[irtf-discuss] Re: [E-impact] Re: [Green] Network Equipment Energy Efficiency Metric

[Hesham ElBakoury <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mark,
Did you look at SCI (Software Carbon Intensity) metric which is developed
by Green Software Foundation and standardized by ISO [1]. It  can be
defined for any unit including a user.

The equation to calculate an SCI score is elegantly simple. This simplicity
means it can be applied in a number of different scenarios.

[image: alt_text]

SCI = ((E *I) + M) per R

E = Energy consumed by a software system I = Location-based marginal carbon
emissions*M = Embodied emissions of a software system.* R = Functional unit
(e.g. carbon per additional user, API-call, ML job, etc)

I am wondering who is using it?
Hesham
[1]
https://learn.greensoftware.foundation/measurement/#:~:text=The%20Software%20Carbon%20Intensity%20(SCI)%20specification%20is%20a%20methodology%20developed,cars%20they%20produce%20every%20year
.

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024, 10:27 AM Mark Butcher <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hello!
>
>
>
> I’m definitely never going to claim to be a grid expert, but…
> understanding the grid’s dynamics, especially active, reactive, and
> apparent power is definitely essential if the objective is to get a better
> handle on power usage across networks. It’s obvs. not just about energy
> efficiency; translating this into carbon emissions gets even more critical
> when you consider how different power sources impact the grid's overall
> carbon intensity. I’ve had some interesting chats with operators this year
> around how they are planning to move from supply side to demand side
> shaping.
>
>
>
> I don’t envy the Grid operators facing the balancing act between cost,
> stability, emissions targets, and resilience (especially as the subject of
> renewables come into play). Getting even vaguely accurate carbon intensity
> metrics from them isn’t easy and there’s lot of sweeping assumptions.
> What’s your view on the regional info shared by operators like the National
> Grid? I don’t think it’s perfect but it’s at least more accurate than a
> national average as it reflects their understanding of the flows/mix.
>
>
>
> Starting with simpler elements, like SFPs, and then scaling up to more
> complex topologies makes sense. Tracking energy consumption at this
> granular level, from individual components up to entire network sections,
> could provide the data points needed to make informed decisions on reducing
> emissions, rather than just measuring usage (if we assume we can use
> intensity metrics from the operators).
>
>
>
> Do you think breaking it down into energy consumption at the element,
> group, and network levels would give insights we could actually use and
> more importantly to act on? Or is this overkill without an agreed
> structure/approach on what to do with the data and how to interpret it?
>
>
>
> Have you got any good examples where you’ve seen this work? I’m doing a
> lot of work in data centres on this subject and the networks teams are
> often excluded because of the complexity of their operations (outside of
> core DC networks).
>
>
>
> Looking forward to discussing this further! I personally believe there’s
> definitely a lot we can do. It would also be good to consider how the data
> that’s collated can be rolled into the reporting within IT and the wider
> business.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Dean Bogdanovic <[e-mail]>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 12 November 2024 at 17:20
> *To: *Mark Butcher <[e-mail]>
> *Cc: *Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>, E-Impact IETF <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> <[e-mail]>
> *Subject: *Re: [Green] [E-impact] Network Equipment Energy Efficiency
> Metric
>
> I’m really curious how many people understand how electrical grid operates,
>
> the difference between active, reactive and apparent power in electrical
> grid. And how the grip operators are balancing power plants to maintain the
> needed power levels, how the operators decide between economic dispatch,
> grid stability and frequency regulation, environmental regulations and
> emissions , operational flexibility at the power plants etc.
> Until we do, I would not speak about CO2 emissions and other complex
> energy and traffic engineering relations.
>
> Lets first figure out how to report energy consumption by the networks,
> from very basic power consumers (SFPs) to more complex, like topologies.
> And provide the ability to provide the energy consumption information about
> an element, group of elements, part of network or even whole network to
> people who will know what to do with the info.
>
> Dean
>
> On 12 Nov 2024, at 14:59, Mark Butcher wrote:
>
> What’s interesting is seeing how kWh/GB is so variable – either based on
> network demand, the reality of the power curve and most importantly for me,
> when translated into CO2e how the variability massively increases (time and
> location)
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>
> *Date:* Tuesday, 12 November 2024 at 14:32
> *To:* [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, E-Impact IETF <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* [Green] Re: [E-impact] Network Equipment Energy Efficiency
> Metric
>
>
> Is is useful for network planners to know kWh/peak-GB for an entire
> infrastructure?
>
> This doesn't try to model reaction of network equipment to increased flows,
> but rather to model how infrastructure grows to accomodate higher peak
> loads?
>
> There is also an induced demand issue.  Networks grow when they fill,
> assuming there is revenue to support it.  This is akin to transportation:
>       https://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-                      *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
>
> _______________________________________________
> Green mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> --
> E-impact mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>