James Governor's Monkchips

Sustainability On Steroids: IBM, Nortel, SAS, SAP etc

Share via Twitter Share via Facebook Share via Linkedin Share via Reddit

That’s what I am talking about over here.

IBM is also pushing into certification. I think the firm needs to think bigger though and to take on bigger challenges (not often I say that). Data center energy optimisation is interesting, but IBM should be looking at driving power improvements in supply chains, manufacturing plants, building central heating and so on. IT currently accounts for around 3% of world energy consumption. Lets get to work on the other 97%.


Nortel is going after Cisco “ruthlessly” based on better power performance of its gear. This is the most aggressive use of a energy benchmarking I have seen so far in the industry. Great – bring on competition on the basis of power consumption.


I am liking SAS pitching its BI tools for the triple bottom line. with Global Reporting Initiative indicators and KPIs based relating to environmental, social, and economic sustainability.


  1. Nortel energy calculator remorse…

    The word on Nortel’s energy efficiency advantages for enterprise networks is getting out there, but not soon enough for some.  On his Lower (Carbon) Footprint blog, Tom Raftery has this post about his Cisco buyer’s remorse.  Tom is a co-f…

  2. It’s a pity you didn’t spot it before now. I used to be a student in Cork (Tyndall), and I never knew about CIX.

    Anyways despite what Cisco are saying about the power ratings being for idle switches, they really can’t get away from the figures. Their idle draw in comparison with the Nortel switches indicate that their solution are less power scalable. Switches are not 100% or 0% (or rarely anyways), and so a solution with lower idle draw will ultimately have lower power consumption over the range of activity. It’s simple logic and one that really can’t be danced away from.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *