DailyTech - IBM Working On Greenhouse Gas Meter

Submit News

IT IBM Working On Greenhouse Gas Meter
Jason Mick (Blog) - December 13, 2007 5:41 PM

E-mail

del.icio.us

21 comment(s) - last by tmouse.. on Dec 14 at 3:54 PM

IBM's new effort should make Al Gore proud

IBM is looking to develop a greenhouse gas meter capable of measuring output by industries and devices. It is working with Enterprise Information Management and Evergreen Energy on the project, which is dubbed GreenCert. The project integrates IBM Websphere tools and applications with a central engine from C-Lock (a subsidiary of Evergreen Energy).

The resulting program uses the varied logistic information it gathers from the Websphere tools to create a snapshot of the company's current usage and calculate an approximate figure for usage.

The program promises financial rewards as companies who use the system can make improvements to their infrastructure and then use the tool to take an "after" picture which will provide companies with proof of their cuts which can be used to obtain carbon credits to be traded on the carbon market.

IBM will release the final version of the software in 2008, but for now it is available for beta test from C-Lock is beta testing it.

As the software seems very vague and abstract, and IBM is keeping much of the details under wraps; it is hard to say how serious IBM is about this project as a business venture. IBM insists that companies will see real financial benefits by utilizing this program, though.

Cutting CO₂ production is the hot item in the science and tech industry today. Grey-matter heavy Oxford University, the U.S. Congress, and now, IBM are among the power players work to develop efforts to help solve this problem.

IBM is constantly coming up with wild products and ideas -- everything from supercomputers, to in-DVD advertisements, and patents for efficient job outsourcing. It also recently came up with a new way to recycle silicon.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Al Gore is already too Proud

By mdogs444 on 12/13/2007 5:50:55 PM , Rating: 4

quote:
IBM's new effort should make Al Gore proud

How about IBM also working on a meter measuring Al Gore's monthly energy & greenhouse gas emmissions and posting that to the public?

That would be a fair measurement of Al Gores "do as i say, not as i do" hypocrisy.

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By SeeManRun on 12/13/2007 6:00:27 PM , Rating: 2

One could say that the message and influence he can exert would be more beneficial to humanity than himself living in a grass hut and eating only organic food. I think his raising the awareness of global warming does more good than his negatives of not car-pooling and flying on jets.

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By Keeir on 12/13/2007 6:59:46 PM , Rating: 3

The problem with the statement is that Al Gore has said the following:

1.) He's long been aware of the dangers of CO2
2.) We should reduce CO2 output
3.) Everyone needs to do something

But in his life, Al Gore doesn't seem to have made the choices that will reduce his CO2 emissions... without compromising his mission.

No one would complaign if Al Gore (and his family) used a reasonable multiplier than the average family... say 2 or 3 times. Instead he uses around 20 times the electricity and 20 times the natural gas. And this does not count in the frequent traveling, etc etc etc. It might not be out of line to say, Al Gore produces 100 times the CO2 emission than I do. It probably is even greater than that... It's pretty galling to hear him say I use too much CO2 and should spend thosands a year to reduce it.

He could take a number of steps, including moving to a smaller more efficient home, upgrading his current home to greener standards, attempting to travel less and use more web cams etc, using all LED lighting, using more efficient electronics (while donating the old ones to schools), etc etc. It just doesn't seem this is occuring. So either he really doesn't care THAT much or he really is just now figuring out CO2 and is not THAT sure

Either way, he comes out a hypocrit, maybe he will get the message and work to reduce his carbon footprint as an example to the rest of us. Once he uses 50% of the CO2 I do, then I will take him seriously that he really believes C02 is bad.

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By TomZ on 12/13/2007 7:42:13 PM , Rating: 2

I agree, and I would add that Gore only started to make energy efficiency upgrades to his home(s) and buy carbon credits* after being "outed" by the media. It was almost as though it hadn't occurred to him before to practice what he preaches.

(* I personally think carbon credits are stupid, but what the heck, it's not my money.)

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By bobbronco on 12/14/2007 12:59:50 AM , Rating: 3

Obviously, you haven't been keeping up with current events.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/G/GORE_TENNES...

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By Ringold on 12/14/07, Rating: 0

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By Keeir on 12/14/2007 2:41:46 PM , Rating: 2

Great! He finally made some changes, but still there is a significant number of personal choices such as having a Commerical Grade Kitchen, Heated Pool, etc that are personal luxuries that many people who he is asking to reduce CO2 emission do not have.

The fact is for decades Al Gore has chosen to live and provide the life of the rich and wasteful.

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By tmouse on 12/14/2007 3:54:01 PM , Rating: 2

Well I guess the Nobel Prize money was useful for something. But seriously here is a guy who has become a poster child for a cause, who quite frankly did not take it seriously enough to reduce his own usage until it was made public. Then he paints himself as some sort of martyr and people excuse him since he is such a good "figure head" for the cause (I cannot say example since he is a poor example of the message). Now he is a hero for doing what he should have done quietly in the first place if he really believed in what he was saying. I will always remember him as the guy who , when being very good about avoiding answering questions with ANY real answer during his presidential bid, was eating ice-cream so the interviewer asked what’s your favorite flavor? He actually stopped to think! (I guess he did not wish to offend any of the other 30+ flavor lovers, he never answered the question.

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By johnsonx on 12/14/2007 11:36:54 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
think his raising the awareness of global warming does more good....

Unless the whole thing is B.S., which it is.

Parent

RE: Al Gore is already too Proud

By Cygni on 12/13/2007 6:01:25 PM , Rating: 2

Wow, what a new and fresh viewpoint on the topic...

Parent

Moving away from fossil fuels

By Gumby16 on 12/13/2007 7:04:32 PM , Rating: 5

I'm not going to repeat the science. It's publicly available for anyone who cares to look. For the sake of argument, let's pretend the planet isn't warming, CO2 isn't an issue, and carbon politics aren't creating an emotional backlash. My question is this:

What is so wrong with changing the way we operate? Why not move to higher efficiency technologies? Why not move away from limited resources like fossil fuels and use other energy sources? Even if you don't "believe" in global warming, moving away from fossil fuel has other very tangible, very economically lucrative possibilities. The fact of the matter is that oil is limited and will disappear. That fact is independent of climate change issues. So let's discuss useful ways to reduce our fossil fuel use and dependency instead of bantering about climate change. If you don't want to understand the science, that's fine. In the end, we'll have to move to a low or no carbon system anyway because of the limited nature of fossil fuels.

This greenhouse gas monitor is way for companies to begin that process of reducing their carbon use and their impact on their surrounding environment. It's something that companies will do anyway as resources become more limited. Why not start now. In the end, it will cost more to change down the road than to slowly implement improvements and changes over time.

RE: Moving away from fossil fuels

By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 7:21:20 PM , Rating: 2

Your second paragraph is worth reading. That's about it.

Parent

RE: Moving away from fossil fuels

By Ringold on 12/13/2007 8:36:58 PM , Rating: 2

The problem is, and environmentalists don't seem to be aware of it, that companies do this routinely. They observe their cost structure, pay economists good money to create internal projections as to where all those costs could be going in the future, and then determin the most profitable plan forward. They try, at least. Do you really think oil companies, for example, aren't aware of the problem? No, they know it, they're exploring like nuts to replace reserves. Most have internal projections, it's said, of $65 / barrel in the long run, and base their operations based on that, though some operate on the assumption of higher long run prices. Apache, for example, if I recall.

Public companies especially have shareholders to report to every 3 months, in detail. Performance is expected, and those who don't perform more often then not end up with family matters to take care of or shaken up due to shareholder activism, such as from people like Carl Icahn. If it were the most efficient use of resources investing in "green" technology, it would be done. In some instances it does happen; you're right, saving energy generally makes sense, doesn't matter where its sourced from. Oil, cow gas, it all costs money.

This.. whatever this monitor is, I suppose, could help spot inefficiency; if a process creates CO2, it probably is eating energy, and.. maybe they hadn't noticed it previously. That's about all I can say about it.

Environmentalists don't have to push or prod business to do things to save money; they've been at this game since long before you or I were born and long before anybody pondered global warming. I therefore always detect either naivety or ulterior motives (such as forced "efficiency" spending) in such arguments.

Parent

CO2

By TomZ on 12/13/2007 6:39:20 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
Cutting CO2 production is the hot item in the science and tech industry today. Grey-matter heavy Oxford University, the U.S. Congress, and now, IBM are among the power players work to develop efforts to help solve this problem.

CO2 is not the problem; a demented perspective about the significance of CO2 is the problem.

RE: CO2

By klstay on 12/14/2007 8:42:47 AM , Rating: 2

FINALLY!

Thank you TomZ for stating what makes this whole discussion a complete non sequitir. IBM has simply looked at the market and decided to cash in on stupidity. (Nothing wrong with that IMHO.)

Suck your thumb, throw a tantrum, and cry about it all you want; the following remain scientific facts:

1. CO2 makes up a paltry proportion of greenhouse gasses.
2. Humans produce a paltry proportion of all CO2.

So, should we a) spend trillions reducing CO2 emissions or b) spend trillions in adapting to climate changes which we CANNOT appreciably impact.

Parent

RE: CO2

By SeeManRun on 12/14/2007 10:58:01 AM , Rating: 2

I think we could wait for God to fix it.

Parent

And the next project....

By retrospooty on 12/13/2007 6:51:32 PM , Rating: 2

Boloney detector! =)

RE: And the next project....

By Orbs on 12/13/2007 6:57:37 PM , Rating: 2

Bologna!

"Learn-ed Pepsi, the word is learned..."

(I know that baloney is an accepted alternate spelling)

Parent

RE: And the next project....

By retrospooty on 12/13/2007 7:02:50 PM , Rating: 2

thats just cuz Oscar Meyer has a way with B-O-L-O-G-N-A. Yup, your right. ;)

Parent

Oh, Come on...

By clovell on 12/13/2007 6:08:02 PM , Rating: 2

Come on, Jason - any chance we might be able to figure out how this thing actually works, or is this just a stub where you could plug the CO2 'problem' without being out-of-context?