Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power IT Technology

Green buildings, Green Server Farms? 263

mstansberry writes "Has IT evolved to the point where it can consider energy efficiency without sacrificing uptime or performance? According to an interview with APC's Richard Sawyer, the answer is yes. The green buildings movement, spearheaded by the USGBC and other organizations has some people thinking about computing infrastructure's impact on the environment. Is it an IT issue or something from C-level executives?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Green buildings, Green Server Farms?

Comments Filter:
  • Pretty weak article (Score:3, Informative)

    by under_score ( 65824 ) <.mishkin. .at. .berteig.com.> on Monday May 16, 2005 @01:47PM (#12545209) Homepage
    It only really just mentions cost and green. I could say to someone "data centers have huge electrical bills and you can save a lot of money by using energy efficient equipment". That's basically what the article says.

    What about specific solutions? Even just general principles? Where would someone look to get help in reducing energy costs? What about alternative energy supplies? Are they reliable enough? Enough power density?

    I would have liked an article with a lot more information.
  • by Quikah ( 14419 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @01:48PM (#12545220)
    CEO, CTO, CFO, etc.
  • Re:My server farm... (Score:4, Informative)

    by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @01:53PM (#12545274)
    And the best thing is, I don't have to pay for APC's, as they all come with batteries!

    They do, but my experience with laptops (particularly old laptops) has been that their battery capacity gauges don't like being left on A/C power for a couple of months; either the battery gets discharged, or the chip thinks the battery has no capacity left, and instead of going on battery power when the A/C shuts off.

    PS: they're Uninterruptable Power Supplies. Not "APCs". Those are Armored Personnel Carriers.

  • by asoap ( 740625 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @01:54PM (#12545287)
    I had to look it up:

    C-level
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

    c-level is an adjective used in a variety of industries to refer "chief" or highest-level executives. The term arises from an urge to group together the alphabet soup of acronyms (CEO, CFO, COO etc.) found in the upper echelons of the corporate world.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 16, 2005 @01:57PM (#12545329)
    I don't know what a "C-Level Executive" is.

    It stands for "Chief-Level Executive". It is shorter and more clear to simply say "Chief Executive" than to obfuscate it to "C-Level Executive".
  • by Brian Stretch ( 5304 ) * on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:02PM (#12545395)
    1) Seasonic S12 series high-efficiency power supply. It makes a VERY noticible difference.
    2) Athlon 64 CPU (preferably the new Venice or San Diego core) and Socket 939 motherboard. Enable PowerNOW! power management (current Linux distros like FC3 support it automagically, some BIOSes don't enable it by default). The CPU runs at 800MHz at 1.1V core while idle, jumping to full speed as needed (just like a notebook). Even at full speed power consumption is about half that of an Intel P4 blast furnace. Run 64-bit Linux and get even more work done per watt.
    3) Avoid high-wattage video cards like the GeForce 6800 series in favor of 6600GT's. MASSIVE power consumption difference. Depending on how hard-core a gamer you are, the 6600GT's are good enough and a lot cheaper.

    See Newegg, etc for the parts.
  • by Guano_Jim ( 157555 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:05PM (#12545429)
    If you're not interested in running your own alternative-energy IT setup, you can always outsource it:

    Solar Hosting [solarhost.com] uses renewables (i.e. solar, hence the name) to power all their web servers.

    Looks like they offer a complete solution package, from web design to hosting.
  • by sffubs ( 561863 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:06PM (#12545451)
    If you're more worried about heat than speed, something using a VIA Epia [mini-itx.com] board would do the trick.
  • by orderb13 ( 792382 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:09PM (#12545472)
    You must be out of touch. A heavily modded computer can easily use 600 watts. My new one came with a 560 watt power supply that can peak at 650.
  • by javaxman ( 705658 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:24PM (#12545644) Journal
    I want a low power/low heat computer because I want to be able to leave it on all the time.

    How about something like a Mac Mini, some sort of system with adaptive processor usage and an active cooling fan system? Having a good hardware sleep mode helps, too, unless you're actually running a server or something that needs to be up 24/7... my home computer spends most of it's time 'asleep', but is ready to use pretty damn quickly. I don't reboot short of a system upgrade...

    LCD monitors are probably the best thing you can do to reduce heat/power consumption of a PC, as well.

  • Re:A Short Story... (Score:3, Informative)

    by NerveGas ( 168686 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:29PM (#12545726)

    30% efficient? Your numbers are hugely off. That might have been true waaaaaaay back in the day before switching power supplies, but it's not now. If that were true, a power supply delivering 300 watts to the computer would have to pull a kilowatt from the wall, and two computers would be enough to trip a 15-amp circuit that is so prevalent in newer construction, three computers would be much more than enough to trip a 20-amp circuit.

    At normal load, most power supplies are around or above 70% efficient, primarily because the ATX 12V v2.0 specs explicitly call for a minimum efficiency of 70% at full load.

    Now, note that even ultra-high-efficiency power supplies, which cost more than just double what a normal power supply costs, only specify 85% efficiency (an increase of 21%), and are reputed to save $17 per year per PC. For realistic usage of 3 hours per day, 10 cents per KW/h, 200 watt draw (which for AVERAGE usage is probably high), you would actually end up saving (365 days * 0.6 kw/h/day * .21 efficiency * .1 dollars/kilowatt/hour)=$4.60 per *year*.

    Maybe it's just me, but spending an extra $100-$150 on a power supply that will save just $4.60 per year seems a bit silly.

    On the other hand, purchasing a more efficient platform to begin with will save VASTLY more electricity. Replacing that with one of the efficient designs from Via would end up with a total real-world consumption closer to 40-50 watts. Switch from a CRT to an LCD, and you've dropped that from ~100 watts to ~35 watts.

    Of course, if we simply increased the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) by just five MPH, we would likely do far, FAR more good not just for the environment, but for world stability as well.

    steve
  • by Retric ( 704075 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:45PM (#12545934)
    storing heat for 5 months in a big tank of water would need tons of insulation.

    It depends on the size of the tank / house. Anyway, 4+ feet underground should provide plenty of insulation check out the permafrost layer up north to see how well that much ground insulates over a few months. I don't know how large a tank you would need for storage capacity but I would go for 10 -20 heat conductive pilings in the ground or water pumped though a pipe the ground as you don't need to use water in a tank for storage capacity when the ground works just as well. As to the day / night cycle that greatly increases the efficiency of these systems but it's not that hard to go from 40deg over 1 day to 40 deg over 200 days as long as your spending less cash on capacity than you are on energy.
  • by Mr Guy ( 547690 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:53PM (#12546032) Journal
    You must be out of touch if you think the vast majority of people use that much power all the time.

    PSU Needs Calculator [jscustompcs.com]

    Using this calculator, a sample system I just made up only needed 319 watts of peak power. To get that, I needed to be running the 3gig barton chip, 2 sticks of ram, 2 hard drives, a Radeon X800, sound, NIC, with 3 fans fullblast and 2 cathode tubes, and a dvd player. Keep in mind that's PEAK power required, which means all of that has to be going top speed to get there, which means something along the lines of running 3D mark while copying a dvd from one drive to the other while playing sound while downloading a file over the internet while having all your fans and lights cranked up.

    Hate to break it to you, bud, but just cause you have it doesn't mean you are using it.
  • by NardofDoom ( 821951 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @02:56PM (#12546053)
    I wonder if using a heat pump to cool servers would be more efficient than using fans and A/C.

    And using a geothermal heat pump is significantly more efficient than using an atmospheric heat pump. The former pumps heat to and from the 50 degree Farenheit ground while the latter tries to pump heat into the hot air during the summer and get heat out of the air during the winter.

    Server farms using these type of pumps would save significant amounts of money using the same equipment.

  • by AKosygin ( 521640 ) on Monday May 16, 2005 @03:19PM (#12546290)
    The reason why laptop *appears* to have battery capacity gauges that don't like being left on A/C power for a couple of months is not the gauge, it is the battery.

    Lithium Ion batteries works poorly in constant full charge conditions and in hot temperatures. Their effectiveness degrades in heat and constant full charge. And guess what? A constant plugged in laptop has BOTH! Heat from the computer and full charge all the time. So a laptop left plugged in for months will kill the battery fast with the heat it generates and the constant charge of the battery.

    Read here: http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm [batteryuniversity.com]

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?

Working...