The life cycle assessment of a UK data centre

BUILDING COMPONENTS AND BUILDINGS

Abstract

Purpose

Data centres are high-energy consumers, and historical assessment of their environmental impact has focused largely on energy consumption. Widely adopted assessment methods consider either single issues or do not comprehensively assess links between issues. One exception is the CLEER Model, which compares life cycle energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of Cloud-based and present-day services. However, there remains the need to verify components for inclusion in a data centre life cycle assessment (LCA), assess quality and quantity of secondary data, benchmark an existing data centre LCA, assess non-Cloud-based services for multiple impacts, and establish facility areas that are sensitive to change.

Methods

A hybrid approach, combining process-based and economic input output (EIO) data, was used to perform the screening LCA of an existing UK data centre. The study includes the definition of the goal and scope, modelling assumptions, a life cycle inventory, results and interpretation and a sensitivity check.

Results and discussion

The dominance of the information technology (IT) operational phase to the overall impact and the severity of the impact on human health are concluded. Due to the use of free cooling, the IT-embodied impact is greater than the combined mechanical and electrical operational impact. Electricity production dominates the total life cycle impact; however, the second most significant impact derives from the disposal of metal refining waste products during the manufacture of IT components and electricity distribution networks. The release of carcinogens is one of the largest contributors to the whole life cycle impact and is almost equal in value between the embodied and operational phases. Finally, a sensitivity check found that a Swedish facility optimised for operational energy efficiency with a 1.25-year server refresh resulted in an embodied impact almost double the operational.

Conclusions

It was concluded that current LCI data, software packages and project data allow for a sufficiently accurate data centre LCA model. The results support the need to broaden environmental impact reduction to beyond operational energy consumption for cooling and that building environmental assessment methods (BEAMs) should consider more embodied impacts. It is concluded also that three parameters are sensitive to design changes that influence the overall impact: operational energy for the IT equipment, cooling and power delivery; the energy mix; and the amount of IT equipment across the facility’s lifetime. The results present a clear need to monitor life cycle impact, develop further tools to compare different design/operation options and functional units, improve data and develop an LCA-based BEAM.

Keywords

Case study Data centres Hybrid LCA LCA results and sensitivity Life cycle assessment (LCA) Screening LCA 

Supplementary material

11367_2014_838_MOESM1_ESM.docx (222 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 222 kb)
11367_2014_838_MOESM2_ESM.docx (53 kb)
ESM 2(DOCX 53 kb)
11367_2014_838_MOESM3_ESM.docx (110 kb)
ESM 3(DOCX 109 kb)
11367_2014_838_MOESM4_ESM.docx (47 kb)
ESM 4(DOCX 47 kb)

References

  1. Angrill S, Farreny R, Gasol C et al (2012) Environmental analysis of rainwater harvesting infrastructure in diffuse and compact urban models of Mediterranean climate. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(1):25–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barroso LA, Hölzle U (2009) The data centre as a computer: an introduction to the design of warehouse-scale machines. doi:10.2200/s00193ed1v01y200905cac006
  3. Baumann H, Tillman A-M (2009) The hitch hiker’s guide to LCA. Studentlitteratur AB, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  4. Bribian IZ, Capilla AV, Uson AA (2011) Life cycle assessment of building materials: comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Build Environ 46(5):1133–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. BSI (1964) BS 648:1964 schedule of weights of building materials. BSI, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. BSI (2011) BS EN 15978:2011 sustainability of construction works—assessment of environmental performance of buildings—calculation method. BSI, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Chang J, Meza J, Ranganathan P, Shah A, Shih R, Bash C (2012) Totally green: evaluating and designing servers for lifecycle environmental impact. In: Proceedings of ASPLOS’12, the Seventeenth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, New York, USA, 3–7 March 2012. doi:10.1145/2150976.2150980
  8. Chang Y, Ries RJ, Lei S (2012b) The embodied energy and emissions of high-rise education building: a quantification using process-based hybrid life cycle inventory model. Energy Build 55:790–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CIBSE (2008) Guide M: maintenance engineering and management (CIBSE guide M). CIBSE, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Dones R, Bauer C, Bolliger R, Burger B, Heck T, Roder A, Emmenegger MF, Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Tuchschmid M (2007) Life cycle inventories of energy systems: results for current systems in Switzerland and other UCTE countries. Data v2.0(2007). Ecoinvent report no. 5. http://www.ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/Life-cycle-analysis-PSI-05.pdf. Accessed 26 June 2013
  11. Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N (eds) (2007) Overview and methodology. Data v2.0 (2007). Ecoinvent report no. 1. http://www.ecoinvent.org/fileadmin/documents/en/01_OverviewAndMethodology.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013
  12. Frischknecht R, Althaus H-J, Bauer C, Doka G, Heck T, Jungbluth N, Kellenberger D, Nemecek T (2007) The environmental relevance of capital goods in life cycle assessments of products and services. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(Special Issue 1):7–17Google Scholar
  13. Fujitsu (2010) Life cycle assessment and product carbon footprint. Primergy TX 300S5 and PRIMERGY RX 300 S5 Server. White paper. http://fujitsu.fleishmaneurope.de/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/LCA_PCF-Whitepaper-PRIMERGY-TX-RX-300-S5.pdf. Accessed 1 Feb 2012
  14. Hischier R, Weidema B (eds) (2010) Implementation of life cycle impact assessment methods. Data v2.2. Ecoinvent report no. 3. http://www.ecoinvent.org/fileadmin/documents/en/03_LCIA-Implementation-v2.2.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013
  15. Intel (2009) The problem of power consumption in servers, InfoQ. http://www.infoq.com/articles/power-consumption-servers. Accessed 2 June 2012
  16. ISO (2006) BS EN ISO 14044:2006 environmental management. Life cycle assessment. Principles and frameworks. BSI, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. ISO (2008) BS ISO 15686–5:2008 buildings & constructed assets—service life planning—part 5: life cycle costing. BSI, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Koomey JG (2007) Estimating total power consumption by servers in the US and the world. http://sites.amd.com/us/Documents/svrpwrusecompletefinal.pdf. Accessed 8 Oct 2010
  19. Koomey JG (2011) Growth in data center electricity use 2005 to 2010. http://www.analyticspress.com/datacenters.html. Accessed 1 Feb 2012
  20. Langdon D (2011) Spon’s mechanical and electrical services price book 2011. Spon Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. LBNL (2014) CLEER model—Cloud energy and emissions research model. Public use model. http://cleermodel.lbl.gov/. Accessed 17 Nov 2014
  22. Lettieri DJ, Shah AJ, Carey VP (2009) Exergy-based environmental design of a computer room air conditioning unit. ASME, Lake Buena Vista. doi:10.1115/IMECE2009-11461 Google Scholar
  23. Nicholson AL, Olivetti EA, Gregory JR et al (2009) End-of-life LCA allocation methods: open loop recycling impacts on robustness of material selection decisions. ISSST, Phoenix. doi:10.1109/ISSST.2009.5156769 Google Scholar
  24. Norris GA (2006) Social impacts in product life cycles. Towards life cycle attribute assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(Special Issue 1):97–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prek M (2004) Environmental impact and life cycle assessment of heating and air conditioning systems, a simplified case study. Energy Build 36(10):1021–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ramakrishnan N, Marwah M, Shah A, Patnaik D, Hossain MS, Sundaravaradan N, Patel C (2012) Data mining solutions for sustainability problems. IEEE Potentials 31(6):28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sára B, Scimìa E, Cappellaro F, Maccallini V, Masoni P (2006) Life cycle assessment of an innovative uninterruptible power supply system to investigate on environmental performance. Care Innovation, Vienna, Austria. http://www.ecosmes.net/pneumaprj/web/jsp/utils/docsView.jsp?d=30&l=EN. Accessed 29 March 2011
  28. Schmidt M, Hottenroth H, Schottler M, Fetzer G, Schlüter B (2011) Life cycle assessment of silicon wafer processing for microelectronic chips and solar cells. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(2):126–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shah A, Lugo W, Patel C (2009) Thermodynamics-based object-oriented environmental design of an industrial air conditioner. ASME, San Francisco. doi:10.1115/HT2009-88105 Google Scholar
  30. Shah A, Chen Y, Bash CE (2012) Sources of variability in data center lifecycle assessment. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology (ISSST), Boston. doi:10.1109/ISSST.2012.6227975
  31. Skaar C, Jørgensen RB (2013) Integrating human health impact from indoor emissions into an LCA: case study evaluating the significance of the use stage. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):636–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Song Q, Wang Z, Li J, Yuan W (2012) Life cycle assessment of desktop PCs in Macau. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(13):553–566Google Scholar
  33. The Green Grid (2012) Data centre life cycle assessment guidelines. White Paper #45, v2. http://www.thegreengrid.org/library-and-tools.aspx. Accessed 20 Nov 2012
  34. The Green Grid (2013) Electronics disposal efficiency (EDE): an IT recycling metric for enterprises and data centers. White Paper #53. http://www.thegreengrid.org/library-and-tools.aspx. Accessed 7 Mar 2013
  35. Uddin M, Rahman AA (2012) Energy efficiency and low carbon enabler green IT framework for data centers considering green metrics. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(6):4078–4094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. US Department of Labor Bureau of Statistics (2012) Consumer price index. All urban consumers. US city average. All items. ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt. Accessed 2 Feb 2012
  37. US Census Bureau (2011a) The 2012 statistical abstract: historical data. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/hist_stats.html. Accessed 2 Feb 2012
  38. US Census Bureau (2011b) No. HS-36. Consumer and gross domestic price indexes: 1913 to 2002. http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-36.pdf. Accessed 2 Feb 2012
  39. VROM—Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (2000) Eco-indicator 99 manual for designers. http://www.pre-sustainability.com/content/reports. Accessed 19 Mar 2013
  40. Weidema BP, Wesnaes MS (1996) Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators. J Clean Prod 4(3–4):167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Whitehead B, Andrews D, Shah A, Maidment G (2014a) Assessing the environmental impact of data centres part 1: background, energy use and metrics. Build Environ 82:151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Whitehead et al (2014b) Assessing the environmental impact of data centres part 2: building environmental assessment methods and life cycle assessment. Build Environ. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.08.015 Google Scholar
  43. WRAP (2010) CON900-001: construction, demolition and excavation waste arisings, use and disposal for England 2008. http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/CDEW_arisings_use_and_disposal_for_England_2008.1e8085ab.9526.pdf. Accessed 3 Jan 2012

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering Science and the Built Environment, LSBULondonUK
  2. 2.Operational IntelligenceKingston upon ThamesUK
  3. 3.HP LaboratoriesPalo AltoUSA

Personalised recommendations