You are here: Home » Green corporations » OECD’s three ideas for green ICT and climate change

OECD’s three ideas for green ICT and climate change

Tony Chan | December 17, 2009 | 0 Comments

The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) held a virtual meeting with video conferencing technology on the sidelines of COP15 in Copenhagen on the topic, “The role of ICTs for climate change. Lead role or supporting act?”

Speakers from Denmark, India, Hong Kong (China), France and Japan told part in the meeting. Participants included Jørgen Abild Andersen, Director-General, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, National IT and Telecom Agency, Denmark; Atsushi Taketani, director, Commerce and Information Policy Bureau of Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry; Rahul Tongia, program director, Centre for Study of Science, Technology and Policy from Bangalore, India; Hilda Lam, assistant director from the Hong Kong Observatory; Nathalie Girouard, Green Growth Strategy Co-ordinator, OECD; Graham Vickery, Head of the Information Economy group, OECD.

They came up with three ideas regarding ICT and climate change.

IDEA NUMBER 1

Green ICTs are important in developed countries (Denmark and Japan) and developing countries (India, Hong Kong (China)). ICTs enable the design of climate change policies and measures by providing decision-makers with detailed information in real-time. They make measuring, verification, and reporting easier, including for climate modelling and research (as pointed out by Hilda Lam from the Hong Kong Observatory)

The initial statement is pretty obvious, and while categorising Hong Kong (where I live) as a developing market makes me wonder how the OECD derives its measures, the idea that ICT can play a part in climate change policy is an interesting point. While I’m still a little hesitant to join in the industrywide lobby to include ICT as part of COP15 – after all, ICT is already a part of government policies in terms of procurement and mandating ICT use, albeit for the best of all intentions, still seems a bit self serving to me – the OECD makes a different assertion.

What the OECD alludes to is the fact that ICTs provides tools and methods for governments to gather facts on climate change, hence the critical information for identifying problems and developing solutions.

IDEA NUMBER 2

“We tend to overestimate the short-term impacts of a technology and underestimate its long-term impacts” – this citation is sometimes referred to as “Amara’s law.” Side-event speakers pointed out that it also applies to the benefits and impacts of ICTs on the environment. Measurement of impacts and knowledge dissemination are therefore key aspects of “Green ICT” analysis.

Another obvious statement, but one that can be expanded much further to include adoption rate, and the commercial viability of technologies. While something like Facebook eliminates snail mail and printed photographs, its adoption rate at the hundreds of millions of users certainly adds to the global energy consumption of telecoms networks and data centres. At the same time, if a technology is expensive, such as solar energy today, its adoption may be limited even though its benefits to the environment are plainly evident.

The idea does make a good point – that the ability to measure the impact of different technologies is important, and getting that information out to the public is just as important.

IDEA NUMBER 3

CO2 emissions savings and cost savings resulted from the side-event itself: Rahul Tongia in Bangalore (India) pointed out that he avoided flying to Copenhagen, which would have caused a carbon footprint larger than that of an average Indian’s annual carbon footprint. And the flight ticket that costs more than an average Indian’s yearly income.

The disparity between the developed world and things that we take for granted – like air travel, and the carbon profile of individuals in developing countries certainly needs more exploration.

When it comes to calculating the carbon footprint of products, how can we quantify their true carbon impact when they are manufactured all over the world? Does manufacturing in India actually lower the impact because of the lower carbon profile of its citizens? What about transportation? All these questions need more work and more cooperation amongst international and industry bodies.

Be Sociable, Share!