Suggestions

Hmmmm....

Good discussion point Tom.

How about implementing the following:

• Midnight switch off of all servers through till 9.00am every day
• To reduce cooling costs relocate servers to the roof top of the hosting building and employ orphan monkeys to hold umbrellas over them incase it rains. this could be taken further by training said monkeys to type the complete works of shakespere thus finally ending Borel's questionable quote.
• build the servers inside trees and use the roots of the trees as not only power supply but also a network as I'm pretty sure that tree roots can both emmit and absorb.
• Plumb a tap from the water cooling system of the servers and use it to make tea causing less kettle boiling.

Seriously though, I'm not sure offsetting would be a the way to go. I am also an sceptical about the current theories of climate change

Investing in some kind of reaforestation project that is of a more personal project to Orchard and its customers with updates and even site visits be it in the UK or abroad.

If green issues and carbon offsetting were so important to this country and this planet we wouldn't still be seeing thirsty cars on the roads, we wouldn't be seeing additional runways being built at Heathrow.

Even if those things are true, it make no difference to the intentions of this thread. It's not an excuse to do nothing.

The future is electronic, possibly virtual.  Tom - believe me - you are doing your bit already.  Don't be suckered in by the new stealth carbon omissions scam, as that is what it appears to me to be.

"you are doing your bit already" I don't get it. 

That's like saying "you don't need to do anything because you're a hosting company." Sounds like it would just as easily apply to a web designer, web developer, spammer etc. And possibly extend to anyone who works for thames Water (simply because you're not in the bottled water business), how about a gardening centre, ...

Servers are a good candidate in some respects because in terms of their carbon output when running, it's pretty much down to where your electricity comes from. While I'm glad that this topic in on the boil, there are other hosts out there who already claim to do this. It's a marketing opportunity, it's a good thing to do, it's environmentally sound, it's a logistical problem, it's a potentially a real money maker.

"you are doing your bit already" I don't get it. 

That's like saying "you don't need to do anything because you're a hosting company." Sounds like it would just as easily apply to a web designer, web developer, spammer etc. And possibly extend to anyone who works for thames Water (simply because you're not in the bottled water business), how about a gardening centre, ...

Agreed. This is not about token gestures, it's about doing all you can. It worries me that any still doubt that climate change is occurring, or that they are still fixated on whether or not humans are to blame, instead of whether or not we can change it. Especially given that many ways of improving our behaviour actually save us money by reducing wastage. How can the latter ever be a bad thing?

Tom, the poll is a little confusing - the title says it's a yes/no to carbon neutral hosting, but this thread suggests that some may be voting specifically on carbon offsetting. I voted 'Yes' but agree that directly reducing your own wastage is a far better approach.

That said, it's difficult for a small company to save 2-3 tonnes year on year - which is where paying someone else to make cuts in their emissions/wastage starts to make sense, as long as you can be sure that they are actually doing so. Being sure of that is the only catch, especially if due diligence is replaced by weak-kneed legislation (and/or 'Green Taxes' - which only become more likely the more people try to avoid reducing wastage themselves).

Was there any outcome?

I noticed that http://www.telehouse.net/about-telehouse/ makes no reference to any 'green' colocation offering. Rackspace only reffers to http://www.rackspace.co.uk/managed-hosting/hosting-solutions/managed-hosting/green-hosting/ an 'offsetting' package too. I believe rackspace have their own datacentre, so they for one would be able to buy all their juice from a non-fossil fuel electricty provider, but again I guess it's all or nothing, (or all or off-setting).

There's no outcome as yet, we're going to wait for a bit, discuss the options, and then post on this forum, it's a hard decision that's not going to please everyone!

You are entitled to doubt of course, but a few people trying to disprove the conclusions of decades of independent study means nothing until they can convince the scientific community that their science is valid. It's just part of the normal scientific process, hyped up in this case by wealthy vested interests. The UEA 'Climategate' is an emotive piece of squabbling notable only for its timing - a few poorly-worded emails highlighted now to allow politicians to fudge things in Copenhagen. It has no relevance to the data gathered at all, since other large collections show the same trends. Finally, whatever the cause of current climate change, it's still a problem we have to face, and few doubt that we've created some of it, which means a change in our ways can mitigate the worst effects. Those effects will make the global banking meltdown look like a hiccough, so I'm voting a definite yes to carbon neutral/negative hosting, though I'll agree with you and others that carbon trading may not be a reliable way to achieve that.

Tom, carbon trading is certainly a quick way to show willing, and bravo for asking for feedback on this. Perhaps you could commit to this now, with transparency in your use of trading, and a further commitment to find more absolute ways to cut carbon footprint as they become feasible? Transparency would at least encourage your competitors to disclose what their 'carbon neutral' claims really mean.

I strongly agree. I think that considering your CO2 emissions is a praiseworthy thing.  Exactly how you go about reducing them in a real way is more difficult to say.  I would say however that doing nothing is certainly not the right stance to take.

John

Would like to echo what many have already said - it's brilliant that Orchard are raising this issue. Well in Tom.

I have to say, I think switching to renewable energy is by far the best alternative, but it is a sticky issue when you're talking about a huge datacentre with many other clients. Unlike Orchard's those clients have no community for collectively raising issues such as this or trying to influence management.

Are there datacentres already using 100% renewables? How much more expensive are they? Can the concept of offsetting be totally discounted - or if we cannot agree en masse, should each customer have the option to add it to their subscription?

By the way, I don't believe we shouldn't let a very small doubt over the anthropogenic nature of climate change distract us from following the Precautionary Principal. On balance of probability even if it turns out not to be man-made, it's still worth acting based on the information and scientific consensus we have today.

Great topic Tom

If it were possible to offer us the choice then I would definitely pay extra to have my accounts transferred to a server being powered by green energy.

I'm not as convinced by the offsetting idea but would definitely give it consideration as a stepping stone to genuinely clean hosting.

I completely agree with chrischarlton on keeping to the precautionary principle.

Hi Tom,
Should mention some points that mainstream media won't, following a phone-in with the PM that I joined on Wednesday:

• Gordon Brown is currently at the biggest meeting in human history and said that it is essential that the public register their support for action on climate change. 1/500th of the world population has already signed the most urgent petition, at http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_copenhagen/ - but we need more. As you clearly care, please sign if you haven't already.
• The PM also said that individuals and companies should get moving now, and not wait for the politicians. There is widespread support for the 10-10 campaign http://www.1010uk.org/ - Microsoft, Sony, the Welsh Assembly and many other huge public and private bodies have made this commitment, so if you're looking for a first step, that should be it.

...and mainstream media are being roundly criticised for creating doubt where there is none, just because controversy sells papers.

(Sorry, you have at least one 'informed tree-hugger activist' among your clients...)