[108417] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Google's PUE
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Grosser)
Thu Oct 2 10:27:02 2008
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 10:26:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andy Grosser <andy@sugar.meniscus.org>
To: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
In-Reply-To: <8EA2777A-90D2-4BAA-9582-AE657342B219@multicasttech.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 18:10:37 -0400
> From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
> To: deepak@ai.net
> Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Google's PUE
>>
>>> I am going to attempt to determine our PUE, using the methodology
>>> described in the Google paper. One must figure that "in the spirit it was
>>> intended" has to factor in the natural gas consumption, otherwise my PUE
>>> would be about 0.1. :)
>>
>> If you generate energy for your microturbine from a land fill (free methane
>> gas) your PUE would be nearly zero. Obviously PUE can be skewed and
>> shouldn't be considered as a single metric for anything other than a press
>> release.
>>
>> I would also suggest that Alex shouldn't hold is breath on more details.
>> The details provided are interesting, but without context.
>
> Indeed. If they would refuse a visit to Cory Doctorow writing for Nature, I
> don't think we should hold our breath at
> all :
>
> http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080903/full/455016a.html
Ack! US$32 for the article. :-)
---
Andy Grosser
andy [at] meniscus {dot} org
---
