Green IT – Sustainable IT Solutions

In 2010 I.B.M. and the city of Dubuque, Iowa joined forces to implement a pilot project called Dubuque 2.0. 311 families have volunteered to have Smart Water Meter installed for their homes. These meters are able to collect data ad transmit it to I.B.M’s database center every 15 minutes, after which customers will be able to view their water consumption data online in real time.

Before Smart Water Meters, there was no available system that allowed families to closely monitor their water consumption in real time. Usually households receive their water bills every quarter, therefore if there were any unusual spikes in the water consumption, they were not able to catch it immediately. Consequently, it could take a family as much as a few months to discover leaks.

The proponents of this pilot argue that once these meters are in place throughout the city, it would be very easy and quick for the city to discover possible upcoming problems and address them before they become too big and costly.

The Smart Water Meters appeared in California in 2008, but people soon started complaining that their utility bills actually increased. The Smart Meter proponents argued that the hike in the utility bills were not due to the meters, but to the extensive heat waves that coincided with the installation of the meters. Soon after however, people started to complain that the Smart Water Meters emitted electromagnetic frequencies, and people’s health started to be effected by it. Although, Smart Water Meters have been certified by the FCC, California residents demanded that the meters be banned.

Meanwhile, New York City is moving full speed with installing the meters all over the city. Although for the last couple of years the Smart Water Meter installation rates have declined dramatically, It is expected that the Smart Water Meter industry will reach $2 billion by 2020.

The rocket fuel that was used to launch the Curiosity Mars Rover in 2012 was fuel called Hydrazine. This fuel has been used since the 1970s to launch rockets in to space. Hydrazine is extremely power full and is highly flammable as well as produces an enormous amount of heat when burned. However, is this fuel good for the environment? The answer to that is no; Hydrazine is very toxic to humans when inhaled or contacts with the skin. This fuel is not only toxic but easily ignited as well so transferring it  would require extreme cautions.

However, scientist has found new replacement fuel which is more efficient also more environmentally friendly too. The new fuel is called energetic ionic liquid, the AF-M315E is not only easier to handle and much safer to humans since the toxic level to human is lower that of caffeine. The M315E would reduce the carbon emission level of Nasa’s rockets because when combusted the fuel would produce non toxic gasses like water vapor hydrogen and carbon dioxide. This new fuel is far more beneficially to our atmosphere than current  Hydrazine fuel. However, the earliest test flight for the new EIL fuels would not be tested until 2015, so in 2 year  the M315E would provide a change to the environment and space flights.

Source:

NBC News NASA

Company like Monitronics Internation has invested their money on making their contract online. Simply customers can use their iPad or Android tablets to use the eContract. What happens is this the once the consumer has understood and acknowledged his or her contract they simply press “submit”, in which a PDF version of the contract is generated and sent to the company and the customer. Company goes on to saying with this technology the company saves over $4,000 per week in shipping charges and also saves money on paper contracts. further information is available here.

Students in Austin, MN are donating compact fluorescent lamps to raise money for “Going Green” . They will sell the lamps and raise money to buy polar panel to install on the roof of the high school that they go to. The student group got the idea from when visited an energy summit looking to cut down on the energy usage. Further information can be found here

The New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority new “green fee” which started earlier this year in March was part of the new fare hike plan in order for the corporation to reduce cost and generate more revenue. The initial plan was to charge riders an extra $1 dollar  on every purchase of a new MetroCard. By doing so, this would prompt riders to hang on to their current card longer and reducing the amount of new cards required to be printed each year.

According to the Daily News the Mta prints around 160 million cards each year costing them around 9.5 million dollars to do so. They estimated the amount they will be saving to be about 2 million year from the reduced printing and cleaning labor. However, this new “green fee” instead of just reducing plastic waste and providing additional savings it is actually  generating more revenue then expected. Since, many riders have yet to go along with the mta going green recycle initiative they forcast the amount generative from this green tax to be about 20 million dollar this year; however exact amount that was generated from this green fee from it started date is not disclosed by the MTA for now.

My opinion regarding this “green fee” is the MTA has the right idea to prompt riders to be more green and sustainable since before the implement of this extra 1 dollar fee; MetroCards were literally everywhere and with with this fee it can help reduce waste in the environment. However, i believe the Mta would needs to provide more durable cards so rider are not so eager to replace the old with the new and be more green.

According to research there is no evidence linking cell phone use and cancer. Cell phone emits non-iodize radiation that the body can absorb when in use. Researchers says that the amount of heat observed by the body is not enough to cause any cell heating, which can cause lasting damage to our health. A number of studies have been conducted both cohort and case control studies to find a relationship between cell phone use and cancer. One cohort study was conducted in Denmark where researchers followed 420,000 for a period of a period of 20 years. They followed people who had subscription to cell phone and those that did not have .The study was conducted with only person who was registered in the Danish national system. The study found no evidence linking cell phone use to cancer. Another study comprised 13 countries including Canada and the UK and 16 research centers found no evidence with cell phone use and cancer. The study was conducted as an inter-phone study the largest case control study so far.

Some studies have found a small link with cell phone use and cancer but most studies (but most studies indicate that there is no direct correlation. Some of the reasons for the discrepancies within and between studies might be because of inaccurate reporting. For example, some people may say that something has happened more or less often that it actually did because they may not remember their cell phone usage at the given period of time. Another reason might be because of recall bias, where the study collects prior data about habits and exposure using questionnaires administered after disease has been diagnosed on some of the participants. Participants who have cancer may remember their cell phone usage differently than individuals who do not have cancer.

Although there is no concrete evidence associating cell phone use and cancer we are still advised to take the necessary precautionary measure until further studies can be done. We should limit our cell phone use especially with children; studies say that because of their age children might tend to accumulate more cell phone use than adults. In addition, we should not sleep with our cell phones close to our body.

The FCC has issued a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) that cell phone manufacturers should follow. SAR is basically the measure of the rate of radio-frequency energy absorbed by the body from the source been measure for example our cell phone. The FCC SAR limit is 1.6W/kg. For more information on SAR you can follow this link http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones.If you would like to find out the SAR of your phone you can follow this link http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones.

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phones

http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones.

http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones

http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d6387

New surveys conducted to see what are the views of some data center’s on going “Green”. What the survey found was that these data center managers and staff are getting tired of what big companies like Google and Microsoft are doing to their data centers. In order for them to be more green efficient, and be environmentally friendly. Matt Stansverry of Uptime Institute’s director of content and publications said that, “A lot of these green initiatives, like raising server inlet temperatures and installing variable-speed fans, are seen as somewhat risky, and they’re not something you do unless you have a bunch of engineers on staff,” From this we can see that its all about what kind of staff engineers you have and how much money you have to spend on initiatives like going green. Further information on the survey can be found here

Ernest Moniz, Director of the MIT Energy Initiative, was recently voted in as Energy Secretary for the United States. The nomination was passed through the senate unanimously at 97-0, a huge feat for a group that is often split in decision. While he might be a good decision in terms of possibly finding a happy medium between both democrats and republicans, in the past he has supported hydro-fracking and fossil fuel initiatives of Obama deemed as detrimental by environmentalists.

This recent news also comes after Secretary of State John Kerry announced that he wants the US to lead the initiative to combat climate change at a conference in Sweden. While we hear leaders indicate their desire to innovate and create change, decisions like the election of Moniz might put us a step behind, especially if you look at the social welfare of communities, such as New York, where fracking is put in place. Environmental groups such as the Sierra Club have congratulated Moniz on his new title, but hope that through assessments, both environmental and economic, are conducted with any new initiative.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/03/26/ernest-moniz-and-fracking-drive-environmentalists-off-of-the-rails/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/ernest-moniz-energy_n_3287690.html

http://grist.org/news/as-climate-change-broils-the-arctic-john-kerry-apologizes/?utm_source=feedly

Corporate Social Responsibility is how a company manages their relationship with all stakeholders, not only those who invest in the company, including things like the environment or the surrounding community. It’s what a company does beyond its normal business practices.

Having worked at an investment bank I know first hand of the industry’s attempt to go green, specifically in IT they send their old computers and hardware to a company which claims that they responsibly recycle, have initiatives to promote reduction of paper usage and promote the consolidation of devices allocated to each new hire. While these initiatives are great, is it enough? These efforts should all be applauded but what about “greening” their main lines of business. It’s about creating a completely sustainable strategy versus having only one green aspect of the company. Climate Bonds are one item to look into, or creating mutual funds bringing together green companies. The goal is to not to think of sustainability as an independent department or committee but rather an initiative that drapes over every single part of a firm.

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/05/sustainability_in_financial_services_is_not_about_being_green.html?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+harvardbusiness+%28HBR.org%29

http://climatebonds.net/about/

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/init_define.html