• INTERVIEW: Malcolm Harbour
Chairman of the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (LINK)

• INTERVIEW: Elena Santiago
CEN-CENELEC Director General (LINK)

• Knut Blind: Interoperability within the Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative – the Innovation Union

www.talkstandards.com/interoperability-within-the-europe-2020-flagship-initiative-the-innovation-union
In the European Commission’s recently published communication on the Innovation Union, the need for “faster setting of interoperable standards” is highlighted. However, as Knut Blind commented, it remains rather unclear how this objective will be reached. While the EC acknowledges the need for more efficient coordination of research and standardization efforts, two other dimensions are missing which are also crucial for assuring interoperability. These are, demand-side considerations (including public sector procurement) and, most importantly, greater integration of international consortia.

• Helen Disney: Creating a Modern Framework
www.talkstandards.com/creating-a-modern-framework
While Interoperability is an essential component in ensuring that standards are utilized across the board, recently, we are witnessing a worrying trend in which policy-makers are afforded a greater degree of discretion concerning the desirable direction and forms in which standardization interoperability should take place. As opposed to this coercion and exclusion, Helen Disney emphasized the need to discuss and consider the most effective ways of securing and maintaining this objective. The real challenge is to create a modern framework that incentivizes and harnesses market forces towards greater interoperability, while also providing the necessary safeguards to deal with market failures when they occur.

• Ken Krechmer: Suggestions for the future of EU standardization
www.talkstandards.com/suggestions-for-the-future-of-eu-standardization
Ken Krechmer outlined five key points which need to be addressed within the European standardization framework. These include addressing the ambiguity within the EU literature, greater emphasis towards Government-led R&D, greater inclusion of stakeholders, avoiding confrontation with consortia, and a move away from “fixed standards”. Regarding the ambiguity of terms, Krechmer commented: “Open standards” is like “democratic government,” it is easy to say but very hard to achieve. The first step is a clear definition.

• James Bryce Clark: Interoperability within the Standards Marketplace
www.talkstandards.com/interoperability-within-the-standards-marketplace
While classical economic theory would say that the standards market is delivering exactly the amount of interoperability that its forces require at equilibrium, OASIS’ James Bryce Clack commented that even at its best, the standards “market” is an example of the imperfect markets spawned by the knowledge economy. Further exasperating this, the word “interoperability” is often thrown around, but it’s rarely quantified. Interoperability requires clear designation, clear criteria and clear proof.

• Ait Jaokar: Standards, Fora, Innovation and Geography
www.talkstandards.com/standards-fora-innovation-and-geography
There is an ongoing debate in the European commission regarding revision of the European Standardization System and the European Commission is currently working on a “Standardisation Package”. Ajit Jaokar outlined the vision as two over-arching goals; ensuring, through standards, European competitiveness at a global scale and Greater Integration on a European scale. Jaokar noted that European integration is a worthy goal, but asks whether we are mixing two goals: That of European integration and European competitiveness?

World hunger is a pressing issue and as the world’s population continues to grow the burden will not ease. Researchers estimate that 80% of the world’s population will live in urban areas by 2050, which will increase to 3 billion people. The natural question is of course: how will we feed all these people when we are already struggling?

Since we seem to have reached maximum capacity in conventional farming (or close to it) and farming land is growing increasingly scarce, the answer may lie in technological innovation. One recent development is the Vertical Farm, or ‘Farmscrapers’, a concept where high-rise buildings are constructed to hold extensive agricultural facilities.

Last year, Swedish innovation company Plantagon International took first place in Globe Forum’s ‘Innovation Idol’ for their Plantagon Greenhouse, beating over 100 international contributions.

The idea of vertical farming is to build tall buildings out of eco-friendly material and provide each floor with its own water and air supply. By the use of intelligent technology, sensors can detect and track how much water every single plant uses, or how much nutrients it has absorbed. Also, by analyzing the gas content of the air, the system will be able to tell when a plant is ready to be picked.

And the potential is great; a Scientific American article states that one-square-block building of 30 floors would produce the same amount of food as 2,400 conventional outdoor acres. And because of its urban position, less food would be wasted during the transport. Vertical farming would also significantly decrease the use of fossil fuels, US farming today accounts for 20% of the total gasoline and diesel consumption, and that’s without transports.

All and all, Farmscrapers are an ingenious innovation. It increases farming output and, decreases wasted food, energy consumption, water use and greenhouse gas emissions and solves the problem of coming up with arable land the size of Brazil that doesn’t exist. It is also an excellent example of what smart technology can accomplish for the environment, almost surprising that it hasn’t been done already.

The smart metering for electricity grids is another good example of infrastructure supported by ICT in which standardisation plays a key role in attaining the envisaged energy gains. The Commission has called upon Member States to agree by 2010 on minimum functional specifications for smart metering that will enable electricity network operators, suppliers and consumers to effectively manage their energy needs and to use ICT solutions for automated energy management. To this effect, the Commission has issued a standardisation mandate to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI for the development of an open architecture for utility meters involving communication protocols enabling interoperability. The achievement of such standardisation will be a major step in the advance towards Smart Grids, which is expected to be one of the foremost contributors to ICT-enabled energy abatement.

Finally, beyond ICT technical standards themselves for interoperability of ICT products and services, ICT presents a unique potential to facilitate the standardisation of the measurement, reporting and verification of energy consumption – not only for the ICT sector itself, but also for other industries. ICT can play a key role in elaborating systemic and standard monitoring frameworks to help achieve the EU 2020 targets. The ICT industry will take the lead in this area by establishing an ICT for Energy Efficiency Forum, with the aim of delivering a common framework by 2011 for measuring its own energy consumption and exceeding the EU 2020 targets by 2015.

-The divergence between material standards and the ethereal world of ICT

We have standards for nearly everything in this green world of ours. There are Green Building Standards (LEED, Green Globes, BREEM, Energy Star, NAHB Green and ASHRAE 189 to name a few), international standards for eco-labeling (ISO 14020 and 14024); Energy Star Standards for equipment, the EPEAT Standard for the green-ness of the manufacturing process and final product, a standard for restaurants (Green Restaurant® 4.0) and even a push by the SEIU and janitors for the “the adoption of green cleaning standards to make their jobs safer.” All of these help to improve the environment in one way or another, and they all have one thing in common:  they deal with a measurable quantity of something.

This measurement of physical output is essential; we must know how many Kcals are used heating the water, how much CO2 is pumped out by driving, or how many watts are generated by a wind turbine, and we need international agreement as to the meaning of those numbers.

In the physical world, standards become key. For ICT companies looking to build the tools and technology to green all these homes, factories and even restaurants, defining the physical isn’t so easy.

The carbon marketplace is a good example of this dilemma.  While a robust carbon marketplace exists, the measurement of carbon output today is more of a chalk outline than a real footprint.  Companies build profiles based on simplistic modeling that looks at square footage and number of employees, and measuring improvements is often done after a change is made, rather than based on models set beforehand.

Carbonetworks and Hara Software are two companies that are attempting to provide the technological underpinnings to a real and active carbon marketplace.  Both companies are building tools to measure the entire supply chain and, most importantly, model changes in real time. In the case of Carbonetworks, they are focused on the network effects of carbon whereas Hara is a more traditional single-point analysis approach.  The companies use different technologies and methodologies to solve the problems of measuring, monitoring and managing a corporation’s carbon footprint, but both provide products that allow companies to lower emissions.  And in the case of Carbonetworks, create a direct interface to the carbon trading market.

And yet to grow that marketplace for carbon, there needs to be agreement as to what a change is worth.  In simple terms, the market needs to know that “a cup of carbon in America is the same as a cup of carbon in China.”  The interesting conundrum is that while standardizing measurements will enable competition and innovation between Hara and Carbonetworks, standardizing the technology only will prevent competition.

Finally, creating technology to analyze the carbon output for an entire supply chain is the “holy grail” of carbon, but it’s a grail that has not presented a viable business model.  Several companies that were trying to solve this riddle have failed–not because their technology lacked standardization, but because they had not found that ineffable mixture which glues money, ideas and product together.

We are still a long way from knowing the right technology to help fill the missing pieces of the entire supply chain carbon footprint. It may be Carbonetworks, it may be Hara, or it may be another player none have heard of yet.  But a government-mandated standard today could ensure that we’d never know about that potential new entrant.
Green IT is still capable of “radical innovations”; we should support standards in our material world, while letting our spirits work out the details of the ethereal one.

On December 10th, IDC released a report that detailed 17 ICT solutions that could reduce the G20 nations’ CO2 emissions by 5.8GTonnes per year by 2020. The solutions spanned four industry segments (Transport, Buildings, Industry and Energy). The report highlighted that within the Energy segment, a total of 1.7 GTonnes could be saved – with Renewable Energy Management Systems ( part of a Smart Grid deployment) being the leading solution. China and the U.S. have such a huge opportunity to reduce their emissions using this solution.

Within the Transport sector, savings in Video Conferencing-based solutions are promising with 162 MTonnes of CO2 savings being possible for the collective G20. However, for Transport, IDC suggest that Supply Chain Logistics improvements using ICT is the major opportunity. The 3rd sector, Buildings, can realize significant CO2 savings by using Energy Management Systems. We believe that this ICT solution could be used to save up to 762 MTonnes of CO2 per annum.

Our findings show that ICT based solutions do have a genuine place and role to play in reducing global CO2 emissions. The key points that can be concluded from this study indicate that digital-based Energy Management Systems (from Energy Generation and Distribution to Buildings Management) are the corner stones of any initiative. Another key point to mention is that the G20 nations do have strong ICT infrastructure support systems already in place (networks, data centers, skills to perform business-like Sustainability Intelligence, real time decision making, etc). This knowledge and best practices is a very easily transferable knowledge to nations outside the G20, and therefore should be agreed upon as national strategies. The time is right for ICT to take the lead and implement solutions that have significant impacts through massive deployment of these solutions.

ICTs have the potential to play a leading role in such emissions reduction plans and low-carbon investment strategies. An analysis by The Climate Group in partnership with the Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI), and McKinsey suggests that smart solutions enabled by Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) could save 7.8 Gt CO2e in 2020, or 15% of global emissions in 2020.

However, in order to achieve their full energy conservation potential; smart building, smart appliance, smart transportation, and smart energy grid applications will need to be integrated through the convergence of telecoms, energy, transportation, and building infrastructures. Such convergence will also be necessary if we want to increase inputs from variable and intermittent sources of renewable energy to our energy grids. One of the major obstacles confronting such convergence is the different modus operandi and regulatory bodies of each industry.

ICT standards will be instrumental to overcoming such obstacles and allowing disparate smart applications emerging from each industry to interact enabling a sum impact greater than its parts. Standardizing information sharing protocols for tracking energy consumption will enable industries to collaborate on energy conservation strategies, the monitoring of direct and quantification of equivalent emissions, and the buying and selling of renewable sources of energy.

Standards will also be an important first step towards ICT enabled smart system initiatives to capitalize on emerging carbon market opportunities, particularly as more flexible arrangements are being considered to replace the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol. Rigorous, internationally agreed standards and methodologies need to be applied to qualify GHG emissions measurements and savings calculations. ICT standards for integrated smart systems developed to meet to these requirements would position the information gathered by these systems for immediate consideration in carbon market mechanisms. This holds the potential for consideration of further emission reduction incentives, beyond the direct economic benefits of achieving energy efficiencies, which could help accelerate innovation and adoption of smart system applications.

Conservation is the largest single opportunity for short-run improvements in energy efficiency. In both the US and Europe, “Smart Grids” are touted as a promising conservation tool. The basic idea is to add some digital intelligence to electricity meters and household appliances, so that usage can be more easily, measured, monitored and controlled. Smart Grid technology will also allow some consumers to become energy producers, by selling the excess capacity from their own solar or wind generators back to the electrical grid. In addition to providing basic tools for inter-operability and security, Smart Grid standards must be designed for usability. Experience shows that consumers are unlikely to invest in conservation unless it is extremely easy (or prices increase substantially, bringing some of the long-run savings forward into the immediate future). Andrew Updegrove provides a nice overview of Smart Grid standardization, and the US Smart Grid standards initiative has an easily accessible home page.

Environmental labeling and certification programs are another case of standardization in support of the environment. Many consumers will pay a bit more for environmentally friendly products, but cannot distinguish among options at the point of purchase. This has given rise to a number of eco-certification programs, such as Energy Star for appliances, LEED for buildings, Forest Stewardship Council certification for paper and lumber or a host of different organic food designations. For an overview of eco-labeling, see here. In some cases, such as organic food, the number of labels has grown so quickly that it may be adding to customer confusion, leading to calls for government certified labels such as USDA organic. Assessing the costs and benefits of competing certification schemes is an interesting area for standards-related research.

Finally, since this blog is primarily devoted to ICT standards, we should consider the growing problem of electronic waste. Computers and electronics contain a variety of toxic materials (which are also sometimes quite valuable). Short product life-cycles and poor systems for reclamation cause much of this material to end up in landfills. However, there is growing pressure from groups such as the Electronics Take-back Coalition to push some of the costs and logistics of reclamation back onto electronics manufacturers. This is an area where governments are becoming involved. For example, the EU recently passed the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has endorsed a set of principles for called Responsible Recycling (R2) for accreditation of electronics recyclers. If electronics manufacturers want a voice in these regulatory efforts, they will have to begin developing and adopting new standards for Green designs and more comprehensive take-back policies to facilitate recycling and component re-use.

Governments are playing an active role in all of the standardization efforts described above. However, the most critical policies have little to with the standardization process itself. The value proposition for all of these efforts depends on raising the price of carbon to a level where the private and social costs of consumption are roughly equal. When these prices are in place – and let us hope that is soon – the remarkably diverse and adaptive international standards system will begin to deliver a variety of tools for change.

G B Shaw said: The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

Much of the discussion around Smart Grids is ‘reasonable’. It is mostly oriented towards the existing infrastructure, with the assumption that the existing infrastructure will also have an important role to play in future.

This is a ‘reasonable’ perspective, but what if we were to be ‘unreasonable’? And therefore progressive and also disruptive in the words of GB Shaw?

This article explores the role of customers as creators of energy rather than mere consumers. It explores the creation of a ‘cottage’ industry of Peer to Peer energy producers. In such an ecosystem, the standard would be used to connect the peer producers and the consumers. The standard would be the unifying glue to bring together peer producers with the value being abstracted to higher levels of software and services which create the peer trading ecosystem based on small amounts of energy produced by individuals at ‘home’.

The role of customers as energy producers is a use case for Smart Grids, but it is relatively less explored. And for good reasons; it is disruptive, and it does not really benefit the incumbent providers of energy. But even so, Peer to Peer energy production may be an idea whose time has come.

George Papanikolaou explores this idea further and I summarise some of my thoughts on this discussion

a) The current approach to Smart Grids and Green initiatives is ‘top down’. It predicates infrastructure investment first and needs many players to come together especially large producers of energy.

b) While the traditional approach is beneficial, a more long reaching impact can be realised if we were to empower the customers and create a ‘bottom up’ network of cottage (home) energy producers who create and distribute energy within a social network – and not always for commercial gain. The Internet provides us such a network – but it needs a peer to peer social network to create and distribute energy

c) Producers are unified with the ‘means of production’. This means, the need for an intermediary is reduced. The motivations for the peers may be sustainability and other additional ‘soft’ benefits apart from revenue itself.

d) Energy produced by solar, wind and other means could lead to potential population realignment away from the cities if it is found that small producers are economically viable. This is not as far fetched as it first sounds. The Web has a tendency to commoditize content and services since it tends to make prices globally transparent. However, the Internet cannot commoditize physical goods and energy production will always have a commercial value. Thus, a whole class of middle income energy producers could arise if the methods of production and distribution become economically viable.

To conclude,

I have read Peter Drucker’s books for a long time. In his book the Post Capitalist Society, Peter Drucker says that productivity of nations will arise from infrastructure investments and since many people will no longer be involved in producing goods, the knowledge economy could play an increasing part. The vision of Peer to Peer production of energy brings these ideas together by the ‘ultimate; decentralising of production (to the individual) and by also adding a knowledge component in empowering the individual.

However, the promised benefits of this vision cannot be realised unless we have standards that foster the connectivity and the ecosystem to make Peer to Peer energy production economically viable.

Comments welcome. Happy holidays!

Developments in Green ICT are moving fast, with new innovations continuously springing to surface. Below are some of these recent trends and progresses listed.

Building Automation

Building automation is one of the latest trends in creating environmentally efficient ICT solutions. Put shortly, building automation is the process of creating an integrated, computerized and intelligent network of electronic devices within a building. As a result, the building can be monitored and controlled automatically, increasing efficiency in lighting, air conditioning, alarm systems etc.

The market for Building Automation System (BAS) is currently dominated by large actors such as, Honeywell, Siemens and Johnson Control; but these are increasingly pressured by upcoming smaller companies, e.g. Cimetrics and Adura Technologies, mainly due to their swift ability to adapt.

More Building automation info can be found here.

PAS 2060- The new British Green ICT standard

In October, it was announced that the British Standards  Institute (BSI) that a new standard was being developed. The new PAS 2060, built upon existing ISO 14000 and PAS 2050 standards, is aimed at providing a consistent approach to assess carbon-neutrality claims. Currently, companies can ‘greenwash’ themselves by making false carbon-neutrality claims since the definition is anything but clear: “Carbon neutral means that – through a transparent process of calculating emissions, reducing those emissions and offsetting residual emissions – net carbon emissions equal zero”.

The BIS not only believes that PAS 2060 will reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also to encourage broader actions toward climate control and carbon reduction management. The draft was up for public review in November and is now being processed for publication.

A Vertical Solution to World Hunger

Even restrictive projections calculate that the world´s population will have grown by about 3 billion people to 2050; this will obviously stress the already pressured food supply. One possible solution to the problem is thought to be Vertical farming; Skyscraper greenhouses designed to grow crops.

Not only would such indoor farming bring the food closer to the people who eat it, but farming efficiency could be increased. However, this will require new, intelligent technological solutions that can effectively emulate a natural environment.

Smart Grid Trials Underway

Two major Smart grid trial projects have recently been launched in the US; the first in July and now a second in November.

The most recent project has a funding of $1.6 billion in total, of which $620 million is stimulus funds from the DOE. The launched project will aim at developing communications in the grid by installing in-home energy displays, two way meters and sensors.

Europe’s first large scale urban trial of a Smart grid system is currently underway in Stockholm, Sweden. Taking place in the new Stockholm Royal Seaport area, the project is a collaboration between Fortum (Sweden), Espoo (Finland) and ABB (Switzerland) and is set to test the concept of a low-emission power network. Stockholm Royal Seaport is designed to become an ecologically sustainable district, providing housing for 10,000 families and 30,000 office spaces and implements the latest technology in eco-friendly transport, waste management and energy use.