ENERGY STAR for UPS

February 21, 2010 by AJ Howard

Speaking of ENERGY STAR, the EPA released a framework document for the newly announced Uninterruptable Power Supplies (UPS) specification last week.  UPS, like computer power supplies before them, lack industry standard measurement procedures to specify their efficiency.  As the market for energy efficient data center equipment grows UPS makers seem to be increasingly marketing the efficiency of their devices, but manufacturers usually specify 100% load – a condition that a UPS will never actually operate in because many UPS are critically underloaded.  Also similar to server power supplies, many UPS are operated in redundant configurations where the load is split between two UPS in the case that one fails.  This means that a UPS in this configuration could only hit 50% load, max.  The efficiency of power conversion equipment tends to fall off below 50% load, so it’s important to measure and specify the efficiency of loads below 50%, because this is where a lot of this equipment is actually running.

To illustrate the point, here’s a chart of power supply efficiency curves from when I was working on the server specification, which I stole from the ENERGY STAR website:

For servers, EPA specified efficiency all the way down to the 10% load condition because available data indicated that that’s where a lot of the redundant power supplies were being operated.  My guess is that ENERGY STAR will be doing a similar thing with UPS, and then the industry will have a way to compare the efficiency of different UPS solutions across much of their operating range. This should be a great help to utilities looking to get verifiable savings through offering incentives or rebates for more efficient UPS.

EPA is also continuing the trend of pushing for standardized reporting requirements (through a power and performance data sheet) and for real-time power and temperature reporting over a standard network.  This is also similar to the V1.0 server specification and what is being proposed for data center storage equipment. EPA is looking to add similar requirements for all data center equipment so that data centers can be operated more efficiently when the managers have better access to data on what’s actually happening in their data center. The power and performance data sheet will also be helpful for proving the specifications of equipment when applying for rebates and incentives.

Interested stakeholders can download the new documents here, and offer comments by April 2, 2010.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Energy Efficiency Programs | Leave a Comment »

Utility and ENERGY STAR Collaboration for Improved Specifications and Programs

February 4, 2010 by AJ Howard

I spent Tuesday reacquainting myself with my old friends over at the ENERGY STAR program by attending the ENERGY STAR information sessions for Servers and Storage that preceded the Green Grid Technical Forum. It was interesting seeing things from the “other side of the podium” by being a stakeholder at these meetings instead of being in my old role of assisting the EPA on the development of the specifications.

Status of the Specifications

In terms of status, there seems to be some significant work to be done on both specifications, but as usual EPA is asking the right questions. For both specifications the question is how can you quantify the generalized “efficiency” of the product, or the amount of useful work and performance you get from a system for a given energy consumption? This is the ideal outcome of this process – what everyone wants. As Andrew Fanara (the lead representative of the EPA) said, “I’d also like to ride a unicorn to work”. Meaning that it would be impossible to get a perfect metric, so for now we need a method to rank IT equipment by it’s efficiency, but don’t expect it to be perfect. There’s hope that we’ll get there eventually, but it will be a long processes, as there are a lot of details to be worked out.  The server specification feels like it’s getting closer – they’re currently working on version 2.0 so they’ve been asking these questions for longer – but there’s still a lot of work to be done.  One good thing is the EPA is showing that they’re willing to think a little differently about these products.  I think this is necessary because the complexity of these products and the subtleties of this market make theses specification development efforts very different from many other products the EPA is used to dealing with.

Utilities and ENERGY STAR

I’ve been feeling that there is a gap in thinking between the EPA and the utility industry, and the funny thing is that I think they really need each other. The utilities are constantly looking for new savings opportunities and it’s a lot easier for them to develop effective programs if they are built on the back of good efficiency specifications.  What the EPA needs are stakeholders with a voice to help drive these specifications towards increased levels of rigor for energy savings.

In addition, there needs to be a closing of the gap between the needs of utilities and the output of the ENERGY STAR program. ENERGY STAR should be producing specifications that can easily be adopted for utility programs.  This should be a high priority for ENERGY STAR, but it feels like the current process is to produce the specification without utilities in mind, and then try and adapt the result to a program.  If utilities want to play in this space, they need to be at the table learning about this industry and helping drive the agenda.

Right now vendors dominate the ENERGY STAR meetings. The vendors are extremely knowledgeable, but obviously biased towards their own products and agendas. The meetings often result in vendors standing up and talking about what isn’t possible or what EPA shouldn’t do. What the efficiency community needs are stakeholders at the table telling EPA what they need to help make these specifications useful tools to leverage for energy savings. The way to speed up this process and to keep ENERGY STAR specifications relevant is to have efficiency advocates help drive the process.  This may involve helping generate data and providing some technical resources. This will be expensive, but if the utilities (and other EE advocates) pool their efforts this should be cost effective and will help ensure a useful product for adoption.  The more utilities bring to the table, the more influence they will have.

The thing is that EVERYONE should benefit from useful ENERGY STAR specifications and effective utility programs that leverage these specifications:  ENERGY STAR can further increase their growing relevance in this emerging market; utilities can run influential and cost effective programs to meet their goals; and vendors can market more efficient product offerings.  It’s a win, win, win.  We can no longer let the voices of manufacturers, who seem afraid of being left out of the party because of inefficient product offerings, dominate this conversation. It’s time for utilities and other advocates to team together and help influence this process to get a leg up in this market.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Energy Efficiency Programs | 2 Comments »

Demand Response (DR) for Reduced Peak Power in Data Centers

January 31, 2010 by AJ Howard

One interesting approach to demand reduction is the idea or demand response, or “DR” programs.  The New York Times recently had this article on Idaho Power’s approach to DR.  The article includes this explanation of what DR is:

This concept, called demand response, has gained traction in utility circles. In essence, it involves paying users to make small sacrifices when there is an urgent need for extra power (the “peak”). The utility can then rely on cutting some demand on its system at crucial times — and, in theory, avoid the cost of building a new plant just to meet those peak needs.

There are many opportunities for demand response in data centers. EMI did a process evaluation for the California Emerging Technologies Program (ETP).  During this project, EMI prepared a number of case studies on different technologies assessed by the ETP. One such case study was on an “Auto-DR” technology.  My colleague who worked on this passed on this report on a joint effort between PG&E and LBNL’s Demand Response Research Center (DRRC) on an a similar Auto-DR pilot program in the summer of 2006. During the pilot program, they setup locally participating businesses to have automated controls to lower their energy consumption in response to demand response signals from PG&E. Of the 24 facilities that participated in the pilot, an office/data center had highest achieved demand reduction for a single event at 363 kW and highest average for 294 kW. In this instance the the DR strategies used at the data center site included: duct static pressure increase, Supply Air Temp (SAT) increase, fan VFD limit, chilled water (CHW) temp increase, and cooling valve limit. The chart below from the report shows how high the demand savings was for the office/data center (all the way on the left) compared to other sites.

The office data center also had the lowest payback period at 0.4 years for implementing the Auto-DR.

Following the project, the DRRC published this data sheet with information on the DR potential of data centers.  The sheet makes some interesting points including that “savings can be higher than those in other industries because reducing server loads simultaneously reduces cooling and other equipment loads.”

Here are some of the other methods the DRRC recommends in their fact sheet:

–      Dynamically shift load onto fewer servers using virtualization.

–      Migration of load to another location (i.e. another data center).

–      Temporarily raise set-point temperatures.

–      Use backup reserves such as ice storage or chilled-water storage for cooling.

PG&E is still running the Auto-DR program along with the other large California IOUs which also have programs.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Demand Reduction | Leave a Comment »

“Energy Savings” versus “Demand Reduction”

January 22, 2010 by AJ Howard

A funny thing in the efficiency and utility segment is the constant confusion between power and energy, or between kilowatts and kilowatt-hours. Even among engineers who clearly know the difference, it’s interesting that people are still constantly confusing the two, or at least use them interchangeably in situations where you really can’t.  A sure way to insult an energy engineer is to say they “can’t tell a kW from a kWh.

Technically, power (kW) is an instantaneous measure of the rate in which you’re using energy, while energy is a cumulative measure of how much of a resource you’re using.  Confused?!

Another way to think of it is that our resources, such as coal or natural gas, store a certain amount of energy. The power you draw dictates the rate at which you are using this energy.  If you draw more power you’ll use up your coal more quickly.  If you use less power your coal will last longer.  Obviously using less power is a good thing because your resources will last longer.

Turns out this distinction between power and energy is very important in the utility industry, and therefore effects how they run their conservation programs.  As residential customers, most people are used to being charged by the kWh, a measure of cumulative energy used.  A residential utility meter therefore measures the cumulative kWh you use in a given month, which is what the utility charges you for.

One of the chief goals of conservation programs is to reduce the peak power draw (kW) on the system, and not necessarily the overall energy used.  The peak demand is what dictates how many power plants need to be running to service a population.  Utilities that are trying to delay the construction of new power plants will look to reduce the peak power demand from their customers.  For this reason, large energy users (such as commercial and industrial customers) will pay not only for the energy usage, but also for their peak demand usage.  This gives a clear pricing signal to the customer to reduce peak demand.

A lot of utility energy efficiency programs will focus on reducing demand and will pay incentives based on reductions in peak kW – not kWh savings.  Austin Energy and Southern California Edison are two examples I’ve found of utilities that base some incentives on kW reduction.  Often this reduction needs to happen during times of peak demand to be eligible for incentives. Typically peak demand occurs in the middle of the afternoon on a hot summer day when everyone is running the AC. In contrast, here in the Pacific Northwest almost no one has AC but most people have electric heat, so demand peaks on cold winter days.

To illustrate this concept, here’s a peak load curve on a natural gas plant I found at natgas.info.

This topic came to mind as I’ve been preparing my materials for my talk at AFCOM, where I will be summarizing data center utility incentives to data center managers and IT professionals. I’m seeking different ways to explain these concepts in simplified terms so that industry members can understand the utilities’ motivation in running conservation programs.

This whole concept reminded me of a neat article I read a while back about an Arizona data center taking advantage of time-of-use pricing.  The data center has installed a system that makes ice at night and uses that ice during the day to cool the data center.  While systems like this don’t necessarily produce energy savings, they create a significant amount of peak demand reduction by shifting that demand to off peak hours (this approach is often referred to as “load shifting”).  The local utility (Arizona Public Service Co.) charges only 2¢ per kWh for off peak energy and 13¢ per kWh for on peak energy.  In this way, the company can save 11¢ per kWh (or 85%) on their energy costs by shifting the demand to off-peak hours (this is probably not quite true since there are likely some loses associated with the load shifting but you get the point).

One of the attractive things about the “smart grid” or “smart meters” is the ability for utilities to offer different prices based on time of use to residential customers so that consumers can reduce their individual peak demand.  This would help further flatten the load profile, reduce the number of power plants needed to service the population and help make electricity production more efficient.

I’m sure that I, like others, will continue to interchange the words energy and power when talking about conservation, but it’s often important to recognize that difference when identifying opportunities to increase efficiency in the system.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Demand Reduction | Leave a Comment »

Data-Driven Prescriptive Incentives for Data Centers

January 15, 2010 by AJ Howard

I’ve spent the last few weeks reviewing information on utility data center energy efficiency programs for a presentation I’m putting together for AFCOM Data Center World, and have been struck by how few prescriptive programs (or “deemed measures”) are available for data center equipment. The few programs that do exist seem to vary widely and are distributed among different utilities around the country.

The most important information you need for creating these programs are data on which to base your assumptions and calculations, including, data on the typical products in the market (or the baseline) and data on the more efficient offerings.  The delta between these two establishes the energy savings on which to base an incentive.  This was similar in my previous work developing specifications for the ENERGY STAR program for the EPA – the biggest problem was access to quality data of sufficient quantity to really understand the energy use of the products. This is a great strength of the ENERGY STAR program, because as a trusted third party they are able to pull in data from a number of different current, and sometimes future, products to get a real sense of how energy is used across different manufacturers.  When they are pulled together these EPA data sets often seem to be some of the best publically available data sets on the energy consumption of these products – a resource that is useful for the program, as well as for other advocates outside the program.

It seems that the utility industry lacks a similar mechanism to collect sufficient data to develop these prescriptive incentive programs for data center equipment.  The primary source of data seems to be data collected through demonstrations and custom incentive applications.  But the utility industry needs a large amount of data to maintain confidence that the prescriptive programs will deliver actual energy savings that they can reliably claim for their programs. However, the utility industry, like ENERGY STAR itself, has only recently taken the plunge into the data center industry.  A lot of programs have a random assortment of incentives they’ve given out for data centers – an efficient UPS here, an economizer there, a few virtual servers in the mix – and do not seem to be reaching the critical mass needed to gather the quantity of information needed to effectively develop prescriptive programs.

I think this turns into a chicken and egg problem. Utilities sometimes find it hard to get traction on their data center programs because they do not have the prescriptive programs that make it easy for the customer to participate, but without the data from participation in the programs they do not have the information needed to develop the prescriptive programs.  As usual, available data seems to be a bottleneck.  What is needed are some central depositories of data with mechanisms to develop intelligent incentives based on that data.  A lot of different groups and organizations have the potential to work toward this goal (and I believe are doing so), and it is an important goal as more prescriptive incentives would certainly help capture some of the energy savings potential which we all know exists in this industry. I’d be really interested to hear about any potential efforts in this area, so if anyone knows about anything fill me in!

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Energy Efficiency Programs | Leave a Comment »

Thoughts from PG&E’s Former Data Center Efficiency Program Manager

January 7, 2010 by AJ Howard

I’m getting caught up on some news from over the holidays (happy new year by the way!) and came across this two part interview with Mark Bramfitt, the former program manager for PG&E’s High Tech program which includes data center efficiency projects (found here: Part 1, Part 2).  Mark has been very vocal over the years in spreading information on PG&E’s ground breaking programs in this area and has been a great ambassador to the high tech and utility industries alike on data center utility incentives.

EMI performed the process evaluation of the PG&E’s High Tech Program (which can be found here) and I got to know Mark initially through his support for my work with the EPA on the ENERGY STAR Computer Server specifications.

Scouring through the two interviews I found a number of interesting points from Mark.

On Barriers to Program Adoption:

In my discussions with utilities across the U.S., this is probably the single biggest barrier to program adoption – they can’t find firms who can do the calculations, or resources to appropriately evaluate and review them.

What has slowed us down, I think, is that the IT industry and IT managers had essentially no experience with utility efficiency programs three years ago. It simply has taken us far longer than we anticipated to get the utility partnership message out there to the IT community.

These two quotes emphasize the fact that there’s a gap of knowledge (and talent) between the utility industry and the high tech companies that equip and run data centers.  On the utility front – there is a gap in knowledge about the IT industry.  The fast pace of technological innovation and quick growth in this industry presents challenges in finding or developing the expertise to implement effective programs (including performing the necessary calculations and analysis).  On the high tech company front – there is a gap in knowledge about how to identify and leverage these new programs and efficiently perform the analysis and calculations to receive the incentives.  My conversations with industry members on both sides highlight these frustrations, and the ultimate success of data center efficiency programs will hinge on closing these gaps in the coming years.

New Opportunities

On the retrofit side, we’re seeing interest in air flow management measures as the hot spot, perhaps because customers are getting the message that the returns are great, and it is an easy way to extend the life and capacity of existing facilities.

Metering and monitoring systems lead people to make simple changes, and can directly measure energy savings in support of utility incentive programs. We also like that some systems are moving beyond just measurement into control of facility and IT equipment, and to the extent that they can do so, we can provide incentive funding to support implementation.

There is a lot of room for potential growth from the basic programs currently offered by utilities.  Mark points out one of the areas of low hanging fruit is with air flow management.  This can include simple efforts like blanking panels or more advanced efforts like switching to hot/cold aisle containment.  The challenges here are in confirming the energy savings, which is where the expertise mentioned above is needed.

Metering and monitoring is always a hot topic of conversation in this industry.  Future and current efforts for quantifying energy efficiency gains rely on access to quality data, so the implementation of better measurement and monitoring would be a big a boost to future energy efficiency projects. The challenge, again is quantifying concrete savings from these measures.

These two points bring up what I see as a main challenge to the utility industry in simply and reliably quantifying the energy savings from these measures so they can use incentives to drive these right behaviors.  It’s a significant challenge and will take some creative thinking. Another of Mark’s points emphasizes the potential outcome of these challenges:

That being said, utilities in California are under tremendous pressure to deliver energy efficiency as cost effectively as possible, so some of the industry leadership activities undertaken by PG&E may have to be de-emphasized, and we may not be able to afford to develop new programs and services if they won’t deliver savings.

To get over this hurdle, the industry needs to think creatively on how to efficiently (i.e. cost effectively) justify incentives and programs that help drive the right behavior.  There’s a large potential for energy savings in this industry, and utilities should have a role in driving these behaviors, we just have to continue to push to find effective models for doing this.

Future Growth of the Industry

PG&E is not seeing the level of new data center construction that we had in ’07 and ’08, but the collocation community tells me demand is exceeding supply by 3-to-1. They just can’t get financing to build new facilities.

This last point emphasizes that despite the credit crunch, demand remains high.  Once some capital is freed up we should continue to see rapid growth of the industry and increased opportunities to effect change through intelligent incentives.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Energy Efficiency Programs | Leave a Comment »

Remote Data Centers as a Consistent Load for Renewable Energy

December 21, 2009 by AJ Howard

Interesting snippet from a datacenterknowledge article on a data center powered by 100% wind power from an onsite turbine:

Microsoft has tapped into a major advantage of containers: they can easily be placed near renewable energy sources, allowing companies to chase green power to meet carbon reduction goals.

This made me think about recent projects trying to get approval for large transmission lines to bring renewable energy from less populated areas where renewable energy can be generated cost effectively (Good Article here from colorado).  Some of these transmission lines are being planned through parks or other natural spaces and are creating controversy in that respect.  It’s an interesting idea to locate data centers (whether containerized or otherwise) in areas to take advantage of these renewable power sources and to potentially limit the environmental damage required to build large transmission lines to pipe alternative energy around the country.  These remote data centers still need access to fiber to pipe in and out the information they’re processing and storing, but perhaps that’s more efficient then redirecting renewable elsewhere.  My gut reaction is that it would be.

Many developers have utilized the cheap electricity from plentiful hydro power in Eastern Washington State.  They’ve moved large data centers to the area and have taken up a lot of that excess capacity, limiting the need to use transmission lines to pump that cheap hydro power to other parts of the country.

However, unlike hydro, the challenge with wind and solar is the variable output depending on conditions.  Data centers provide a very consistent 24×7 load, so until more cost effective energy storage is developed this may be difficult to implement.  But once it is, having a consistent load from data centers could be ideal for renewable energy with a storage buffer, rather than trying to service a highly variable (and less predictable) load.

Tags: ,
Posted in Renewable Energy | Leave a Comment »

Utilities, Data Centers, and Social Media

December 17, 2009 by AJ Howard

I found this interesting post today on Triplepundit.  I was amazed at the combination of themes covered in this post as I kick off this blog.  Here are some of the themes:

  • Cyber shopping for the holiday season
  • The growth of consumer electronics sales
  • Upcoming challenges facing utilities
  • The use of social media to communicate ideas

There’s a lot here, but it can be distilled down to a couple key points relevant to this blog.

  1. The growth in use of the internet, consumer electronics (which increasingly drive internet use) and online social networking tools, which are the things that increasingly drive the growth of data centers and their energy usage.
  2. The need for utilities to use these tools to connect with customers for better customer service and energy saving opportunities.

The thing that makes this interesting is it really illustrates the idea that not only are data centers driving increased electricity use, but they’re also providing us tools to enable energy savings and help spread information on energy saving opportunities (like this blog!).

The author drives home the point that utilities should be dynamic in their thinking to take advantage of these trends, saying “The evidence appears compelling that if an electric utility does not engage its customers in a communal, customer-centric, process then the customers will use new media paths to find non-utility sourced solutions, such as the emergence of iPhone apps that enable enterprise or home scale energy management solutions, including interfacing to onsite solar and battery systems.”

From what I’ve seen, this really seems applicable to the data center industry, as you have an advanced, high-tech industry looking to utilities for support and guidance on opportunities for energy savings. The more utilities can get in this role of gathering and disseminating opportunities for energy savings to data center customers, and possibly offering financial incentives where they make sense, the more they can help lead this industry to save energy and keep the electricity growth in this industry from rising as quickly as the growth in demand for digital services. Helping limit the rapid growth of data center energy use will help utilities be able to meet future capacity needs.

The irony is that the some of the very data centers which offer utilities opportunities for substantial energy savings give us the tools to help influence the energy market and realize these savings.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Utility Marketing | 1 Comment »

Welcome to the EMI Data Center Blog!

December 11, 2009 by AJ Howard

Thanks for visiting the new Energy Market Innovations (EMI) data center blog. Over the years EMI has worked with clients to increase the effectiveness of energy efficiency programs through strategic consulting and evaluation.  Since joining EMI in July, I’ve been excited by the prospect of using my expertise to apply this focus to the growing industry of data centers and information technology (IT) equipment.

Various estimates indicate that data centers are currently responsible for 1.5 to 3.0% of the total electricity use in the US, and that energy use from these facilities is projected to continue at double digit yearly growth rates for the foreseeable future. Regardless of which estimates you believe, it is apparent that the energy use of these facilities is significant and continues to grow with the increased demand for digital services. Over the last few years many experts have collected lists of best practices and many vendors have released more efficient equipment, but more work has to be done to ensure that these practices and technologies are embraced and adopted throughout the industry.

This blog intends to provide a resource for professionals interested in energy efficiency in the data center market, with a focus on how to continue to develop intelligent and effective initiatives for increasing the market penetration of best practices and efficient technologies. This blog will initially focus on utility sponsored initiatives and endeavors to create a bridge of information between the electrical utility and data center industries.  Through this blog, we’ll be keeping you up to date with current news and trends with up to date commentary on how current happenings are applicable to the world of utility sponsored data center energy efficiency initiatives.

Enjoy.  And, of course, being a blog focused on innovation in the digital economy, we’d be remiss to not take advantage of the latest social networking tools.  So please join us via RSS Feeds, Twitter and LinkedIn.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »