There are red faces over at Greenpeace International, after the environmental organisation took Facebook to task last month over a data centre it is building in Oregon that will use mostly coal-based electricity.
Greenpeace’s beef with Facebook’s data centre was that it is not using renewable energy, which led the environmental group to reportedly say that “the only truly green data centres are the ones running on renewable energy.”
Greenpeace even created a Facebook group called “Tell Facebook to use Clean Energy for its Data Center.”
According to Data Center Knowledge, Greenpeace hosts its main website in a Global Switch data centre in Amsterdam. Apparently Greenpeace chose the site because Global Switch bought renewable energy certificates (RECs) to offset the carbon output of its data centre facility.
Data Center Knowledge also pointed out that Greenpeace has a number of servers in a colocation centre in northern Virginia. Most data centres in northern Virginia are thought to be supplied by Dominion Virginia Power, which gets 46 percent of its production from coal, 41 percent from nuclear, 8 percent from natural gas, and just 4 percent of its power from renewable generation.
Gary Cook, a Climate Policy Advisor for the Greenpeace CoolIT Campaign, told Data Center Knowledge that Greenpeace is trying to run the greenest operation it can. “We’re buying RECs because we want to put our money where our mouth is,” he said. He also pointed out that the US operations of Greenpeace include about 30 servers housed in its Washington D.C. office, which is supported by wind power purchased from West Virginia.
In Greenpeace’s defence, it feels that the data centre industry’s largest power users have a higher obligation to utilise renewable energy to power their servers, and that Facebook has a much bigger energy choice to make because of the size of its data centres.
And by criticising Facebook, it has gained valuable publicity by making renewable energy a front-of-mind issue for large companies building new data centres.
Greenpeace has certainly been busy of late. It recently stepped up its campaign against the illegal export of waste electronics to Africa and other continents, and it also regularly publishes a report that names and shames various tech vendors over the toxic substances used in their equipment and hardware.
Suspended prison sentence for Craig Wright for “flagrant breach” of court order, after his false…
Cash-strapped south American country agrees to sell or discontinue its national Bitcoin wallet after signing…
Google's change will allow advertisers to track customers' digital “fingerprints”, but UK data protection watchdog…
Welcome to Silicon In Focus Podcast: Tech in 2025! Join Steven Webb, UK Chief Technology…
European Commission publishes preliminary instructions to Apple on how to open up iOS to rivals,…
San Francisco jury finds Nima Momeni guilty of second-degree murder of Cash App founder Bob…
View Comments
Oh my goodness -_- how can they be advocates of living green when they themselves aren't green =( tsk tsk
While I'm often uncomfortable with Greenpeace's militancy -- which is the major reason I've never joined -- I will defend them, to a degree, in this instance.
If it is important for Greenpeace to have a physical presence in a given location, they will need utilities. If those utilities (not just electricity, but water as well, which may come from dams and the like) involve the use of "dirty power," then the decision-makers in Greenpeace are going to have to decide which trumps in that particular case: the need to be present, or standing by clean power -- even if it means passing up a chance to establish a physical presence?
Sometimes they'll decide the need for a presence overrides the fact that their presence will be powered by dirty power. And sometimes people will agree with them.
Even saints use sinners to get a job done. (Not that anyone at Greenpeace is a *saint,* mind you!)
I disagree with Greenpeace on many things, but this criticism is silly.
RECs represent the delivery of renewable energy to the grid. They are recommended as a way for people and organizations to balance out the emissions generated from their electricity use by the Union of Concerned Scientists, EDF and National Resources Defense Council.
Read more here:
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/what_you_can_do/buy-green-power.html
You might consider me biased (I work for a company in the REC market) but I think RECs are an excellent way for organizations to lower their environmental impact and accelerate the development of a renewable energy economy. Greenpeace should be proud that their data centers use them, and has nothing to apologize for.
Yet another awesome post, always great to read your website! Keep at it!
Great stuff, Just forwarded this on to a coworker who read up on this and she took me to eat after I showed her this site. So, appreciate it!!