Re: Google's PUE

[Andy Grosser <andy () sugar meniscus 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
---