Comments on: Head to head challenge: Nortel targets Cisco “energy tax” http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%25e2%2580%259cenergy-tax%25e2%2580%259d sustainable telecoms news and analysis Tue, 08 May 2012 00:30:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Nortel steps up ‘Cisco Energy Tax’ campaign with cash discounts : http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Nortel steps up ‘Cisco Energy Tax’ campaign with cash discounts : Thu, 07 Aug 2008 08:49:04 +0000 http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/#comment-36 [...] Green Telecom reported earlier, Nortel recently coined the term, ‘Cisco Energy Tax’ after a test it commissioned, and carried [...] [...] Green Telecom reported earlier, Nortel recently coined the term, ‘Cisco Energy Tax’ after a test it commissioned, and carried [...]

]]> By: Tony Chan http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-35 Tony Chan Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:33:45 +0000 http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/#comment-35 Thanks Bo.. I look forward to hearing more about Nortel's success in this area.. BTW.. Nortel will be participating in our Melbourne Congress (30 sept - 1 oct), which will feature a day covering green telecoms practices. Eric Lauzon, Nortel's CTO for Asia has signed on as a speaker. Thanks Bo.. I look forward to hearing more about Nortel’s success in this area..

BTW.. Nortel will be participating in our Melbourne Congress (30 sept – 1 oct), which will feature a day covering green telecoms practices. Eric Lauzon, Nortel’s CTO for Asia has signed on as a speaker.

]]> By: Bo Gowan http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-34 Bo Gowan Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:27:03 +0000 http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/#comment-34 Hey Tony, agreed that right now the various conflicting claims and figures make for a confusing mess for businesses trying to make sense of it. Since that's exactly the environment where analyst firms can help the most, I would expect to see a rush of information and studies from analyst firms as they attempt to help their customers weed through the claims. That should help bridge the gap until a more industry-standard measure of energy efficiency is agreed on. Hey Tony, agreed that right now the various conflicting claims and figures make for a confusing mess for businesses trying to make sense of it. Since that’s exactly the environment where analyst firms can help the most, I would expect to see a rush of information and studies from analyst firms as they attempt to help their customers weed through the claims. That should help bridge the gap until a more industry-standard measure of energy efficiency is agreed on.

]]> By: Tony Chan http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-33 Tony Chan Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:47:49 +0000 http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/#comment-33 Hi Bo, thanks for your feedback and yes.. I did realise that the whole debate was dated a month or two ago but thought it was worth a summary. Regarding the energy efficiency of network equipment, I hesitate to take sides as I'm not an engineer and not an expert in power systems, and have not used the equipment first hand. As a journalist, I feel I should tell both sides of the story - I hope that I represented Nortel's side correctly and fairly. At the same time, I do feel very strongly that standards are lacking, especially when it comes to issues like energy efficiency, emissions reporting and so on. There seems to be so many claims out there without any kind of context. Take a completely arbitrary example - a company claims that it'll reduce emissions by 50% by year 2012. Reducing carbon levels is a completely understandable subject, but does that 50% figure related to anything. If it is overall emissions, then what will be the revenue in 2012? A company can probably reduce their emissions by 50% by simple shutting down half of its operations. If that is not the case, and the company does plan to continue to grow, how does that 50% translate? I'd like to see any company reduce their emissions by 50% when their revenue doubles? Can any company reliably project their growth out four years? At the same time, if the figure means emissions per Mbps of traffic, then 50% doesn't sound like much as equipment advances (i.e. 2G to 3G to LTE) and the corresponding efficiencies gained will easily surpass 50%. Getting back to the topic of network equipment: I am totally in support of Nortel's efforts in driving energy efficiency across the network, and that Cisco (and the rest of the industry) will feel the pressure to do more of the same. Hi Bo, thanks for your feedback and yes.. I did realise that the whole debate was dated a month or two ago but thought it was worth a summary.

Regarding the energy efficiency of network equipment, I hesitate to take sides as I’m not an engineer and not an expert in power systems, and have not used the equipment first hand. As a journalist, I feel I should tell both sides of the story – I hope that I represented Nortel’s side correctly and fairly.

At the same time, I do feel very strongly that standards are lacking, especially when it comes to issues like energy efficiency, emissions reporting and so on.

There seems to be so many claims out there without any kind of context. Take a completely arbitrary example – a company claims that it’ll reduce emissions by 50% by year 2012. Reducing carbon levels is a completely understandable subject, but does that 50% figure related to anything. If it is overall emissions, then what will be the revenue in 2012? A company can probably reduce their emissions by 50% by simple shutting down half of its operations. If that is not the case, and the company does plan to continue to grow, how does that 50% translate? I’d like to see any company reduce their emissions by 50% when their revenue doubles? Can any company reliably project their growth out four years?

At the same time, if the figure means emissions per Mbps of traffic, then 50% doesn’t sound like much as equipment advances (i.e. 2G to 3G to LTE) and the corresponding efficiencies gained will easily surpass 50%.

Getting back to the topic of network equipment: I am totally in support of Nortel’s efforts in driving energy efficiency across the network, and that Cisco (and the rest of the industry) will feel the pressure to do more of the same.

]]> By: Bo Gowan http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Bo Gowan Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:27:30 +0000 http://www.greentelecomlive.com/2008/07/23/head-to-head-challenge-nortel-targets-cisco-%e2%80%9cenergy-tax%e2%80%9d/#comment-32 Hey Tony - most of the debate you outline happened a month or two ago. Since then, Nortel has created a more full-featured online version of our energy efficiency calculator, which you can see here: http://www33.nortel.com/energycalculator/ As we review the Nortel Energy Efficiency Calculator with leading network analysts, we get clear confirmation that Cisco draws more energy for core and edge switches and IP phones. The web based calculator from Nortel is a 1st step engagement process to help people begin getting the facts. We can work with customers to create a very granular model to be built for not only of Nortel to Cisco comparisons, but "any to any" energy modeling scenarios using standard energy measurement formulas, current global kWh rates and CO2 measures. As far as Cisco's call for standards is concerned -- while that is a nice end goal, Cisco is using it as a stall tactic. We have tested in our own labs (and with 3rd parties) switches under various load, in idle mode and under full POE. Nortel continues innovating energy consumption and HVAC analysis across the strands of IT and we are not committing ourselves to mere approximations. Instead of countering with their own detailed test results (or those of independent tests), Cisco insists only an industry standard will do. That standard could be years away...is it any wonder why Cisco's taking this position? Hey Tony – most of the debate you outline happened a month or two ago. Since then, Nortel has created a more full-featured online version of our energy efficiency calculator, which you can see here: http://www33.nortel.com/energycalculator/

As we review the Nortel Energy Efficiency Calculator with leading network analysts, we get clear confirmation that Cisco draws more energy for core and edge switches and IP phones. The web based calculator from Nortel is a 1st step engagement process to help people begin getting the facts.

We can work with customers to create a very granular model to be built for not only of Nortel to Cisco comparisons, but “any to any” energy modeling scenarios using standard energy measurement formulas, current global kWh rates and CO2 measures.

As far as Cisco’s call for standards is concerned — while that is a nice end goal, Cisco is using it as a stall tactic.

We have tested in our own labs (and with 3rd parties) switches under various load, in idle mode and under full POE. Nortel continues innovating energy consumption and HVAC analysis across the strands of IT and we are not committing ourselves to mere approximations.

Instead of countering with their own detailed test results (or those of independent tests), Cisco insists only an industry standard will do. That standard could be years away…is it any wonder why Cisco’s taking this position?

]]>