welcome to Environment Variables, where we bring you the latest news from the world of sustainable software development. I'm the producer of this podcast, Chris Skipper, and today we are thrilled to bring you another episode of Backstage, where we dive into the stories, challenges, and triumphs of the people shaping the future of green software. In this episode, we're turning the spotlight on the Green AI Committee, a pivotal initiative approved by the Green Software Foundation in March, 2024. With the rapid rise of AI, this committee has been at the forefront of shaping how companies innovate sustainably while reducing AI's environmental impact . From driving policies and standards, to fostering collaborations and crafting new tools, the Green AI Committee is charting a path toward a more sustainable AI future. Joining us today are Thomas Lewis, the founder of the committee, along with co-chair Sanjay Podder.Together, they'll share insights on the committee's goals, their strategies for tackling AI's carbon footprint, and the critical role this initiative plays in ensuring AI development supports global net zero ambitions. And as always, everything we discuss today will be linked in the show notes below. So without further ado, let's dive into our conversation about the Green AI Committee.First, I'll let Thomas Lewis introduce himself.Thomas Lewis: Hi, I'm Thomas Lewis. I'm a green software developer advocate at Microsoft, and excited to be here. I also work in artificial intelligence, spatial computing, and I've recently been involved in becoming a book nerd again.Chris Skipper: My first question to Thomas was, what inspired the creation of the Green AI Committee and how does it aim to shape the GFS approach to ensuring AI innovation aligns with sustainability goals? Thomas Lewis: Yeah, so we noticed that we were getting a lot of inquiries. We were getting them from legislators and a lot of technologists. Everybody from, you know, people working at your, you know, typical enterprise to folks who were doing research at universities and learning institutions.And they were reaching out to try to get a better understanding of how the green software principles that we talk about and those practices applied to this growing impact of AI. It was not unusual to see on social media a lot of interest in this kind of intersection of green software or sustainability with artificial intelligence.And, you know, this kind of shaped the GSF's approach because in a way we take a slow, methodical approach to thinking about the challenges of green AI and we tend to bring in a lot of experts who have thought about this space from quite a few different viewpoints. And we don't just look at it in a binary way of good or bad.And I think a lot of times, especially online, it can be like, well, you know, AI is, you know, burning the planet down. And you know, and that the resources needed to run these AIs are significant, which is not untrue. And that's the thing I appreciate with the GSF is that you know, we look at those elephants in the room.But with acknowledging those challenges, we also look at AI to help support sustainability efforts by, again, looking at it from those different vectors and then thinking of a viewpoint and also backing it up with the appropriate tools, technologies, and education that may be needed.Chris Skipper: The committee's manifesto emphasizes focusing on reducing the environmental impact of AI. Could you elaborate on why this focus was chosen rather than areas like AI for sustainability or responsible AI?Thomas Lewis: That's a good question. We tend to look at things from a variety of vectors and don't necessarily limit ourselves if we think it is important to dig into these other areas. But one of the things I do like, about the GSF is that typically when we start a committee or start a project, we always start with a workshop.And what we do is we ask for a lot of experts to come to the, you know, virtual table, so to speak, and walk actually through it. So, everyone gets a voice and gets to put out an opinion and to brainstorm and think about these things. And these workshops are over multiple days. And so, typically the first day is kind of like just getting everything on the board.And then the, you know, second time that we get together is really about how to kind of say, "okay, how do we prioritize these? What do we think are the most important? What should we start on first? And then what are the things that, you know, we put on the backlog?" And then the third, you know, one is typically where we're really getting sort of precise about "here's where our focus is going to be." So the conversation is always very broad in the beginning, right? Because you have all of these people coming to the table to say what's important. But as we kind of go through that, so, after a lot of that discussion, we decide on a prioritized focus. But of course we'll come back to others as we iterate because there are gonna be opportunities where, hey, maybe it is more important that we focus on a certain thing.So, like, for example for the GSF, it is about building out the SCI for AI. So, if you're familiar with our Software Carbon Intensity spec, that now is a standard, that is one of, kind of the projects that came out of that workshop and that thinking, because, you know, first thing you kind of have to do if you wanna make a change in what you do is you have to measure it, right?You have to measure what your carbon intensity is, whether it's AI or gaming or blockchain or what have you. And so I think by having this process of doing these workshops that's really what gets us to our priority. So I don't think that there's always sort of a kind of a crisp thing of like, why we did this or not do this, or why we prioritize it a way.It's really that kind of collective coming together, which I think is what really makes the foundation very powerful because everyone has a voice in it.Chris Skipper: The committee recently responded to a bill drafted by US Senators to investigate AI's environmental impact. How do you see the role of the Green AI Committee in shaping public policy and regulations?Thomas Lewis: I've always seen the Green AI Committee's role in this as a trusted advisor, backed up with technical credibility and intellectual honesty. Our intent is not to rubber stamp legislation or just be another endorsement on a bill, but to review bills and papers that come to us with experts in this field and to call out things that we think are important to sustainability or also question things. What I really have appreciated is what comes to us is there has never been an intention for us just to say, "this is good" and give the check mark. But it really is, has been like, "hey, we want your feedback. We wanna understand how we can make these things better for our constituents."And the other thing is that the committee also works very closely with our own policy group within the GSF because many of the members, including myself, don't work with legislators and politicians normally. And so there's a vernacular to the things that they talk about and how they approach things.And so our policy group is also very helpful in this. So, you know, our committees aren't based on, "hey, everything related to AI will come through this committee." We have a lot of different groups, and those groups may be like the policy group, it may be the open source projects that are within the GSF and some of our education opportunities that are there.But yeah, I would say from my perspective the role is mostly as a trusted advisor. And I think that if that is how people reflected the relationship regarding policy and advocacy, I would think that we are doing a good thing.Chris Skipper: From the initial stages of founding the Green AI Committee to where it stands now, what have been the most valuable lessons learned that could guide other organizations aiming to promote sustainability in AI?Thomas Lewis: I would say, first take a thoughtful approach in how you wanna approach things. Not only is green software a significant amount of tech, people and communities, but AI builds on top of that and has its own things, and the innovation is happening way faster than most people can keep up.And so you've gotta take the time to figure out what you wanna focus on first. You can't say you're just gonna try to cover every angle and every thing. Second, I would say take a less dogmatic approach to your efforts. It's easy to say "things should be this way," right? Or, "hey, we're gonna do something 100%, or it's considered a failure."This space is rapidly changing. This environment especially. So what you have to do is kind of take the time to get a wide variety of insights and motivations, and then methodically figure out what a hopefully optimal approach is going to look like. And then the third which, you know, may not be just related to, you know, green software and AI, but surround yourself with people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than yourself.One of the things that I absolutely love being on this committee is there are just super smart people that I get to work with, like the people that are on this podcast. And I learned so much because we all have different contexts, we have different viewpoints and we have various experiences, right?So we've got you know, folks who are in big companies and people who are in small companies and people who are just starting their sustainability journey. There's people who have been doing this for a long time. We have students, we have researchers. There's all kinds of people. So the more that you can kind of understand where a lot of people are coming from,and again, what their context is, you're gonna find that you're gonna really be able to do a whole lot more than you have been able to before. And you may get ideas from places that you think you didn't before. And again, this isn't just with the Green AI Committee, I think this is in life, you know, and again, if you surround yourself with people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than yourself I always think that you're going to be in a better place and you'll end up being a better person for it.Chris Skipper: Thanks to Thomas for sharing those insights with us. Next up we have Sanjay Podder. Sanjay is not only co-chair of the Green AI Committee, but also host of our other podcast here at the Green Software Foundation, CXO Bytes. My first question to Sanjay was how does the Green AI Committee contribute to reducing AI's carbon footprint?And can you share specific strategies or tools the committee is exploring to achieve these goals?Sanjay Podder: The Green AI Committee brings together experts from across the industry to shape what it truly means to build AI sustainably. Our goal is to not only define green AI, but to make it practical and actionable for developers, data scientists, and technology leaders alike. We started by creating a simple developer-friendly definition of green AI.One that anyone in the ecosystem can understand and apply. But we did not stop there. We have taken a lifecycle approach breaking down the environmental impact of AI at every stage from data processing and model training to deployment and inference. This helps pinpoint where emissions are highest and where optimization efforts can have the biggest impact.We are also actively working on strategies and tools to support these goals. By embedding best practices across the AI lifecycle, we are driving a shift towards AI systems that are not just powerful, but also responsible and sustainable.Chris Skipper: The manifesto highlights the importance of partnerships with nonprofits, governments, and regulators.Could you share some examples of how collaborations have advanced the Green AI committee's mission?Sanjay Podder: The committee understands that tackling AI's environmental impact demands broad collaboration with various stakeholders to create comprehensive standards. These standards will focus on transparency software and hardware efficiency and environmental accountability. Engaging a wide range of AI and ICT organizations will help build consensus and ensure that sustainability is a core design principle from the start.Chris Skipper: The committee is tasked with supporting projects like the development of an ISO standard for measuring AI's environmental impact. What milestones have been achieved in this area so far, and what are the next steps?Sanjay Podder: Despite rapid advancement in AI, practitioners and users currently lack clear guidance and knowledge on how to measure, reduce, and report, AI impacts. This absence limits public awareness and hinders efforts to address AI's environmental footprint, making it more challenging to develop AI sustainably.To address these challenges, the committee is actively pursuing initiatives to provide practitioners and users with the necessary knowledge and tools to minimize AI's environmental footprint. The goal is to increase awareness of green AI principles and promote sustainable AI development practices. For example, Green AI Practitioners course to increase the awareness of green AI and understanding of the implications of AI development on the environment.It'll explain the fundamental principles of green AI developments and solutions and, provide practical, actionable recommendations for practitioners, including guidelines for measurement. Software Carbon Intensity for AI to address the challenges of measuring AI carbon emission to the AI lifecycle, and support more informed decision making and promote accountability in AI development.Chris Skipper: And finally, what are some of the long-term goals for the Green AI Committee, and how do you see these objectives evolving with advancements in AI technology? Sanjay Podder: Our goals are evolving to reduce the ecological footprint of AI systems. Green AI isn't just a standalone solution. It's a core component of a broader sustainability ecosystem. As we advance in this mission, we urge more organizations to join the conversation and help build a more sustainable future for AI, developing and regularly updating standardized methodologies to measure AI's environmental impact will be essential for driving sustainable and scalable AI development.Chris Skipper: Thanks to Sanjay for those insights. Next up, we have some events coming up in the next few weeks that we'd like to announce. First up, a virtual event from our friends at Electricity Maps, Carbon-aware IT: The new standard for sustainable tech infrastructure, on May the fifth at 6:00 PM CEST.Explore how organizations optimize IT infrastructure to meet their net zero goals. Then for those of you in Germany, there is a hybrid event in Karlsruhe run by Green Software Development Karlsruhe, called Inside CO2.js - Measuring the Emissions of the Web, happening on May the sixth at 6:30 PM CEST.This is also a hybrid event, so there will be an online element. Learn how to make emissions estimates and use CO2.js, a JavaScript library from regular environment variables host, Chris Adams and the Green Web Foundation. Then we have another event that is purely virtual happening on May 6th at 6:30 PM CEST, called Monitoring for Software Environmental Sustainability.Learn how to incorporate software sustainability metrics into your monitoring system. And finally in New York, the Green IO and Apidays conference, green io, New York, happening from May the 14th until May the 15th. Get the latest insights from thought leaders in tech sustainability and actionable hands-on feedback from practitioners scaling green IT. So we've reached the end of this special backstage episode on the Green AI Committee Project at the GSF. Thanks to both Thomas and Sanjay for their contributions. I hope you enjoyed the podcast. To listen to more podcasts about green software, please visit podcast.greensoftware.foundation, and we'll see you on the next episode.Bye for now. 

Chris Adams sits down in-person with Max Schulze, founder of the Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance (SDIA), to explore the economics of AI, digital infrastructure, and green software. They unpack the EU's Energy Efficiency Directive and its implications for data centers, the importance of measuring and reporting digital resource use, and why current conversations around AI and cloud infrastructure often miss the mark without reliable data. Max also introduces the concept of "digital resources" as a clearer way to understand and allocate environmental impact in cloud computing. The conversation highlights the need for public, transparent reporting to drive better policy and purchasing decisions in digital sustainability. Learn more about our people:Chris Adams: LinkedIn | GitHub | WebsiteMax Schulze: LinkedIn | WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterResources:Energy Efficiency Directive [02:02]German Datacenter Association [13:47] Real Time Cloud | Green Software Foundation [22:10]Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance [33:04]Shaping a Responsible Digital Future | Leitmotiv [33:12]If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:Max Schulze: The measurement piece is key. Having transparency and understanding always helps. What gets measured gets fixed. It's very simple, but the step that comes after that, I think we're currently jumping the gun on that because we haven't measured a lot of stuff. Chris Adams: Hello and welcome to Environment Variables, brought to you by the Green Software Foundation.In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect. Candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software. I'm your host, Chris Adams. Hello and welcome to another edition of Environment Variables, where we bring you the latest news and updates from the world of sustainable software development.I'm your host, Chris Adams. We're doing something a bit different today. Because a friend and frequent guest of the pod, Max Schulzer is actually turning up to Berlin in person where I'm recording today. So I figured it'd be nice to catch up with Max, see what he's up to, and yeah, just like catch up really.So Max, we've been on this podcast a few times together, but not everyone has listened to every single word we've ever shared. So maybe if I give you some space to introduce yourself, I'll do it myself and then we'll move from there. Okay. Sounds good. All right then Max, so what brings you to this here?Can you introduce yourself today? Yeah. Max Schulze: Yeah. I think the first question, why am I in Berlin? I think there's a lot of going on in Europe in terms of policies around tech. In the EU, there's the Cloud and AI Development Act. There's a lot of questions now about datacenters, and I think you and I can both be very grateful for the invention of AI because everything we ever talked about, now everybody's talking about 10x, which is quite nice.Like everybody's thinking about it now. Yep. My general introduction, my name is Max. For everybody who doesn't know me, I'm the founder of the SDIA, the Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance. And in the past we've done a lot of research on software, on datacenters, on energy use, on efficiency, on philosophical questions around sustainability.I think the outcome that we generated that was probably the most well known is the Energy Efficiency Directive, which is forcing datacenters in Europe to be more transparent now. Unfortunately, the data will not be public, which is a loss. But at least a lot of digital infrastructure now needs to, Yeah,be more transparent on their resource use. And the other thing that I think we got quite well known for is our explanation model. The way we think about the connection between infrastructure, digital resources, which is a term that we came up with and how that all interrelates to software. Because there's this conception too that we are building datacenters for the sake of datacenters.But we are, of course, building them in response to software and software needs resources. And these resources need to be made somewhere. Chris Adams: Ah, I see. Max Schulze: And that's, I think what we were well known for. Chris Adams: Okay. Those two things I might jump into a little bit later on in a bit more detail.So, if you're new to this podcast, my name is Chris Adams. I am the policy chair in the Green Software Foundation's Policy Working Group, and I'm also the director of technology and policy in the confusingly, but similarly named Green Web Foundation. Alright. Max, you spoke about two things that, if I can, I'd like to go dive into in a little bit more detail.So, first of all, you spoke about this law called the Energy Efficiency Directive, which, as I understand it, essentially is intended to compel every datacenter above a certain size to start recording information, and in many ways it's like sustainability-adjacent information with the idea being that it should be published eventually.Could we just talk a little bit about that first and maybe some of your role there, and then we'll talk a little bit about the digital resource thing that you mentioned. Max Schulze: Yeah. I think on the Energy Efficiency Directive, even one step up, europe has this ambition to conserve resources at any time and point.Now, critical raw materials are also in that energy efficiency. Normally, actually, this law sets thresholds. Like it is supposed to say, "a building shall not consume more power than X." And with datacenters, what they realized, like, actually we can't set those thresholds because we don't know, like reliably how many resources have you consumed?So we can't say "this should be the limit." Therefore, the first step was to say, well, first of all, everybody needs to report into a register. And what's interesting about that, it's not just the number that in datacenter land everybody likes to talk about, which is PUE, power usage effectiveness. And so how much overhead do I generate with cooling and other things on top of the IT, but also that it for the first time has water in there.It has IT utilization ranges in there. It even has, which I think is very funny., The amount of traffic that goes in and out of a datacenter, which is a bit like, I don't know what we're trying to measure with this, but you know, sometimes you gotta leave the funny things in there to humor everybody. And it goes really far in terms of metrics on like really trying to see what resources go in a datacenter, how efficiently are there being used, and to a certain degree also what comes out of it. Maybe traffic. Yeah. Chris Adams: Ah, I see. Okay. Alright, so it's basically, essentially trying to bring the datacenter industry in line with some of other sectors where they already have this notion of, okay, we know they should be this efficient, and like we've had a lack of information in the datacenter industry, which made it difficult to do that.Now I'm speaking to you in Berlin, and I don't normally sound like I'm in Berlin, but I am in Berlin, and you definitely sound like you are from Germany, even though you're not necessarily living in Germany. Max Schulze: I'm German. Chris Adams: Oh yeah. Maybe it might be worth just briefly touching on how this law kind of manifests in various countries, because I know that like this might be a bit inside baseball, but I've learned from you that Germany was one of the countries that was really pushing quite hard for this energy efficiency law in the first place, and they were one of the first countries who actually kinda write into their own national law.Maybe we could touch a little bit on that before we start talking about world of digital resources and things like that. Max Schulze: Yeah, I think even funnier, and then you always know in the Europe that a certain country's really interested in something, they actually implemented it before the directive even was finalized.So for everybody who doesn't know European policies, so the EU makes directives and then every country actually has to, it's called transpose it, into national law. So just because the EU, it's a very confusing thing, makes something, doesn't mean it's law. It just means that the countries should now implement it, but they don't have to and they can still change it.So what Germany, for example, did, in the directive it's not mandatory to have heat recovery. So we're using the waste heat that comes out of the datacenter. But also the EU did not set release thresholds. But of course Germany was like, "no, we have to be harsher than this." So they actually said, for datacenters above a certain size, that needs to be powered by renewable energy, you need to have heat recovery,it's mandatory for a certain size. And of course the industry is not pleased. So I think we will see a re revision of this, but it was a very ambitious, very strong, "let's manage how they build these things."Chris Adams: I see. Okay. There is a, I think, is there a German phrase? Trust is nice, control is better.Yes. Well, something like that. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right. So if I'm just gonna put my program ahead on, so when I think of a directive, it's a little bit like maybe an abstract class, right? Yes. And then if I'm Germany, I'm making a kind of concrete, I've implemented that class in my German law basically.Yes. Max Schulze: Interfaces and implementations. Okay. Chris Adams: Alright. You've explained it into nerd for me. That makes a bit more sense. Thank you for that. Alright, so that's the ED, you kind of, you essentially were there to, to use another German phrase, watch the sausage get made. Yeah. So you've seen how that's turned up and now we have a law in Germany where essentially you've got datacenters regulated in a meaningful way for the first time, for example. Yeah. And we're dealing with all the kind of fallout from all that, for example. And we also spoke a little bit about this idea of digital resources. This is one other thing that you spend quite a lot of intellectual effort and time on helping people develop some of this language themselves and we've used ourselves in some of our own reports when we talk to policy makers or people who don't build datacenters themselves. 'Cause a lot of the time people don't necessarily know what, how a datacenter relates to software and how that relates to maybe them using a smartphone. Maybe you could talk a little about what a digital resource is in this context and why it's even useful to have this language.Max Schulze: Yeah, and let me try to also connect it to the conversation about the ED. I think when, as a developer, you hear transparency and okay, they have to report data. What you're thinking is, "oh, they're gonna have an API where I can pull this information, also, let's say from the inside of the datacenter." Now in Germany, it is also funny for everybody listening, one way to fulfill that because the law was not specific,datacenters now are hanging a piece of paper, I'm not kidding, on their fence with this information, right? So this is like them reporting this. And of course we as, I'm also a software engineer, so we as technical people, what we need is the datacenter to have an API that basically assigns the environmental impact of the entire datacenter to something.And that something has always bothered me that we say, oh, it's the server. Or it's the, I don't know, the rack or the cluster, but ultimately, what does software consume? Software consumes basically three things. We call it compute, network, and storage, but in more philosophical terms, it's the ability to store, process and transfer data.And that is the resource that software consumes. A software does not consume a datacenter or a server. It consumes these three things. And a server makes those things, turns actually energy and a lot of raw materials into digital resources. Then the datacenter in turn provides the shell in which the server can do that function.Right? It's, the factory building is the datacenter. The machine that makes the t-shirts is the server. And the t-shirt is what people wear. Right?Chris Adams: Ah, I see. Okay. So that actually helps when I think about, say, cloud computing. Like when I'm purchasing cloud computing, right, I'm paying for compute. I'm not really that bothered about whether it's an Intel server or something like that.And to a degree, a lot of that is abstracted away from me anyway, so, and there's good sides to that and downsides to that. But essentially that seems to be that idea of kind of like cloud you compute and there being maybe for want of a better term, primitives you build services with, that's essentially some of the language that you are, you've been repurposing for people who aren't cloud engineers, essentially, to understand how modern software gets built these days.Right. Max Schulze: And I think. That's also the real innovation of cloud, right? They gotta give them credit for that. They disaggregated these things. So on. When AWS was first launched, it was S3 for storage, EC2 for compute, and VPC for networks, right? So they basically said like, whatever you need, we will give it to you at scale in infinite pools of however much you need and want, and you pay only for it by the hour.Which before you had to rent a server, the server always came with everything. It came with network, it came with storage, and you had to build the disaggregation yourself. But as a developer, fundamentally all you want, sometimes you just want compute. Now we have LLMs. I definitely just want compute. Then you realize, oh, I also need a lot storage to train an LLM.Then you want some more storage. And then you're like, okay, well I need a massive network inside that, and you can buy each of these pieces by themselves because of cloud. That is really what it is about. Chris Adams: Oh, I see. Okay. And this is why it's little bit can be a bit difficult when you're trying to work out the environmental footprint of something because if we are trying to measure, say a server, but the resources are actually cloud and there's all these different ways you can provide that cloud,then obviously it's gonna be complicated when you try to measure this stuff. Max Schulze: Yeah. Think about a gigabyte of storage on S3. There may be hundreds of servers behind it providing redundancy, providing the control layer, doing monitoring, right? Like in a way that gigabyte of storage is not like a disc inside a server somewhere.It is a system that enables that gigabyte. And on thinking on that, like trying to say the gigabyte needs to come from somewhere is the much more interesting conversation than to go from the server up. Ah. It's misleading otherwise. Chris Adams: Alright. Okay. So. I'm gonna try and use a analogy from say, the energy sector, just to kinda help me understand this because I think there's quite a few key ideas inside this. So in the same way that I am buying maybe units of electricity, like kilowatt hours I'm buying that, I'm not really buying like an entire power station or even a small generator when I'm paying for something. There's all these different ways I can provide it, but really I care about is the resources. And this is the kind of key thing that you've been speaking to policy makers or people who are trying to understand how they should be thinking about datacenters and what they're good for and what they're bound for, right? Yes. Okay. Alright, cool. So you are in Berlin and it's surprisingly sunny today, which is really nice. We've made it through the kind of depressing German winter and I've actually like, you know, you, we've crossed parts quite a few times in the last few weeks because you've been bouncing between where you live in Harlem, Netherlands, and Brussels and Berlin quite a lot.And I like trains and I imagine you like trains, but that's not the only reason you are zipping around here. Are there any projects related to digital sustainability that you could talk about that have been taking up your time, like that you're allowed to talk about these days?Max Schulze: Yeah, I there's a lot.There's too many actually, which is a bit overwhelming. We are doing a lot of work still on software also related to AI and I don't think it's so interesting to go into that. I think everybody from this podcast knows that there's an environmental impact. We now have a lot of tools to measure it, so my work is really focused on how do I get policy makers to act. And one project that I just recently came out and now that the elections are over in Germany, we can also talk about it, is we basically wrote a 200 page monster, call it the German Datacenter, not a strategy yet, it's an assessment and there's a lot of like, how much power are they gonna use?That's not from us. But what we, for the first time we're able to do is to really explain the layers. So there's a lot of misconception that say building a datacenter creates jobs. But I think everybody in software knows that, and I think actually all of you should be more offended when datacenters claim that they are creating jobs because it is always software that runs there that is actually creating the benefit, right?A datacenter building is just an empty building, and what we've been able to explain is to really say, okay, I build a datacenter, then there is somebody bringing servers, running IT infrastructure, maybe a hoster. That hoster in turn provides services to, let's say an agency. That agency creates a website. And that's a really complex system of actors that each add value,and what we've shown is that a datacenter, per megawatt, depending on who's building it, can be three to six jobs. And a megawatt is already a very large datacenter, just can be 10,000 servers. If you compare that to the people on top, like if you go to that agency that can go to up to 300 to 600 jobs per megawatt.And the value creation is really in the software and not anywhere else. And we believe that the German government and all sort of regions, and this applies to any region around the world, should really think like, "okay, if I did, I will build this datacenter, but how do I create that ecosystem around it? You know, in Amsterdam is always a good example.You have Adyen, you have booking.com, you have really big tech companies, and you're like, "I'm sure they're using a Dutch datacenter." Of course not. They're running on AWS in Ireland. So you don't get the ecosystem benefit. But your policy makers think they do, but you don't connect the dots, so to say. Chris Adams: Ah, okay.So if I understand this, so essentially the federal German government, third largest economy, I think it's third or fourth largest economy in the world. Yes. They need to figure out what to do with the fact there's lots and lots of demand for digital infrastructure. They're not quite sure what to do with it, and they also know they have like binding climate goals. So they're trying to work out how to square their circle. And there is also, I mean, most countries right now do wanna have some notion of like being able to kind of economically grow. So they're trying to understand, okay, what role do these play? And a lot of the time there has been a bit of a misunderstanding between what the datacenter provides and where the jobs actually come from.And so you've essentially done for the first time some of this real, actually quite rigorous and open research into, "okay, how do jobs and how is economic opportunity created when you do this? And what happens if you have the datacenter in one place, but the job where the agencies or the startups in another place?" For example, because there seems to be this idea that if you just have a datacenter, you automatically get all the startups and all the jobs and everything in the same place.And that sounds like that might not always be the case without deliberate decisions, right? Max Schulze: Yes. Without like really like designing it that way. And it becomes even more obvious when you look at Hyperscale and cloud providers, where you see these massive companies with massive profits and let's say they go to a region, they come to Berlin,and they tell Berlin, you know, having actually Amazon and Spain also sent a really big press release, like, "we're gonna add 3% to your GDP. We're going to create millions of jobs." And of course every software engineer know is like just building a datacenter for a cloud provider does not do that.And what they're also trying to distract, which we've shown in the report by going through their financial records, is that they don't, they pay property tax, so they pay local tax, in Germany is very low. But they of course, don't pay any corporate income tax in these regions. So the region thinks, "oh, I'm gonna get 10% of the revenue that a company like Microsoft makes."That's not true. And in return, the company ask for energy infrastructure, which is socialized cost, meaning taxpayers pay for this. They ask for land, not always available, or scars. And then they don't really give much back. And that's really, I'm not saying we shouldn't build datacenters or you know, but you have to be really mindful that you need the job creation.The tax creation is something that comes from above this, like on top of a datacenter stack. Yeah. And you need to be deliberate in bringing that all together, like everything else is just an illusion in that sense. Chris Adams: Oh, I see. Okay. So this helps me understand why you place so much emphasis on help helping people understand this whole stack of resources being created and where some of the value might actually be.'Cause it's a little bit like if you are, let's imagine like say you're looking at, say, generating power for example, and you're like, you're opening a power station. Creating a power station by itself isn't necessarily the thing that generates the wealth or it's maybe people being able to use it in some of the higher services, further up the stack as it were.Correct. And that's the kind of framing that you helping people understand so they can have a more sophisticated way of thinking about the role that datacenters play when they advance their economies, for example. Max Schulze: I love that you're using the energy analogy because everybody will hear that, or who's hearing this on the podcast will probably be like, "oh yeah, that's obvious, right?"But for digital it, to a lot of people, it's not so obvious. They think that the power station is the thing, but actually it's the chemical industry next to it that should actually create, that's where the value is created. Chris Adams: I see. Okay. Alright. That's actually quite helpful. So one of the pieces of work you did was actually.Providing new ways to think about how digital infrastructure ends up being, like how it's useful for maybe a country, for example. But one thing that I think you spoke about for some of this report was actually the role that software can actually play in like blunting some of the kind of expected growth in demand for electricity and things like that.And obviously that has gonna have climate implications for example. Can we talk a little bit about the role that designing software in a more thoughtful way actually can blunt some of this expected growth so we can actually hit some of the goals that we had. 'Cause this is something that I know that you spend about fair amount of time thinking about and writing about as well.Max Schulze: Yeah, I think it's really difficult. The measurement piece is key, but having transparency and understanding always helps. What gets measured gets fixed. It's very simple. But the step that comes after that, I think we're currently jumping the gun on that because we haven't measured a lot of stuff. We don't have a public database of say, this SAP system, this Zoom call is using this much.We have very little data to work with and we're immediately jumping through solutions that like, oh, but we, if we shift the workloads, but if we're, for example, workload shifting on cloud, it's, unless the server has turned off, the impact is zero. Or that zero is extreme, but it's very limited because the cloud provider then has an incentive to, to fill it with some other workload.You, it's, we've talked about this before. If everybody sells oil stocks because they're protesting against oil companies, it just means somebody else gonna buy the oil stock. You know? And it ultimately brings them spot prices down. But that's a different conversation. So I think, let's not jump to that.Let's first get measurement really, right? And then it raises to me the question, what's the incentive for big software vendors or companies using software to actually measure and then also publish the results? Because, let's be honest, without public data, we can't do scientific research and even communities like the Green Software Foundation will have a hard time, you know, making report or giving good, making good analysis if we don't have publicly available data on certain software applications.Chris Adams: I see. Okay. This does actually ring some bells 'cause I remember when I was involved in some of the early things related to working out, say software carbon intensity scores. We found that it's actually very, difficult to just get the energy numbers from a lot of services simply because that's not the thing that, 'cause a lot of the time,if you're a company, you might not want to share this 'cause you might consider that as commercially sensitive information. There's a whole separate project called the Real Time Cloud project within the Green Software Foundation where the idea is to, and there's been some progress putting out, say, region by region figures for the carbon intensity of different places you might run cloud in, for example, and this is actually like a step forward, but at best we're finding that we could get maybe the figures for the carbon intensity of the energy that's there, but we don't actually have access to how much power is being used by a particular instance, for example. We're still struggling with this stuff and this is one thing that we keep bumping up against. So I can see where you're coming from there. So, alright, so this is one thing that you've been spending a bit of time thinking through, like where do we go from here then?Max Schulze: Yeah, I think first we need to give ourselves a clap on the back because if you look at the amount of tools that can now do measurement like commercial tools, open source tools, I think it's amazing, right? We have, it's all there. Dashboards, promoters things, report interfaces, you know, it's all there. Now, the next step, and I think that's, as software people, we like to skip that step because we think, well, everybody's now gonna do it.Well, it's not the reality. Now it's about incentives. And I think, for example, one organization we work with is called Seafit and it's a conglomerate of government purchasers, iT purchasers, who say, "okay, we want to purchase sustainable software." And to me it's very difficult to say, and I think you have the same experience, here are the 400 things you should put in your contracts to make the software more sustainable.Instead, what we recommend is to simply say, well, please send me an annual report of all the environmental impacts created from my usage of your software, and very important phrase we always put in this end, please also publish it. Yeah. Again, and I think, right now, that's what we need to focus on. We need to focus on creating that incentive for somebody who's buying, even like Google Workplace, more like notion to really say, "Hey, by the way, before I buy this, I want to see the report," right?I want to see the report from my workplace, and even for all the people listening to this, any service you use, like any API you use commercially, send them just an email and say, "Hey, I'm buying your product. I'm paying 50 euro a month, or 500 or 5,000 euros a month. Can I please get that report? Would you mind?"Yeah. And that creates a whole chain reaction of everybody in the company thinking, "oh my God, all our customers are asking for this." Yeah, we need this. One of our largest accounts wants this figured out. And then they go to the Green Software Foundation or go to all the open source tools.They learn about it, they implement a measurement. Then they realize, "oh, our cloud providers are not giving us data." So then they're sending a letter to all the cloud providers saying like, "guys, can you please provide us those numbers?" Chris Adams: Yeah. Yes. Max Schulze: And this is the chain reaction that requires all of us to focus and act now to trigger.Chris Adams: Okay. So that sounds like, okay. When you, when I first met you, you were looking at, say, how do you quantify this and how do you build some of these measurement tools? And I know that some, there was a German project called, is It SoftAware, which was very, you know, the German take on SoftAware that does try to figure these out to like come up with some meaningful numbers. And now the thing it looks like you're spending some time thinking about is, okay, how do you get organizations with enough clout to essentially write in the level of disclosure that's needed for us to actually know if we're making progress or not?Right? Yeah. Max Schulze: Correct. Little side anecdote on SoftAware. The report is also a 200 page piece. It's been finished for a year and it's not published yet because it's still in review in the, so it's a bit, it's a bit to pain. But fundamentally what we concluded is that, and I, there's other people that have already, while we are writing it, built better tools than we have.And again, research-wise, this topic is, I don't wanna say solved. All the knowledge is out there and it's totally possible. And that's also what we basically set the report. Like if you can attach to the digital resource, if I can attach to the gigabyte of S3 storage, that is highly redundant or less redundant, an environmental product declaration.So how much, physical resources went in it, how much energy went into it, how much water? Then any developer building a software application can basically then do that calculation themselves. If I use 400 gigabytes of search, it's just 400 x what I got environment important for, and that information is still not there.But it's not there because we can't measure it. It's there because people don't want to, like you said, they don't want to have that in public. Chris Adams: Okay. So that's quite an interesting insight that you shared there, is that, 'cause when we first started looking at, I don't know, building digital services,there was a whole thing about saying, well, if my webpage is twice the size, it must have twice the carbon footprint. And there's been a whole debate saying, well actually no, we shouldn't think about that. It doesn't scale that way. And it sounds like you're suggesting yes, you can go down that route where you directly measure every single thing, but in aggregate, if you wanna take a zoom out, if you wanna zoom out to actually achieve some systemic level of change, the thing you might actually need is kind of lower level per primitive kind of allocation of environmental footprint and just say, well, if I know the thing I'm purchasing and building with is say, gigabytes of storage, maybe I should just be thinking about in terms of each gigabyte of storage has this much, so therefore I should just reduce that number rather than worrying too much about if I halve my half, halve the numbers, it's not gonna be precisely a halving in emissions because you're looking at a kind of wider systemic level.Max Schulze: First of all, I never talk about emissions because that's already like a proxy. Again, I think if you take the example of the browser, what you just said, I think there it becomes very obvious, what you really want is HP, Apple, Dell, any laptop they sell, they say, you know, there's 32 gigs of memory per gigabyte of memory.This is the environmental impact per CPU cycle. This is the environmental impact. How easy would it be then to say, well, this browser is using 30% CPU, half of the memory, and then again, assigning it to each tab. It becomes literally just a division and forwarding game mathematically. But the scarcity, that the vendors don't ultimately release it on that level makes it incredibly painful for anyone to kinda reverse engineer and work backwards. Exactly. You get it for the server for the whole thing. Yeah. But that server also, of which configuration was it? Which, how much memory did it have? And this subdivision, that needs to happen.But again, that's a feature that I think we need to see in the measurement game. But I would say, again, slap on the back for all of us and everybody listening, the measurement is good enough. For AI we really see it like, I think for the first time, it is at a scale that everybody's like, it doesn't really matter if we get it 40 or 60% right. It's pretty bad. Yeah. Right. And instead of now saying like, oh, let's immediately move to optimizing the models. Let's first create an incentive that we get all the model makers and then especially those service providers and the APIs, to just give everybody these reports so that we have facts.That's really important to make policy, but also then to have an incentive to get better. Chris Adams: Okay. So look, have a data informed discussion essentially. Alright, so you need data for a data informed discussion basically. Max Schulze: Yes. Chris Adams: Alright. Max Schulze: To add to that, it's really because you like analogies and I like analogiesit's a market that is liquid with information. What I mean by that, if I want to buy a stock of a company, I download their 400 page financial report and it gives me a lot of information about how good that company's doing. Now for software, what are we, what is the liquidity of information in the market?It's, for environmental impact, it's zero. The only liquidity we have is features. There are so many videos for every product on how many features and how to use them. So we have even the financial records of most software companies you can't actually get, 'cause they're private. So we have very scarcity of information and therefore competition in software is all about features.Not about environmental impact. And I'm trying to create information liquidity in the market so that you and I and anybody buying software can make better choices. Chris Adams: Ah, okay. And this helps me understand why, I guess you pointed to there was less that French open example of something equivalent to like word processing.I think we, it should be this French equivalent to like Google Docs. Yeah. Or which is literally called Docs. Yeah. And their entire thing was it's, it looks very much, very similar to some, to the kind of tool you might use for like note taking and everything like that. But because it's on an entirely open stack, it is possible to like see what's happening inside it and understand that, okay, well this is how the impacts scale based on my usage here, for example.Max Schulze: But now. Now one of our friends, Anna, from Green Coding, would say, yeah, you can just run it through my tool and then you see it, but it's still just research information. We need liquidity on the information of, okay, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in France is using docs. It has 4,000 documents and 3000 active data users.Now that's the where I want the environmental impact data, right? I don't want a lab report. I don't wanna scale it in the lab. I want the real usage data. Chris Adams: Okay. So that feels like some of the next direction we might be moving to is almost looking at some of these things, seeing, like sacrificing some of the precision for maybe higher frequency information at like of things in production essentially.So you can start getting a better idea about, okay, when this is in production or deployed for an entire department, for example, what, how will the changes I make there scale across rather than just making an assumption based on a single system that might not be quite as accurate as the changes I'm seeing in the real world?Max Schulze: And you and I have two different bets on this that go in a different direction. Your bet was very much on sustainability reporting requirements, both CSRD or even financial disclosures. And my bet is if purchasers ask for it, then it will become public. And those are complimentary, but they're bets on the same exact thing. Information liquidity on environmental impact information. Chris Adams: Okay. All right. Well, Max, that sounds, this has been quite fun actually. I've gotta ask just before we wrap up now, if people are curious, and I've found some of the stuff you're talking about, interesting. Where should people be looking if they'd like to learn more?Like is there a website you'd point people to or should they just look up Max Schulze on LinkedIn, for example? Max Schulze: That's always a good idea. If you want angry white men raging about stuff, that's LinkedIn, so you can follow me there. We, the SDIA is now focused on really helping regional governments developing digital ecosystems.So if you're interested in that, go there. If you're interested more in the macro policy work, especially around software, we have launched a new brand that's our think tank now, which is called Leitmotiv. And I'm sure we're gonna include the note, the link somewhere in the notes. Of natürlich. Yeah. Yeah. Very nice.And yeah, I urge you to check that out. We are completely independently funded now. No companies behind us. So a lot of what you read is like the brutal truth and not some kind of washed lobbying positions. So maybe you enjoy reading it. Chris Adams: Okay then. All right, so we've got Leitmotiv, and we've got the SDIA and then just Max Shulzer on LinkedIn.These are the three places to be looking for this sort. Yeah. Alright, Max, it's lovely chatting to you in person and I hope you have a lovely weekend and enjoy some of this sunshine now that we've made it through the Berlin winter. Thanks, Max. Thanks Chris. Hey everyone. Thanks for listening. Just a reminder to follow Environment Variables on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.And please do leave a rating and review if you like what we're doing. It helps other people discover the show. And of course, we'd love to have more listeners. To find out more about the Green Software Foundation, please visit greensoftware.foundation. That's greensoftware.foundation in any browser.Thanks again and see you in the next episode.

Karl Rabe, founder of WoodenDataCenter and co-lead of the Open Compute Project’s Data Center Facilities group, dives into the fascinating world of sustainable data centers. He discusses how colocating data centers with renewable energy sources like wind farms can slash carbon emissions. Rabe explores the innovative use of cross-laminated timber in construction, highlighting its benefits. He also emphasizes replacing traditional diesel generators with cleaner alternatives and the crucial role of modular, open-source hardware in achieving sustainability and transparency.

Host Chris Adams sits down with James Hall, Head of GreenOps at Greenpixie, to explore the evolving discipline of GreenOps—applying operational practices to reduce the environmental impact of cloud computing. They discuss how Greenpixie helps organizations make informed sustainability decisions using certified carbon data, the challenges of scaling cloud carbon measurement, and why transparency and relevance are just as crucial as accuracy. They also discuss using financial cost as a proxy for carbon, the need for standardization through initiatives like FOCUS, and growing interest in water usage metrics.Learn more about our people:Chris Adams: LinkedIn | GitHub | WebsiteJames Hall: LinkedIn Greenpixie: WebsiteFind out more about the GSF:The Green Software Foundation Website Sign up to the Green Software Foundation NewsletterNews:The intersection of FinOps and cloud sustainability [16:01]What is FOCUS? Understand the FinOps Open Cost and Usage Specification [22:15]April 2024 Summit: Google Cloud Next Recap, Multi-cloud Billing with FOCUS, FinOps X Updates [31:31]Resources:Cloud Carbon Footprint [00:46]Greenops - Wikipedia [02:18]Software Carbon Intensity (SCI) Specification [05:12]GHG Protocol [05:20]Energy Scores for AI Models | Hugging Face [44:30]What is GreenOps - Newsletter | Greenpixie [44:42]Making Cloud Sustainability Actionable with FinOps Fueling Sustainability Goals at Mastercard in Every Stage of FinOps If you enjoyed this episode then please either:Follow, rate, and review on Apple PodcastsFollow and rate on SpotifyWatch our videos on The Green Software Foundation YouTube Channel!Connect with us on Twitter, Github and LinkedIn!TRANSCRIPT BELOW:James Hall: We want get the carbon data in front of the right people so they can put climate impact as part of the decision making process. Because ultimately, data in and of itself is a catalyst for change. Chris Adams: Hello, and welcome to Environment Variables, brought to you by the Green Software Foundation. In each episode, we discuss the latest news and events surrounding green software. On our show, you can expect candid conversations with top experts in their field who have a passion for how to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of software.I'm your host, Chris Adams. Hello and welcome to Environment Variables where we explore the developing world of sustainable software development. We kicked off this podcast more than two years ago with a discussion about cloud carbon calculators and the open source tool, Cloud Carbon Footprint, and Amazon's cloud carbon calculator.And since then, the term GreenOps has become a term of art in cloud computing circles when we talk about reducing the environmental impact of cloud computing. But what is GreenOps in the first place? With me today is James Hall, the head of GreenOps at Greenpixie, the cloud computing startup, cloud carbon computing startup,to help me shed some light on what this term actually means and what it's like to use GreenOps in the trenches. James, we have spoken about this episode as a bit of a intro and I'm wondering if I can ask you a little bit about where this term came from in the first place and how you ended up as the def facto head of GreenOps in your current gig.Because I've never spoken to a head of GreenOps before, so yeah, maybe I should ask you that.James Hall: Yeah, well, I've been with Greenpixie right from the start, and we weren't really using the term GreenOps when we originally started. It was cloud sustainability. It was about, you know, changing regions to optimize cloud and right sizing. We didn't know about the FinOps industry either. When we first started, we just knew there was a cloud waste problem and we wanted to do something about it.You know, luckily when it comes to cloud, there is a big overlap between what saves costs and what saves, what saves carbon. But I think the term GreenOps has existed before we started in the industry. I think it, yeah, actually originally, if you go to Wikipedia, GreenOps, it's actually to do with arthropods and Trilobites from a couple million years ago, funnily enough, I'm not sure when it started becoming, you know, green operations.But, yeah, it originally had a connotation of like data centers and IT and devices and I think Cloud GreenOps, where Greenpixie specializes, is more of a recent thing because, you know, it used to be about, yeah, well it is about how do you get the right data in front of the right people so they can start making better decisions, ultimately.And that's kind of what GreenOps means to me. So Greenpixie are a GreenOps data company. We're not here to make decisions for you. We are not a consultancy. We want get the carbon data in front of the right people so they can put climate impact as part of the decision making process. Because ultimately, data in and of itself is a catalyst for change.You know, whether you use this data to reduce carbon or you choose to ignore it, you know, that's up to the organization. But it's all about being more informed, ignoring or, you know, changing your strategy around the carbon data.Chris Adams: Cool. Thank you for that, James. You mentioning Wikipedia and Greenops being all about Trilobites and Arthropods, it makes me realize we definitely should add that to the show notes and that's the thing I'll quickly just do because I forgot to just do the usual intro folks. Yeah, my name's Chris Adams.I am one of the policy director, technology and policy director at the Green Web Foundation, and I'm also the chair of the policy working group inside the Green Software Foundation. All the things that James and I'll be talking about, we'll do our best to judiciously add show notes so you can, you too can look up the origins of, well, the etymology of GreenOps and find out all about arthropods and trilobites and other.And probably a lot more cloud computing as well actually. Okay. Thank you for that James. So you spoke a little and you did a really nice job of actually introducing what Greenpixie does. 'Cause that was something I should have asked you earlier as well. So I have some experience using these tools, like Cloud Carbon Footprint and so on to estimate the environmental impact of digital services. Right. And a lot of the time these things use billing data. So there are tools out there that do already do this stuff. But one thing that I saw that sets Greenpixie apart from some other tools as well, was the actual, the certification process, the fact that you folks have, I think, an ISO 14064 certification.Now, not all of us read over ISO standards for fun, so can you maybe explain why that matters and what that actually, what that changes at all, or even what that certification means? 'Cause, It sounds kind of impressive and exciting, but I'm not quite sure, and I know there are other standards floating around, like the Software Carbon Intensity standard, for example.Like yeah, maybe you could just provide an intro, then see how that might be different, for example.James Hall: Yeah, so ISO 14064 is a kind of set of standards and instructions on how to calculate a carbon number, essentially based on the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. So the process of getting that verification is, you know, you have official auditors who are like certified to give out these certifications, and ultimately they go through all your processes, all your sources, all the inputs of your data, and kind of verify that the outputs and the inputsmake sense. You know, do they align with what the Greenhouse Gas Protocol tells you to do? And, you know, it's quite a, it's a year long process as they get to know absolutely everything about your business and processes, you really gotta show them under the hood. But from a customer perspective, it means you know, that it proves thatthe methodology you're using is very rigorous and it gives them confidence that they can use yours. I think if a company that produces carbon data has an ISO badge, then you can probably be sure that when you put this data in your ESG reports or use it to make decisions, the auditors will also agree with it.'Cause the auditors on the other side, you know, your assurers or from EY and PWC, they'll be using the same set of guidance basically. So it's kind of like getting ahead of the auditing process in the same way, like a security ISO would mean the security that the chief security officer that would need to, you know, check a new vendor that they're about to procure from.If you've got the ISO already, you know they meet our standards for security, it saves me a job having to go and look through every single data processing agreement that they have.Chris Adams: Gotcha. Okay. So there's a few different ways that you can kind of establish trust. And so one of the options is have everything entirely open, like say Cloud Carbon Footprint or OpenCost has a bunch of stuff in the open. There's also various other approaches, like we maintain a library called CO2.js, where we try to share our methodologies there and then one of the other options is certification. That's another source of trust. I've gotta ask, is this common? Are there other tools that have this? 'Cause when I think about some of the big cloud calculators, do you know if they have this, let's say I'm using say, a very, one of the big three cloud providers.Do these have, like today, do you know if they actually have the same certification or is that a thing I should be looking for or I should be asking about if I'm relying on the numbers that I'm seeing from our providers like this.James Hall: Yeah, they actually don't. Well, technically, Azure. Azure's tool did get one in 2020, but you need to get them renewed and reordered as part of the process. So that one's kind of becoming invalid. And I'm not sure AWS or Google Cloud have actually tried, to be honest, but it's quite a funny thought that, you know, it's arguably because this ISO the, data we give you on GCP and AWS is more accurate than the data, or at least more reliable than the data that comes directly out the cloud providers.Chris Adams: Okay. Alright. Let's, make sure we don't get sued. So I'm just gonna stop there before we go any further. But that's like one of the things that it provides. Essentially it's an external auditor who's looked through this stuff. So rather than being entirely open, that's one of the other mechanisms that you have.Okay, cool. So maybe we can talk a little bit more about open source. 'Cause I actually first found out about Greenpixie a few years ago when the Green Software Foundation sent me to Egypt, for COP 27 to try and talk to people about green software. And I won't lie, I mostly got blank looks from most people.You know, they, the, I, there are, people tend to talk about sustainability of tech or sustainability via tech, and people tend not to see them as, most of the time I see people like conflating the two rather than actually realizing no, we're talking about of the technology, not just how it's good for stuff, for example, and he told me, I think one of your colleagues, Rory, was this, yeah.He was telling me a bit about, that Greenpixie was initially using, when you just first started out, you started looking at some tools like Cloud Carbon Footprint as maybe a starting point, but you've ended up having to make various changes to overcome various technical challenges when you scale the use up to like a large, to well, basically on a larger clients and things like that. Could you maybe talk a little bit about some of the challenges you end up facing when you're trying to implement GreenOps like this? Because it's not something that I have direct experience myself. And it's also a thing that I think a lot of people do reach for some open source tools and they're not quite sure why you might use one over the other or what kind of problems they, that they have to deal with when you start processing that, those levels of like billing and usage data and stuff like that.James Hall: I think with the, with cloud sustainability methodologies, the two main issues are things like performance and the data volume, and then also the maintenance of it. 'Cause just the very nature of cloud is you know, huge data sets that change rapidly. You know, they get updated on the hour and then you've also got the cloud providers always releasing new services, new instance types, things like that.So, I mean, like your average enterprises with like a hundred million spend or something? Yeah. Those line items of usage data, if you like, go down to the hour will be billions of rows and terabytes of data. And that is not trivial to process. You know, a lot of the tooling at the moment, including Cloud Carbon Footprint, will try to, you know, use a bunch of SQL queries to truncate it, you know, make it go up to monthly.So you kind of take out the rows by, you know, a factor of 24 times 30 or whatever that is. It's about 740, I think. Something like that (720). Yeah. Yeah. So, and they'll remove things like, you know, there's certain fields in the usage data that will, that are so unique that when you start removing those and truncating it, you're really reducing the size of the files, but you are really losing a lot of that granularity.'Cause ultimately this billing data is to be used by engineers and FinOps people. They use all these fields. So when you start removing fields because you can't handle the data, you're losing a lot of the familiarity of the data and a lot of the usability for the people who need to use it to make decisions.So one of the big challenges is how do you make a processor that can easily handle billions of line items without, you know, falling over. And CCF, one of the issues was the performance really when you start trying to apply it to big data sets. And then on the other side is the maintenance.You know, arguably it's probably not that difficult to make a methodology of a point in time, but you know, over the six months it takes you to create it, it's way out date. You know, they've released a hundred new instance types across the three providers. There's a new type of storage, there's a brand new services, there's new AI models out there.And so now, like Greenpixie's main job is how do we make sure the data is more, we have more coverage of all the skews that come out and we can deliver the data faster and customers have more choices of how to ingest it. So if you give customers enough choice and you give it to them quick enough and it's, you know, covering all of their services, then you know, that's what those, lack of those three things is really what's stopping people from doing GreenOps, I think.Chris Adams: Ah, okay, so one of them was, one of the things you mentioned was just the volume, the fact that you've got, you know, hours multiply the number of different, like a thousand different computers or thousands of computers. That's a lot of data. And then there's a, there's like one of the issues about like the metrics issue, like you, if you wanna provide a simple metric, then you end up losing a lot of data.So that's one of the things you spoke about. And the other one was just the idea of models themselves not being, there's natural cost associated with having to maintain these models. And as far as I'm aware, there aren't, I mean, are there any kind of open sources of models so that you can say, well this is what the figures probably would be for an Amazon EC, you know, 6XL instance, for example.That's the stuff you're talking to when you say the models that you, they're hard to actually up to, hard to keep up to date, and you have to do that internally inside the organization. Is that it?James Hall: Yes, we've got a team dedicated to doing that. But ultimately, like there will always be assumptions in there. 'Cause some of these chip sets you actually can't even get your hands on. So, you know, if Amazon release a new instance type that uses an Intel Xeon 7850C, that is not commercially available.So how do you get your hands on an Intel Xeon 7850B that is commercially available and you're like, okay, it, these six things are similar in terms of performance in hardware. So we're using this as the proxy for the M5 large or whatever it is. And then once you've got the power consumption of those instance types,then you can start saying, okay, this is how we, this is how we're mapping instances to real life hardware. And then that's when you've gotta start being really transparent about the assumptions, because ultimately there's no right answer. All you can do is tell people, this is how we do it. Do you like it?Do you?And you know, over the four years we've been doing this, you know, there's been a lot of trial and error. Actually, right at the start, one of the questions was, what are my credentials? How did I end up as head of GreenOps? I wouldn't have said four years ago I have any credentials to be, you know, a head of GreenOps.So it was a while when I was the only head of GreenOps in the world, according to a Sales Navigator. Why me? But I think it's like, you know, they say if you do 10,000 hours of anything, you kind of, you become good at it. And I wouldn't say I'm a master by any means, but I've made more mistakes and probably tried more things than anybody else over the four years.So, you know, just, from the war stories, I've seen what works. I've seen what doesn't work. And I think that's the kind of, that's the kind of experience people wanna trust. And why Greenpixie made me the head of GreenOps.Chris Adams: Okay. All right. Thanks for that, James. So maybe this is actually a nice segue to talk about a common starting point that lots of people do actually have. So over the last few years, we've also seen people talk about move from not moved away, not just talking about DevOps, but talking about like FinOps.This idea that you might apply kind of some financial thinking to how you purchase and consume, say, cloud services for example. And this tends to, as far as I understand, kinda nudge people towards things like serverless or certain kinds of ways of buying it in a way, which is almost is, you know, very much influenced by fi by I guess the financial sector.And you said before that there's some overlap, but it's not totally over there, it's not, you can't just basically take a bunch of FinOps practices and think it's gonna actually help here. Can we explore that a bit and maybe talk a little bit about what folks get wrong when they try to like map this straight across as if it's the same thing?Please.James Hall: Yeah, so one of the big issues is cost proxies, actually. Yeah, a lot of FinOps as well, how do you fix, or how do you optimize from a cost perspective? What already exists? You know, you've already emitted it. How do you now make it cheaper? The first low hanging fruit that a finance guy trying to reduce their cloud spend would do is things like, you know, buy the instances up front.So you've paid for the full year and now you've been given a million hours of compute.That would might, that might cut your bill in half, but if anything that would drive your usage up, you know, you've got a million hours, you are gonna use them.Chris Adams: Commit to, so you have to commit to then spending a billion. You're like, "oh, great. I have the cost, but now I definitely need to use these." Right?James Hall: Yeah, exactly. And like, yeah, you say commitments. Like I promise AWS I'm gonna spend $2 million, so I'm gonna do whatever it takes to spend that $2 million. If I don't spend $2 million, I'll actually have to pay the difference. So if I only do a million in compute, I'm gonna have to pay a million and get nothing for it.So I'm gonna do as much compute as humanly possible to get the most bang for my back. And I think that's where a lot of the issues is with using costs. Like if you tell someone something's cheap, they're not gonna use less, they're gonna be like, "this looks like a great deal." I'm guilty of it myself. I'll buy clothes I don't need 'cause it's on a clearance sale.You know? And that's kind of how cloud operates. But when you start looking at, when you get a good methodology that really looks at the usage and the nuances between chip sets and storage tiers, you know, there is a big overlap between, you know, cutting the cost from a 2X large to a large that may halve your bill, and it will halve your carbon. And that's the kind of things you need to be looking out for. You need a really nuanced methodology that really looks at the usage more than just trying to use costs.Chris Adams: Okay, so that's one place where it's not so helpful. And you said a little bit like there are some places where it does help, like literally just having the size of the machine is one of the things you might actually do. Now I've gotta ask, you spoke before about like region shifting and stuff, something you mentioned before.Is there any incentive to do anything like that when you are looking at buying stuff in this way? Or is there any kind of, what's the word I'm after, opinion that FinOps or GreenOps has around things like that because as far as I can tell, there isn't, there is very rarely a financial incentive to do anything like that.If anything, it costs, usually costs more to use, maybe say, run something in, say Switzerland for example, compared to running an AWS East, for example. I mean, is that something you've seen, any signs of that where people kind of nudge people towards the greener choice rather than just showing like a green logo on a dashboard for example?James Hall: Well, I mean, this is where GreenOps comes into its own really, because I could tell everyone to move to France or Switzerland, but when you come to each individual cloud environment, they will have policies and approved regions and data sovereignty things, and this is why all you can do is give them the data and then let the enterprise make the decision. But ultimately, like we are working with a retailer who had a failover for storage and compute, but they had it all failing over to one of the really dirty regions, like I think they were based in the UK and they failed over to Germany, but they did have Sweden as one of the options for failover, and they just weren't using it.There's no particular reason they weren't using it, but they had just chosen Germany at one point. So why not just make that failover option Sweden? You know, if it's within the limits of your policies and what you're allowed to do. But, the region switching is completely trivial, unfortunately, in the cloud.So you know, you wouldn't lift and shift your entire environment to another place because there are performance, there are cost implications, but again, it's like how do you add sustainability impact to the trade-off decision? You know, if increasing your cost 10% is worth a 90% carbon reduction for you, great.Please do it if you know the hours of work are worth it for you. But if cost is the priority, where is the middle ground where you can be like, okay, these two regions are the same, they have the same latency, but this one's 20% less carbon. That is the reason I'm gonna move over there. So it's all about, you've already, you can do the cost benefit analysis quite easily, and many people do.But how do you enable them to do a carbon benefit analysis as well? And then once they've got all the data in front of them, just start making more informed decisions. And that's why I think the data is more important than, you know, necessarily telling them what the processes are, giving them the, here's the Ultimate Guide to GreenOps. You know, data's just a catalyst for decisions and if you just need to give them trustworthy data. And then how many use cases does trustworthy data have? You know, how many, how long is a piece of string? I've seen many, but every time there's a new customer, there's new use cases.Chris Adams: Okay, cool. Thank you for that. So, one thing that we spoke before in this kind of pre-call was the fact that, sustainability is becoming somewhat more mainstream. And there's now, within the kind of FinOps foundation or the people who are doing stuff for FinOps are starting to kind of wake up to this and trying to figure out how to incorporate some of this into the way they might kind of operate a team or a cloud or anything like that.And you. I believe you told me about a thing called FOCUS, which is, this is like something like a standardization project across all the FinOps and then, and now there's a sustainability working group, particularly inside this FOCUS group. For people who are not familiar with this, could you tell me what FOCUS is and what this sustainability working group as well working on?You know, 'cause working groups are supposed to work on stuff, right?James Hall: Yeah, so as exactly as you said, FOCUS is a standardization of billing data. So you know, when you get your AWS bill, your Azure bill, they have similar data in them. But they will be completely different column names. Completely different granularities, different column sizes. And so if you're trying to make a master report where you can look at all of your cloud and all of your SaaS bills, you need to do all sorts of data transformations to try and make the columns look the same.You know, maybe AWS has a column that goes one step more granular than Azure, or you're trying to, you know, do a bill on all your compute, but Azure calls it virtual machines. AWS calls it EC2. So you either need to go and categorize them all yourself to make a, you know, a master category that lets you group by all these different things or, you know, thankfully FOCUS have gone and done that themselves, and it started off as a, like a Python script you could run on your own data set to do the transformation for you, but slowly more cloud providers are adopting the FoCUS framework, which means, you know, when you're exporting your billing data, you can ask AWS give me the original or give me a FOCUS one. So they start giving you the data in a way where it's like, I can easily combine all my data sets. And the reason this is super interesting for carbon is because, you know, carbon is a currency in many ways, in the fact that the, Chris Adams: there's price on it in Europe. There's a price on it in the UK. Yeah.James Hall: There's a price on it, but also like the way Azure will present you, their carbon data could be, you know, the equivalent of yen, AWS could be the equivalent of dollars.They're all saying CO2 E, so you might think they're equivalent, but actually they're almost completely different currencies. So this effort of standardization is how do we bring it back? Maybe like, don't give us the CO2 E, but how do we go a few steps before that point and like, how do we start getting similar numbers?So when we wanna make a master report for all the cloud providers, it's apples to apples, not apples to oranges. You know, how do we standardize the data sets to make the reporting, the cross cloud reporting more meaningful for FinOps people?Chris Adams: Ah, I see. Okay. So I didn't realize that the FOCUS stuff has actually listing, I guess like what the, let's, call them primitives, like, you know, compute and storage. Like they all have different names for that stuff, but FOCUS has a kind of shared idea for what the concept of cloud compute, a virtual machine might be, and likewise for storage.So that's the thing you are trying, you're trying to apply, attach a carbon value to in these cases, so you can make some meaningful judgment or so you can present that information to people. James Hall: Yeah, it's about making the reports at the same, but also how do you make the numbers, the source of the numbers more similar? 'Cause currently, Azure may say a hundred tons in their dashboard. AWS may say one ton in their dashboard. You know, the spend and the real carbon could be identical, but it's just the formula behind it is so vastly different that you're coming out with two different numbers.Chris Adams: I see. I think you're referring to at this point here. Some places they might share a number, which is what we refer to as a location based figure. So that's like, what was kind of considered on the ground based on the power intensity from the grid in like a particular part of the world.And then a market based figure might be quite a bit lower. 'Cause you said, well, we've purchased all this green energy, so therefore we are gonna kind of deduct that from what a figure should be. And that's how we'd have a figure of like one versus 100. But if you're not comparing these two together. It's gonna, these are gonna look totally different.And you, like you said, it's not apples. With apples. It's apples with very, yeah. It's something totally different. Okay. That is helpful.James Hall: It gets a lot more confusing than that 'cause it's not just market and location based. Like you could have two location based numbers, but Azure are using the grid carbon intensity annual average from 2020 because that's what they've got approved. AWS may be using, you know, Our World in Data 2023 number, you know, and those are just two different sources for grid intensity.And then what categories are they including? Are they including Scope 3 categories? How many of the scope 2 categories are they including? So when you've got like a hundred different inputs that go into a CO2 number, unless all 100 are the same, you do not have a meaningful comparison between the two.Even location/market based is just one aspect of what goes into the CO2 number, and then where do they get the kilowatt hour numbers from? Is it a literal telemetry device? Or are they using a spend based property on their side? Because that's not completely alien to cloud providers to ultimately rely on spend at the end of the day.So does Azure use spend or does AWS use spend? What type of spend are they using? And that's where you need the transparency as well, because if you don't understand where the numbers come from, it could be the most accurate number in the world, but if they don't tell you everything that went into it, how are you meant to know?Chris Adams: I see. Okay. That's really interesting. 'Cause the Green Web Foundation, the organization I'm part of, there is a gov, there's a UK government group called the Government Digital Sustainability Alliance. And they've been doing these really fascinating lunch and learns andone thing that showed up was when the UK government was basically saying, look, these are, this is the carbon footprint, you know, on a kind of per department level. Like this is what the Ministry of Justice is, or this is what say the Ministry of Defense might be, for example. And that helps explain why you had figures where you had a bunch of people saying the carbon footprint of all these data centers is really high.And then you said they, there were people talking about saying, well, we're comparing this to cloud looks great, but 'cause the figures for cloud are way lower. But the thing they, the thing that I was that people had to caveat that with, they basically said, well, we know that this makes cloud look way more efficient here, and it looks like it's much more, much lower carbon, but because we've only got this final kind of market based figure, we know that it's not a like for like comparison, but until we have that information, we're, this is the best we actually have. And this, is an organization which actually has like legally binding targets. They have to reduce emissions by a certain figure, by a certain date. This does seem like it has to be, I can see why you would need this transparency because it seems very difficult to see how you could meaningfully track your progress towards a target if you don't have access to that.Right?James Hall: Yeah. Well, I always like to use the currency conversion analogy. If you had a dashboard where AWS is all in dollars, Azure, or your on premise is in yen. There's 149 yen in 1 dollar. So, but if you didn't know this one's yen and this one's dollars, you'd be like, "this one's 149 times cheaper. Why aren't we going all in on this one?"But actually it's just different currencies. And they are the same at the end of the day. Under the hood, they're the same. But, know, just the way they've turned it into an accounting exercise has kind of muddied the water, which is why I love electricity metrics more. You know, they're almost like the, non fungible token of, you know, data centers and cloud.'Cause you can use that to calculate location-based. You can use calculate market-based. You can use electricity to calculate water cooling and metrics and things like that. So if you can get the electricity, then you're well on your way to meaningful comparisons.Chris Adams: And that's the one that everyone guards very jealously a lot of the time, right?James Hall: Exactly. Yeah. Well that's directly related to your cost of running business and that is the proprietary information.Chris Adams: I see. Okay. Alright, so we spoke, we've done a bit of a deep dive into the GSG protocol, scope 3, supply chain emissions and things like that. If I may, you mentioned, you, referenced this idea of war stories before. Right. And I. It's surprisingly hard to find people with real world stories about okay, making meaningful changes to like cloud emissions in the world.Do you have any like stories that you've come across in the last four years that you think are particularly worth sharing or that might be worth, I dunno, catch people's attention, for example. Like there's gotta be something that you found that you are allowed to talk about, right.James Hall: Yeah, I mean, MasterCard, one of our Lighthouse customers, they've spoken about the work we're doing with them a lot in, at various FinOps conferences and things like that. But they're very advanced in their GreenOps goals. They have quite ambitious net zero goals and they take their IT sustainability very seriously.Yeah, when we first spoke to them. Ultimately the name of the game was to get the cloud measurement up to the point of their on-premise. 'Cause their on-premise was very advanced, daily electricity metrics with pre-approved, CO2 numbers or CO2 carbon coefficients that multiplied the, you multiply the electricity with.But they were getting, having no luck with cloud, essentially, you know, they spend a lot in the cloud and, but they, they were honestly like, rather than going for just the double wins, which is kind of what most people wanna do, where it's like, I'm gonna use this as a mechanism to save more money.They honestly wanted to do no more harm and actually start making decisions purely for the sustainability benefits. And we kind of went in there with the FinOps team, worked on their FinOps reporting, combined it with their FinOps recommendations and the accountability, which is their tool of choice.But then they started having more use cases around. How do they use our carbon data, not our electricity data from the cloud or like, because we have a big list of hourly carbon coefficients. They wanna use that data to start choosing where they put their on-premise data centers as well, and like really making the sustainability impact a huge factor in where they place their regions, which I think is a very interesting one. 'Cause we had only really focused on how do we help people in their public cloud. But they wanted to align their on-premise reporting with their cloud reporting and ultimately start even making decisions. Okay, I know I need to put a data center in this country.Do I go AWS, Azure, or on-prem for this one? And what is the sustainability impact of all three? And, you know, how do I weigh that against the cost as well? And it's kind of like the golden standard of making sustainability a big part of the trade-off decision. 'Cause they would not go somewhere, even if it saved them 50% of their cost, if it doubled their carbon. They're way beyond that point. So they're a super interesting one. And even in public sector as well, like the departments we are working with are relatively new to FinOps and they didn't really have like a proper accountability structure for their cloud bill. But when you start adding carbon data to it, you are getting a lot more eyes onto the, onto your bills and your usage.And ultimately we help them create that more of a FinOps function just with the carbon data. 'Cause people find carbon data typically more interesting than spend data. But if you put them on the same dashboard, now it's all about how do you market efficient usage? And I think that's one of the main, use cases of GreenOps is to get more eyes or more usage.So, 'cause the more ideas you've got piling in, the more use cases you find and.Chris Adams: Okay. Alright, so we spoke, so you spoke about carbon as one of the main things that people are caring about, right. And we're starting to develop more of an awareness that maybe some data centers might themselves be exposed to kind of climate risks themselves. Because I know they were built on a floodplain, for example.And you don't want a data center on a floodplain in the middle of a flood, for example. Right. but there's also like the flip side, you know, that's too much water. But there are cases where people worry about not enough water, for example. I mean, is that something that you've seen people talk about more of?Because there does seem to be a growing awareness about the water footprint of digital infrastructure as well now. Is that something you're seeing people track or even try to like manage right now?James Hall: Well, we find that water metrics are very popular in the US more so than the CO2 metrics, and I think it's because the people there feel the pain of lack of water. You know, you've got the Flint water crisis. In the UK, we've got an energy crisis stopping people from building homes. So what you really wanna do is enable the person who's trying to use this data to drive efficiency, to tell as many different stories asis possible,. You know, the more metrics and the more choice they have of what to present to the engineers and what to present to leadership, the better outcomes they're gonna get. Water is a key one because data centers and electricity production uses tons of water. And the last thing you wanna do is, you know, go to a water scarce area and put a load of servers in there that are gonna guzzle up loads of water. One, because if that water runs out, your whole data center's gonna collapse. So it's, you're exposing yourself to ESG risk. And also, you know, it doesn't seem like the right thing to do. There are people trying to live there who need to use that water to live.But you know, you've got data centers sucking that water out, so you know, can't you use this data to again, drive different decisions, could invoke an emotional response that helps people drive different decisions or build more efficiently. And if you're saving cost at the end of that as well, then everyone's happy.Chris Adams: So maybe this is actually one thing we can talk about because, or just like, drill into before we kind of, move on to the next question and wrap up. So we, people have had incentives to track cost and cash for obvious reasons, carbon, as you're seeing more and more laws actually have opinions about carbon footprint and being able to report that people are getting a bit more aware of it.Like we've spoken about things like location based figures and market based figures. And we have previous episodes where we've explored and actually kind of helped people define those terms. But I feel comfortable using relatively technical terminology now because I think there is a growing sophistication, at least in certain pockets, for example.Water still seems to be a really new one, and it seems to be very difficult to actually have, find access to meaningful numbers. Even just the idea of like water in the first place. Like you, when you hear figures about water being used, that might not be the same as water. Kind of.It's not, it might not be going away, so it can't be used. It might be returned in a way that is maybe more difficult to use or isn't, or is sometimes it's cleaner, sometimes it's dirtier, for example. But this, it seems to be poorly understood despite being quite an emotional topic. Have you, yeah, what's your experience been like when people try to engage with this or when you try to even find some of the numbers to present to people and dashboards and things?James Hall: Yeah. So yeah, surprisingly, all the cloud providers are able to produce factors. I think it's actually a requirement that when you have a data center, you know what the power usage effectiveness is, so what the overhead electricity is, and you know what the water usage effectiveness is. So you know, what is your cooling system, how much water does it use, how much does it withdraw?Then how much does it actually consume? So the difference between withdrawal and consumption, is withdrawal is you let you take clean water out, you're able to put clean water back relatively quickly. Consumption is you have either poisoned the water with some kind of, you know, you've diluted it or you know, with some kind of coolant that's not fit for human consumption or you've now evaporated it.And there is some confusion sometimes around "it's evaporated, but it'll rain. It'll rain back down." But, you know, a lake's evaporation and redeposition processs is ike a delicate balance. If it, you know, evaporates 10,000 liters a day and rains 10,000 liters a day after, like a week of it going into the clouds and coming back down the mountain nearby.If you then have a data center next to it that will accelerate the evaporation by 30,000 leases a day, you really upset the delicate balance that's in there and that, you know, you talk about are these things sustainable? Like financial sustainability is, do you have enough money and income to last a long time, or will your burn rate run out next month?And it's the same with, you know, sustainability. I think fresh water is a limiting resource in the same way a company's bank balance is their limiting resource. There's a limited amount of electricity, there's a limited amount of water out there. I think it was the cEO of Nvidia. I saw a video of him on LinkedIn that said, right now the limit to your cloud environment is how much money you can spend on it.But soon it will be how much electricity is there? You know, you could spend a trillion dollars, but if there's no more room for electricity, there's no more electricity to be produced, then you can't build anymore data centers or solar farms. And then water's the other side of that.I think water's even worse because we need water to even live. And you know what happens when there's no more water because the data centers have it. I think it invokes a much more emotional response. When you have good data that kind of is backed by good sources, you can tell an excellent story of why you need to start reducing.Chris Adams: Okay, well hopefully we can see more of those numbers because it seems like it's something that is quite difficult to get access to at the moment. Water's it, water in particular. Alright, so we're coming to time now and one thing we spoke about in the prep call was talking about the GSG protocol.We did a bit but nerd like nerding into this and you spoke a little bit about yes, accuracy is good, but you can't just only focus on accuracy if you want someone to actually use any of the tools or you want people to adopt stuff, and you said that in the GHG protocol, which is like the gold standard for people working out kind of the, you know, carbon footprint of things.You said that there were these different pillars inside of that matter. And if you just look at accuracy, that's not gonna be enough. So can you maybe expand on that for people who maybe aren't as familiar with the GSG protocol as you? Because I think there is something that, I think, that there, there's something there that's worth, I think, worth exploring.James Hall: Yeah. So it just as a reminder for those out there, the pillars are accuracy, yes, completeness, consistency, transparency, and relevance. A lot of people worry a lot about the accuracy, but, you know, just to give an example that if you had the most amazing, accurate number for your entire cloud environment, you know, 1,352 tons 0.16 grams, but you are one engineer under one application, running a few resources, the total carbon number is completelyuseless to you, to be honest. Like how do you make, use that number to make a decision for your tiny, you know, maybe five tons of information. So really you've got to balance all of these things. You know, the transparency is important because you need to build trust in the data. People need to understand where it comes from.The relevance is, you know, again, are you filtering on just the resources that are important to me? And the consistency touches on, aWS is one ton versus Azure is 100 tons. You can't decide which cloud provider to go into based on these numbers because you know, they're marking their own homework. They've got a hundred different ways to calculate these things. And then the completeness is around, if you're only doing compute, but 90% is storage, you are missing out on loads of information. You know, you could have a super accurate compute for Azure, but if you've got completely different numbers for AWS and you dunno where they come from, you've not got a good data set, a good GreenOps data set to be able to drive decisions or use as a catalyst.So you really need to prioritize all five of these pillars in an equal measure and treat them all as a priority rather than just go for full accuracy.Chris Adams: Brilliant. We'll sure make a point of sharing a link to that in the show notes for anyone else who wants to dive into the world of pillars of sustainability reporting, I suppose. Alright. Okay. Well, James, I think that takes us to time. So just before we wrap up, there's gonna be usual things like where people can find you, but are there any particular projects that are catching your eye right now that you are kind of excited about or you'd like to direct people's attention to? 'Cause we'll share a link to the company you work for, obviously, and possibly yourself on LinkedIn or whatever it is. But is there anything else that you've seen in the last couple of weeks that you find particularly exciting in the world of GreenOps or kind of the wider sustainable software field? James Hall: Yeah, I mean, a lot of work being done around AI sustainability is particularly interesting. I recommend people go and look at some of the Hugging Face information around which models are more electrically efficient. And from a Greenpixie side, we've got a newsletter now for people wanting to learn more about GreenOps and in fact, we're building out a GreenOps training and certification that I'd be very interested to get a lot of people's feedback on.Chris Adams: Cool. Alright, well thank you one more time. If people wanna find you on LinkedIn, they would just look up James Hall Greenpixie, presumably right? Or something like that.James Hall: Yeah, and go to our website as well.Chris Adams: Well James, thank you so much for taking me along to this deep dive into the world of GreenOps ,cloud carbon reporting and all the, and the rest. Hope you have a lovely day and yeah. Take care of yourself mate. Cheers.James Hall: Thanks so much, Chris.  Hey everyone, thanks for listening. Just a reminder to follow Environment Variables on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And please do leave a rating and review if you like what we're doing. It helps other people discover the show, and of course, we'd love to have more listeners.Chris Adams: To find out more about the Green Software Foundation, please visit greensoftware.foundation. That's greensoftware.foundation in any browser. Thanks again, and see you in the next episode. 

Christopher Liljenstolpe, Senior Director for Data Center Architecture and Sustainability at Cisco, shares his expertise on the energy demands of AI-driven data centers. He discusses the potential role of nuclear power in sustainable tech and the advantages of small modular reactors. The conversation also touches on the importance of efficient design for AI infrastructure and the unforeseen role of internet infrastructure during the pandemic. Chris highlights how collaboration between hardware and software sectors can drive innovation in green technology.