Major companies could reduce their carbon emissions by as much as 50 percent and significantly increase energy efficiency by shifting to cloud computing, according to a new report.
In an analysis of UK, French, and U.S. firms that have used cloud computing for at least two years, the Carbon Disclosure Project calculated that by 2020 U.S. companies with annual revenues of more than $1 billion can save $12.3 billion in energy costs and achieve carbon reductions equivalent to 200 million barrels of oil a year if they shift to shared data networks.
The report said that large UK companies could achieve annual energy savings of £ 1.2 billion if they move to cloud computing.
Cloud computing — in which data can be stored, managed, and processed on external servers as needed — allows companies to buy less hardware and also improves efficiency and flexibility. According to the report — which was conducted by the independent firm Verdantix and sponsored by AT&T — large companies plan to accelerate their adoption of cloud computing from 10 percent to 69 percent of their IT spending by 2020.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Thursday, November 24, 2011
More warnings!
A week before delegates arrive at Durban to take up what was left hanging at Copenhagen, UNEP has sounded another warning. By 2020, greenhouse gas emissions could rise exceed the level needed to limit global warming to 2°C by 6-11 gigatons of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2e), it says.
According to the latest report Bridging the Emissions Gap, keeping global warming to 2°C requires emission levels to be kept to around 44 GtCO2e in 2020. UNEP warns that if global governments’ weakest pledges are implemented, emissions are likely to reach around 54.6 GtCO2e. Even with more ambitious pledges it will only touch 50.
The report says that cutting emissions by 2020 to a level that would keep the global average temperature rise to 2°C is technologically and economically feasible. In particular, action is needed on aviation and shipping emissions, which currently fall outside of the Kyoto Protocol, and could account for up to 2.5 GtCO2e by 2020.
For a week or two, the media will be abuzz with Durban heat and dust. But will anything come out of it? Besides even more warnings??
According to the latest report Bridging the Emissions Gap, keeping global warming to 2°C requires emission levels to be kept to around 44 GtCO2e in 2020. UNEP warns that if global governments’ weakest pledges are implemented, emissions are likely to reach around 54.6 GtCO2e. Even with more ambitious pledges it will only touch 50.
The report says that cutting emissions by 2020 to a level that would keep the global average temperature rise to 2°C is technologically and economically feasible. In particular, action is needed on aviation and shipping emissions, which currently fall outside of the Kyoto Protocol, and could account for up to 2.5 GtCO2e by 2020.
For a week or two, the media will be abuzz with Durban heat and dust. But will anything come out of it? Besides even more warnings??
Resource Revolution
Why do we humans need revolutions to wake us up? Sadly, we do. And now, going by what most of us know, but vindicated time and again, and now by a report from McKinsey, without a resource revolution, we all face the prospect of damage to global growth, welfare, and the environment.
Not to despair, the new McKinsey report Resource Revolution: Meeting the world’s energy, materials, food, and water needs shows that the resource challenge can be met through a combination of expanding the supply of resources and a step change in the way they are extracted, converted, and used. Such resource productivity improvements, using existing technology, could satisfy nearly 30 percent of demand in 2030. Just 15 areas, from more energy-efficient buildings to improved irrigation, could deliver 75 percent of the potential for higher resource productivity.
Meeting the resource-supply and productivity challenges will be far from easy—only 20 percent of the potential is readily achievable and 40 percent will be hard to capture. There are many barriers, including the fact that the capital needed each year to create a resource revolution will rise from roughly $2 trillion today to more than $3 trillion, with additional capital requirements to pursue climate change and universal-energy-access agendas.
Policy makers should consider action on three fronts: unwinding subsidies that keep prices artificially low and encourage inefficiency; ensuring that enough capital is available and that market failures are corrected; and bolstering society’s resilience by creating safety nets to help very poor people deal with change and educating consumers and businesses to heed the reality of future resource constraints.
Not to despair, the new McKinsey report Resource Revolution: Meeting the world’s energy, materials, food, and water needs shows that the resource challenge can be met through a combination of expanding the supply of resources and a step change in the way they are extracted, converted, and used. Such resource productivity improvements, using existing technology, could satisfy nearly 30 percent of demand in 2030. Just 15 areas, from more energy-efficient buildings to improved irrigation, could deliver 75 percent of the potential for higher resource productivity.
Meeting the resource-supply and productivity challenges will be far from easy—only 20 percent of the potential is readily achievable and 40 percent will be hard to capture. There are many barriers, including the fact that the capital needed each year to create a resource revolution will rise from roughly $2 trillion today to more than $3 trillion, with additional capital requirements to pursue climate change and universal-energy-access agendas.
Policy makers should consider action on three fronts: unwinding subsidies that keep prices artificially low and encourage inefficiency; ensuring that enough capital is available and that market failures are corrected; and bolstering society’s resilience by creating safety nets to help very poor people deal with change and educating consumers and businesses to heed the reality of future resource constraints.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Some questions
Let us have your thoughts on a puzzle. Will rising energy prices have an effect on consumption, or will the public absorb the same, till a point of no-go?
Some point out to show that rising oil prices have not seen many people abandon private travel. In fact the data from last two years actually show a rise of consumption. Well, this could be simply that more people have come into the bracket rather than the same lot have increased consumption. It stands to reason that any savings will draw buyers. So should fossil fuel based power be made more costly, or at least show its real price?
And when talking of oil, one can't avoid talking of diesel and how one segment that uses this susidised fuel is the one that owns high-end vehicles. Should such costly cars be running on subsidised diesel? Should diesel cars be taxed heavily?
Should energy tax be the lone tax in times so heavily dependent on energy? Will that be enough to cater to public services?
Some point out to show that rising oil prices have not seen many people abandon private travel. In fact the data from last two years actually show a rise of consumption. Well, this could be simply that more people have come into the bracket rather than the same lot have increased consumption. It stands to reason that any savings will draw buyers. So should fossil fuel based power be made more costly, or at least show its real price?
And when talking of oil, one can't avoid talking of diesel and how one segment that uses this susidised fuel is the one that owns high-end vehicles. Should such costly cars be running on subsidised diesel? Should diesel cars be taxed heavily?
Should energy tax be the lone tax in times so heavily dependent on energy? Will that be enough to cater to public services?
Monday, November 21, 2011
Efficient motors can rake in millions
As we have been saying, simple measures go a long way in tackling complex issues. Sometimes it can be so simple as to be tough to discern!
Electric motors and VSDs account for two-thirds of industrial electricity use in the UK and 40% of all electricity consumption globally and can cost ten times as much as they cost to run every year.
But two new guides from the Carbon Trust show businesses how to make reductions to their annual energy bills. A medium-sized business spending £50,000 a year on electricity could save 10% on its costs by installing VSDs and higher efficiency motors.
Motors often don’t need to be working at 100% capacity, so VSDs help save energy by slowing motors down by 20%, for example, which can cut energy use by half. Timers can also be used to switch off motor-powered equipment when not in use.
According to the Carbon Trust, the UK food and drink industry could save up to £70 million a year through such measures, while more energy intensive sectors like plastics, rubber and chemicals could save up to £270 million annually.
Electric motors and VSDs account for two-thirds of industrial electricity use in the UK and 40% of all electricity consumption globally and can cost ten times as much as they cost to run every year.
But two new guides from the Carbon Trust show businesses how to make reductions to their annual energy bills. A medium-sized business spending £50,000 a year on electricity could save 10% on its costs by installing VSDs and higher efficiency motors.
Motors often don’t need to be working at 100% capacity, so VSDs help save energy by slowing motors down by 20%, for example, which can cut energy use by half. Timers can also be used to switch off motor-powered equipment when not in use.
According to the Carbon Trust, the UK food and drink industry could save up to £70 million a year through such measures, while more energy intensive sectors like plastics, rubber and chemicals could save up to £270 million annually.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Extreme weather will wreak havoc
Sorry if this sounds repetitive, but just days after IEA's dire warning about inaction in the face of climate change, comes a report from IPCC.
Rising sea levels will increase the vulnerability of coastal areas, and the increase in "extreme weather events" will wipe billions off national economies and destroy lives, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Scientists have warned of these effects for years, but today's report – the "special report on extreme weather" compiled over two years by more than 100 scientists – is the first comprehensive examination of scientific knowledge on the subject, in an attempt to produce a definitive judgment.
The report contained stark warnings for developing countries in particular, which are likely to be worst afflicted in part because of their geography but also because they are less well prepared for extreme weather in their infrastructure and have less economic resilience.
Increases in population density and in the value of property at risk, rather than changes in the climate, are the likeliest explanation for rising disaster losses in many countries, the report said. It called on governments to do a better job of protecting people and heading off catastrophes before they strike.
The report was timed just ahead of crucial talks taking place later this month in Durban, South Africa, where the world's governments will discuss a new global agreement to tackle greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Will these dire warnings be enough to get governments to come out with a solid plan of action? Or have we got used to such dire warnings?
Rising sea levels will increase the vulnerability of coastal areas, and the increase in "extreme weather events" will wipe billions off national economies and destroy lives, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Scientists have warned of these effects for years, but today's report – the "special report on extreme weather" compiled over two years by more than 100 scientists – is the first comprehensive examination of scientific knowledge on the subject, in an attempt to produce a definitive judgment.
The report contained stark warnings for developing countries in particular, which are likely to be worst afflicted in part because of their geography but also because they are less well prepared for extreme weather in their infrastructure and have less economic resilience.
Increases in population density and in the value of property at risk, rather than changes in the climate, are the likeliest explanation for rising disaster losses in many countries, the report said. It called on governments to do a better job of protecting people and heading off catastrophes before they strike.
The report was timed just ahead of crucial talks taking place later this month in Durban, South Africa, where the world's governments will discuss a new global agreement to tackle greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Will these dire warnings be enough to get governments to come out with a solid plan of action? Or have we got used to such dire warnings?
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Wind energy to become cheap soon
Wind is catching up on solar, and how! A new analysis says that wind will be as cheap as natural gas in a couple of years!
The best wind farms in the world are already competitive with coal, gas, and nuclear plants. But over the next five years, continued performance improvements and cost reductions will bring the average onshore wind plant in line with cheap natural gas, even without a price on carbon, according to analysis from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF).
After analyzing the cost curve for wind projects since the mid-1980s, BNEF researchers showed that the cost of wind-generated electricity has fallen 14 percent for every doubling of installation capacity. These cost reductions are due to a number of factors: more sophisticated manufacturing, better materials, larger turbines, and more experience with plant operations and maintenance. Those improvements, combined with an oversupply of turbines on the global market, will bring the average cost of wind electricity down another 12 percent by 2016.
In the next few years the mainstream world is going to wake up to wind cheaper than gas, and rooftop solar power cheaper than daytime electricity. Add in the same sort of deep long-term price drops for power storage, demand management, LED lighting and so on.
Welcome claen energy!
The best wind farms in the world are already competitive with coal, gas, and nuclear plants. But over the next five years, continued performance improvements and cost reductions will bring the average onshore wind plant in line with cheap natural gas, even without a price on carbon, according to analysis from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF).
After analyzing the cost curve for wind projects since the mid-1980s, BNEF researchers showed that the cost of wind-generated electricity has fallen 14 percent for every doubling of installation capacity. These cost reductions are due to a number of factors: more sophisticated manufacturing, better materials, larger turbines, and more experience with plant operations and maintenance. Those improvements, combined with an oversupply of turbines on the global market, will bring the average cost of wind electricity down another 12 percent by 2016.
In the next few years the mainstream world is going to wake up to wind cheaper than gas, and rooftop solar power cheaper than daytime electricity. Add in the same sort of deep long-term price drops for power storage, demand management, LED lighting and so on.
Welcome claen energy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
