Saving Energy in Data Centers with Smart Sensors and Algorithms

Two other technologies may be more immediate and relevant. First, virtual servers (one box with lots of memory, CPU and hard disk) let smaller websites that don't need a whole computer get a "slice" of a computer. It operates just like a regular server to any given customer, but multiple customers can use a single box. There are many advantages over co-location in a data center, not the least of which being that you don't have a whole bunch of computers to manage. For the customer it's just cheaper and probably more reliable; from an energy and resource perspective virtualized.

In fact, Amazon (of all companies) has a very successful and fast growing option for website hosting called EC2. It has virtual computing on a massive scale. Many large sites are moving to Amazon because it is much cheaper, and also because you only pay for what you use, but you can use as much as you need.

My company has a modestly sized installation in a data center. We have around 10 computers installed, all running continuously. We pay several thousands of dollars a month for the electricity, cooling, and reliability of this center. We have to have spare computers for redundancy, and it's a huge, huge waste.

We are moving our entire installation to Amazon, and expect to pay 1/3 the total cost; much of this can be chalked up to EC2 being a more efficient way to host computers.

Centralizing computing resources is a great example of how economies of scale can actually work just like economists would predict. They are much more efficient, much less energy intensive and much more flexible.

Server locations should be housed underground to lower the cooling requirement, basically a basement with the heat exchanger using geothermal techniques (and funnel in cool air from outside in winter), then have a one story "office" on top - topped off with a solar array. This would work great in places like California where a large number of servers are.

The 1.5% statistic is a bit shocking - especially since I've heard people say for years that "it's your monitor that uses energy, not so much the computer itself" and also "it takes more energy to reboot a system than to simply leave it turned on."

Although, if cooling takes up the majority of power in these case, what kind of impact does geographic location and local climate have on costs?

Putting servers in a basement, as stated in a comment above, sounds like a step in the right direction -- but even in office buildings, they are somewhat of a rarity in California. (I haven't lived in a house with a basement since I lived on the East Coast).

- Glenn Rubenstein

I like the concept of underground server farms, but I'd argue for putting them where the ground can't be used to farm and returning Silicon Valley to the farm/orchard land it used to be.

I'm with Anne - return the surface to the planet! How awesome would that be - in fact, the dissipated heat might extend the season for fruit - enhancing yield; more for the bees to do! Hold this thought...

I wouldn't be me if I didn't point out that when these servers are decommissioned - it's imperative that they be disposed of in an environmentally friendly manner. If improperly disposed of, future generations will have trouble growing anything, let alone orchards! So, if you're going to refresh a few servers, please make a plan for proper disposal. We are one of many companies that can perform this function (we think we're the best). Please - keep http://www.greenassetdisposal.com in your mind when somebody at your company is about to trash some hardware!

OK - back to the green field vision!

At my office, we have 8 decent sized rack mount servers that put out 8000 btu of heat an hour. We've build duct work, and a fan system that pulls the excess heat out of the room during the cooler months and puts the heat near our perpetually cold entrances and doors. It's helped greatly for comfort, and now we don't have to run AC in that room year round.

The underground concept is a solid idea..places like Springfield, Illinois with their old mines turned underground complexes.

Server farms are often located wherever there is cheap (coal powered) electricity. So we need to fix that problem too. Another promising trend is transition from 3.5in discs to 2.5in discs with use less electricity and produce less heat (= less cooling electricity). Of course that is more planned obsolescence, but far more drives are being bought than retired due to web 2.0 sites needing so much storage. Disclaimer: I work for a hard drive company.

I work in datacentre and we have many hosting houses and datacentres as clients. our company specializes in power and cooling for datacentre's and specifically we specilize in "right sizing for datacentre's". The problem that most people have in datacentre's is that they overspec cooling and power for future proofing therefore using far too much power and coling from day 1.
A underground datacentre is a good idea as it will probably keep servers at a much lower temperature and it is actually a misconception that all servers need cooling they just need to be kept under a certain temperature and most of the time this temperaure can be achieved without crack or air con units.. Scaremongering has led peole to oversize so building a datacentre that is expandable from day 1 is what we believe is the right philosophy. additionally we install, supply and commision hydrogen fuel cells instead of diesel generators so that zero emmisions go back into the air..
If you have a small number of servers then you probably wont need to cool them if you have them in a basement or underground somehow this way you will use zero kva on cooling. If you are a large datacentre then putting your servers underground will not solve much as they will need colling and power and monitoring them will not greatly reduce anything - rightsizing from day 1 will...

Another simple step is to get the hard drives out of the individual servers. keeping drives spun up so that they're useful takes quite a bit of power. Using SAN or NAS systems which move the data drives out of the servers into a central pool allows you to run fewer total hard drives, since storage for multiple systems can run on one drive, you don't have to keep open space on each server. Instead, you keep a storage pool of available space which is shared by all the servers in your datacenter. All this in addition to easier updates, backups and manageability.

Another simple step is to get the hard drives out of the individual servers. keeping drives spun up so that they're useful takes quite a bit of power. Using SAN or NAS systems which move the data drives out of the servers into a central pool allows you to run fewer total hard drives, since storage for multiple systems can run on one drive, you don't have to keep open space on each server. Instead, you keep a storage pool of available space which is shared by all the servers in your datacenter. All this in addition to easier updates, backups and manageability.

Obviously, we need to reduce the power used in data centers and by computers. Technology improvements such as the ones mentioned should be incorporated into all data centers. Everyone should shut down their computer at night. Etc., etc.

However, when calculating how much power data centers use, we should take into consideration how much energy is saved because of computer technology and what we do with it. For example, we can use Google Maps to find the quickest (and most energy-efficient) route before we drive. We can pay our bills online and not have to print paper checks and mail them across the country. We can search for phone numbers online and do away with phone books. These little things add up.

I'm not trying to justify the amount of energy data centers use; but don't just look at one number and say "that's too much," because it's saving a lot of energy in other industries.

Okay, so I'm looking at these pictures, and I've been working in and around datacenters since '95.

Who, in their right mind, uses vertically mounted machines in their datacenter? Who, in their right mind, does not put their machines in racks with doors that close and lock? Who, in their right mind, uses quad-gang outlets strapped or bolted to a rack instead of proper Power Distribution Units, like ones from APC that include remote power control? You know, so you could, like, turn them off remotely when you don't need them?

And all that exposed cabling at heights that it could be so easily jostled or accidentally unplugged by someone just walking by, and their clothing happens to snag on something!?! And, of course, to try to "solve" that problem, they use plastic tie-wraps for all that cabling, which I'm sure is cut-to-length and single-use -- When it would be so much better to have velcro wraps that can be re-used many times over.

Next time, please choose better pictures of good computer room operations and management, so that you're not highlighting the very thing you should be decrying.

Most pictures of good datacenters are boring. Just rows and rows of locked cabinet after locked cabinet, usually with some sort of ventilation slots or holes to allow good airflow. But I found a good picture at http://www.flickr.com/photos/22976481@N02/2334426662/. Some horizontal rack-mount servers, some vertical servers (bad idea given how heat normally distributes, but sometimes you've got to take what you are given), but all locked behind closed doors and unlikely to have any of their cables snagged. And the picture at http://www.flickr.com/photos/22976481@N02/2334426730/ looks like some of them are APC racks with integrated temperature monitoring, or somesuch.

Please, let's not distract from an important topic by having bad pictures to "illustrate" the problem.

Oh, and with regards to underground datacenters, one problem there is that most existing underground facilities are not water-tight, and you really, really don't want water intrusion into your facility. Also, if you dig it yourself, you're not going to have much room to grow, so you're going to want to find existing facilities that have already been built.

There are a number of old military missle silos that have been converted to datacenter use, and some companies specialize in doing these. But there's only so many old missle silos around that can be converted. And most of them aren't anywhere close to the power feeds you need, nor are they close to places where you'd be likely to find the kind of talent you'd want to have down there taking care of the systems.

Nice idea, but usually doesn't work out so great in the real world.

Oh, and with regards to underground datacenters, one problem there is that most existing underground facilities are not water-tight, and you really, really don't want water intrusion into your facility. Also, if you dig it yourself, you're not going to have much room to grow, so you're going to want to find existing facilities that have already been built.

There are a number of old military missle silos that have been converted to datacenter use, and some companies specialize in doing these. But there's only so many old missle silos around that can be converted. And most of them aren't anywhere close to the power feeds you need, nor are they close to places where you'd be likely to find the kind of talent you'd want to have down there taking care of the systems.

Nice idea, but usually doesn't work out so great in the real world.

Can someone explain to me why these datacentres are not simply cooled by fresh air from the outside and an exhaust of the hot air back outside? Why are they sealed and cooled by air conditioning when all that is really needed is a fan? Sure, if you're in a really hot part of the world at midday then you may need air conditioning to cool the computers to a reasonable temperature but surely anywhere else the outside air temperature whould be a low enough temperature.
Another question: why don't these datacentres have a centralised transformer that supplies 12V, 5V and whatever else is needed? That may well be cheaper than hundreds of standard power supplies and it could be in a different room to the servers to reduce heat production in that area.
Would love to know the answers to these.

These photos are of the WORST, most inefficient, space wasting, heat spewing, sort of data center there is. If you are going to publish an article about conserving energy in a data center, don't use photos of some amateur project. There are many good example of professional data centers that demonstrate how it is done correctly.

That supposed "Data Center"should be gutted, re-engineered, and remodeled.

Pravitus