Vivian Reading and the low carbon ICT team at DG Infosoc: A 21st century climate hero

I don’t think that many expected Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for Information Society and Media, to become one of the leading global voices for innovative climate solutions two years ago. A little more than a year ago during the European Business Summit was the first time that I heard her publicly made it very clear that she saw ICT as an important part of the climate solution. Now during the ICT4EE: High Level Event on ICT for Energy Efficiency she delivered a speech that was really encouraging in terms of scope and focus.

It was a fascinating feeling to see the big ICT4EE banner at Charlemagne. A year ago the focus in the commission was still ICT as a ”problem” (The emissions from ICT) and the work related to the solutions that smart ICT solutions can provide was very marginal. In less than two years this has changed and Redding moved to the forefront, not only in EU but globally when it comes to an innovation based solutions agenda.

The language on the page for ICT4EE is happy reading of anyone that believe in a innovation and solution agenda.

”The Commission has recognized that ICTs and ICT-based innovations may provide one of the potentially most cost-effective means to achieve the 2020 targets. We aim at creating a policy framework that will allow the energy-saving potential of ICTs to be widely recognized and exploited.”

Let’s hope that Vivian and her team will deliver recommendations that will ensure that the words and visions that turn into concrete action.

Below are my bullet point recommendations for the commissions that I presented in my keynote during the ICT4EE event:

1. Clear responsibility
- Important to be able to track and measure what is happening and without clear responsibility (that include targets) ICT for energy efficiency will only be an idea.

2. Separate the 2% from the 98% even more
- Ensure focus and right tools. It is hard to support innovation and large parts of the ICT industry still not get it (during the initial keynote presentation it was sad to hear a business representative talk about smaller boxes for mobile phones and energy efficient base stations. Not only did it sound like a sale pitch it also showed that he did not understand what the focus now is. Business needs to ensure that they bring the representatives that understand the issue, and they exist in all companies so it should not be a problem. I can also recommend the joint WWF-Gartner assessment as guide to ensure that leading companies are given space)

3. Frame the recommendation within the concepts of “low- and high carbon feedback” or “20th century and 21st century infrastructure”
- Look beyond the direct reductions and ensure the right direction. ICT can help accelerate reduction by triggering further investments in smart solutions that help reduce emissions further. Too much money is invested in infrastructure that is not really delivering anything else but a lock-in into a 20th century resource intensive society that block innovation.

4. Track support and subsidies
- No need for subsidies, but urgent need for technology neutral solutions. Few low carbon ICT solutions need any subsidies, but they need rules that are technology neutral and sometime get transition support as we move from a 20th century infrastructure (with built in subsidies /support for old energy intensive solutions) to a 21st century smart infrastructure (with built in subsidies/support for energy efficient solutions). Support for smart grid solutions that encourage increased decentralised energy production and buildings that are net producers of energy is one example of an important measure. To encourage transparency it would be good with a tool that can track support and subsidies in 20th or 21st century infrastructure.

5. Include targets and special support for solutions that reduce CO2 emissions with 90% or more/ are 100 times better or more
- The more I think about it the more important I think that this policy is. I see so many initiatives (and organisations) that ignore innovation and solutions that really can make a difference as they focus on incremental improvements in existing systems. Very seldom are the really sustainable solutions discussed and there are many reasons for that (difficult to calculate the CO2 savings when significant shifts happens, limits in current economic models, political structures mirrors existing old business structures not tomorrows businesses, etc). In order to allow these solutions space to develop and understand the needs better targets and support is needed.

6. Shift from product to service
- All major policies and public procurement (EU first to require meeting agencies?) The commission and the member states must change their thinking from products to services both in policy development (include ICT solutions in infrastructure planning) and in key instruments (use public procurement to put pressure).

7. A Global perspective
- Solutions should be developed that can be used around the world, especially emerging markets like China and India. The solutions should also be developed together with other governments and companies outside EU. Targets for export and import are needed as well as targets for employment (not just in one country or region, but globally), but even more important is target for productivity.

It is obviously time to take the next step in the WWF-ETNO project "Saving the climate @ the speed of light"... Now we need implementation @ the speed of light, and we need more companies and stakeholders onboard....

Vivian Reading and the low carbon ICT team at DG Infosoc: A 21st century climate hero

I don’t think that many expected Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for Information Society and Media, to become one of the leading global voices for innovative climate solutions two years ago. A little more than a year ago during the European Business Summit was the first time that I heard her publicly made it very clear that she saw ICT as an important part of the climate solution. Now during the ICT4EE: High Level Event on ICT for Energy Efficiency she delivered a speech that was really encouraging in terms of scope and focus.

It was a fascinating feeling to see the big ICT4EE banner at Charlemagne. A year ago the focus in the commission was still ICT as a ”problem” (The emissions from ICT) and the work related to the solutions that smart ICT solutions can provide was very marginal. In less than two years this has changed and Redding moved to the forefront, not only in EU but globally when it comes to an innovation based solutions agenda.

The language on the page for ICT4EE is happy reading of anyone that believe in a innovation and solution agenda.

”The Commission has recognized that ICTs and ICT-based innovations may provide one of the potentially most cost-effective means to achieve the 2020 targets. We aim at creating a policy framework that will allow the energy-saving potential of ICTs to be widely recognized and exploited.”

Let’s hope that Vivian and her team will deliver recommendations that will ensure that the words and visions that turn into concrete action.

Below are my bullet point recommendations for the commissions that I presented in my keynote during the ICT4EE event:

1. Clear responsibility
- Important to be able to track and measure what is happening and without clear responsibility (that include targets) ICT for energy efficiency will only be an idea.

2. Separate the 2% from the 98% even more
- Ensure focus and right tools. It is hard to support innovation and large parts of the ICT industry still not get it (during the initial keynote presentation it was sad to hear a business representative talk about smaller boxes for mobile phones and energy efficient base stations. Not only did it sound like a sale pitch it also showed that he did not understand what the focus now is. Business needs to ensure that they bring the representatives that understand the issue, and they exist in all companies so it should not be a problem. I can also recommend the joint WWF-Gartner assessment as guide to ensure that leading companies are given space)

3. Frame the recommendation within the concepts of “low- and high carbon feedback” or “20th century and 21st century infrastructure”
- Look beyond the direct reductions and ensure the right direction. ICT can help accelerate reduction by triggering further investments in smart solutions that help reduce emissions further. Too much money is invested in infrastructure that is not really delivering anything else but a lock-in into a 20th century resource intensive society that block innovation.

4. Track support and subsidies
- No need for subsidies, but urgent need for technology neutral solutions. Few low carbon ICT solutions need any subsidies, but they need rules that are technology neutral and sometime get transition support as we move from a 20th century infrastructure (with built in subsidies /support for old energy intensive solutions) to a 21st century smart infrastructure (with built in subsidies/support for energy efficient solutions). Support for smart grid solutions that encourage increased decentralised energy production and buildings that are net producers of energy is one example of an important measure. To encourage transparency it would be good with a tool that can track support and subsidies in 20th or 21st century infrastructure.

5. Include targets and special support for solutions that reduce CO2 emissions with 90% or more/ are 100 times better or more
- The more I think about it the more important I think that this policy is. I see so many initiatives (and organisations) that ignore innovation and solutions that really can make a difference as they focus on incremental improvements in existing systems. Very seldom are the really sustainable solutions discussed and there are many reasons for that (difficult to calculate the CO2 savings when significant shifts happens, limits in current economic models, political structures mirrors existing old business structures not tomorrows businesses, etc). In order to allow these solutions space to develop and understand the needs better targets and support is needed.

6. Shift from product to service
- All major policies and public procurement (EU first to require meeting agencies?) The commission and the member states must change their thinking from products to services both in policy development (include ICT solutions in infrastructure planning) and in key instruments (use public procurement to put pressure).

7. A Global perspective
- Solutions should be developed that can be used around the world, especially emerging markets like China and India. The solutions should also be developed together with other governments and companies outside EU. Targets for export and import are needed as well as targets for employment (not just in one country or region, but globally), but even more important is target for productivity.

It is obviously time to take the next step in the WWF-ETNO project "Saving the climate @ the speed of light"... Now we need implementation @ the speed of light, and we need more companies and stakeholders onboard....

The commission launch a Low carbon IT communication

The communication from the commission “on mobilising Information and Communication Technologies to facilitate the transition to an energy-efficient, low-carbon economy” is one of the most sophisticated low carbon documents that I have seen from the commission, ever. It is really a significant step towards a serious strategy that can deliver more than incremental improvements. Obviously it has a number of shortcomings, but after all the internal compromises that these documents must go through it feels like a reasonable coherent document with a lot of potential.

Obviously the thing that really matters is the recommendation due in the second half of 2009 that ”will set out tasks, targets and timelines, for industry stakeholders and Member States to accelerate progress towards these ends.”

It is worth noting that compared to many other ICT strategies, including almost all member states, this sets a new standard with sucha clear focus on the 98% and the role of ICT as an enabler. Congratulation to those involved.

Taking a step back and look at the development I can’t help but note that this is very far from the reactions I got when I published the book ”Saving the planet at the speed of light” almost 10 years ago. Even when Katalin Szomolanyi and I wrote the roadmap for EU in 2006 ”Saving the climate at the speed of light” in the joint WWF-ETNO project the reaction and support from the commission was quite vague. Now it finally looks as if things could take off.

There is a lot to like in this. Below the key parts [The full PDF can be downloaded here]

1. Three clear stands of work moving forward
FIRST “The ICT sectors own footprint”: not the most important, but must dealt with so good to include (and not spend a lot of time on).

SECOND “working partnerships between the ICT sector and other major energy-using
Sectors”: Here it would be good to develop a list with priority areas. It is especially important to ensure that a service perspective is guiding the actions and not a focus on existing sectors. While ICT can play a significant role in relation to transport and buildings, it is not just the car industry and the building industry where collaboration is needed. Flexiwork/telewok can help reduce Co2 emissions from both the transport and building industry, but these sectors will not drive this development. Especially the car industry is important to challenge, as they so far have been reluctant to move from a product to a service perspective.

THIRD “Member States should be called upon to enable the EU-wide roll-out of ICT tools
likely to trigger a shift in the behaviour of consumers, businesses and communities and at
the same time drive demand for innovative ICT solutions to optimise the energy
performance of their own operations.” This is probably the most interesting area and it is here we could see groundbreaking initiatives in m-government, m-health, m-education, m-business, etc. This would be especially interesting if we see new tools beyond current sectors that encourage a high quality resource efficient lifestyle and support new start-up companies that provide these kinds of innovative solutions.

A good division and it is important to keep them apart. The second and third will be a challenge, but I’m sure all of us working with this are willing to support if there is an opportunity.

2. Clear focus on buildings and transport (two areas where ICT can make a real difference)
There is a tendency in the communication to look at the incremental improvements (where a building can be more efficient and where logistics can be improved). These are important, but it is important to move beyond current sectors. If not we will only see a few smart meters and some logistic initiatives. These kinds of solutions can actually result in increased emissions over time as they don’t help us move beyond our current inefficient infrastructure.

3. A challenge to the ICT industry to develop methodologies that can measure the benefits.
It is just to agree with the commission:
”In the absence of a means by which consumers, whether individuals, businesses or public
administrations, can verify and compare potential energy-saving strategies offered by ICTs
and their cost effectiveness, the threat that so-called greenwashing will take market share
from solutions that offer legitimate benefits is very real.”

This is a real challenge to those companies that are really serious. But also for the initiatives/projects that are developing reporting standards. In both cases the support for a scientific methodology that can calculate the positive contributions from ICT have been less positive than it should… Hopefully this will change.

4. “Urban planning strategies incorporating end 2010 energy efficiency and carbon emissions”
This could become one of the most important part for EU, but only if a global and transformative perspective (that look beyond incremental improvements) can be included and where solutions are encouraged that can be exported/used in other parts of the world (especially the emerging markets).

5. Software innovations
I’m very happy to see that the commission includes a discussion about software companies writing that “There are roughly half a million software businesses in the EU. Typically employing 3 to 7 persons, these businesses have one of the highest levels of productivity and profitability of all sectors of the economy”. I have suggested an annual competition where ”code of the year” was given a prize. I think there is a huge untapped potential in software companies and look forward to more concrete initiatives in this area.

+++
A few things could improve below is a list of areas that I hope we will see in the recommendations, most of these already exist in the communication but needs to be clarified. Especially in order to ensure that this process end up in the same innovation hostile straightjacket that so often seem to be the end result in well intended processes in Europe. Some of these have been developed in more details earlier, see for example the following document that I wrote for WWF together with Ewa Thorslund from the association of Swedish IT companies for the Swedish government:

1. Clear responsibility
Too often new initiatives fall flat, as they don’t fit in existing structures. Many countries have conducted studies and looked into the potential of ICT as an enabler. Then when it comes to implementation nothing (or very very little) happens. The commission must not make this mistake.

2. Separate the 2% from the 98% even more
The distinction between Green IT/2%/IT’s own emissions and Greening with IT/98%/IT’s ability to help reduce the emissions in society is still not clear enough and
the enabling capacity of ICT is not dealt with in a systematic way. The focus on transport and buildings is good, but a strategy must go further to ensure that the really innovative solutions are allowed to get support. It is not a significant problem for this communication, but for a strategy it is very important to separate the two so that no confusion can emerge regarding targets and resources.

3. Frame the recommendation within the concepts of “low- and high carbon feedback” or “20th century and 21st century infrastructure”
One of the major challenges with ICT is that it can deliver significant short-term reductions that can lock us in a high carbon infrastructure unless the feedback from the investments results in further reductions. Logistic improvements can make single vehicles a lot more efficient, but the result is often that the total amount of vehicles increases. Increased flexiwork can result in dramatic reduction of commuting and office space, but can also result in more flying.

Even more interesting is that many ICT investments can trigger further reductions, but this will only happen if a supporting framework exists. Keep your eyes open as a new report will come next week that describe this in detail for virtual meeting and teleworking. It will be posted here as soon as it is public.

4. Global perspective
The commission focus is obviously EU, but the need for smart solutions is global, and the need to ensure economy of scale and accelerated reductions of CO2 emissions require us to think global and to develop global strategies. Many of the leading ICT companies also work global

5. Trade/innovation perspective
I would like to see a chapter that include a concrete strategy to encourage trade (export and import of low carbon ICT solutions)

Let’s hope that communication can translate into concrete action.

PS
I hope that Sweden can move to the forefront in this area and support this work during the presidency and the climate meeting in Copenhagen where IT and other solution sectors could be supported to move to the front of the discussion.

The commission launch a Low carbon IT communication

The communication from the commission “on mobilising Information and Communication Technologies to facilitate the transition to an energy-efficient, low-carbon economy” is one of the most sophisticated low carbon documents that I have seen from the commission, ever. It is really a significant step towards a serious strategy that can deliver more than incremental improvements. Obviously it has a number of shortcomings, but after all the internal compromises that these documents must go through it feels like a reasonable coherent document with a lot of potential.

Obviously the thing that really matters is the recommendation due in the second half of 2009 that ”will set out tasks, targets and timelines, for industry stakeholders and Member States to accelerate progress towards these ends.”

It is worth noting that compared to many other ICT strategies, including almost all member states, this sets a new standard with sucha clear focus on the 98% and the role of ICT as an enabler. Congratulation to those involved.

Taking a step back and look at the development I can’t help but note that this is very far from the reactions I got when I published the book ”Saving the planet at the speed of light” almost 10 years ago. Even when Katalin Szomolanyi and I wrote the roadmap for EU in 2006 ”Saving the climate at the speed of light” in the joint WWF-ETNO project the reaction and support from the commission was quite vague. Now it finally looks as if things could take off.

There is a lot to like in this. Below the key parts [The full PDF can be downloaded here]

1. Three clear stands of work moving forward
FIRST “The ICT sectors own footprint”: not the most important, but must dealt with so good to include (and not spend a lot of time on).

SECOND “working partnerships between the ICT sector and other major energy-using
Sectors”: Here it would be good to develop a list with priority areas. It is especially important to ensure that a service perspective is guiding the actions and not a focus on existing sectors. While ICT can play a significant role in relation to transport and buildings, it is not just the car industry and the building industry where collaboration is needed. Flexiwork/telewok can help reduce Co2 emissions from both the transport and building industry, but these sectors will not drive this development. Especially the car industry is important to challenge, as they so far have been reluctant to move from a product to a service perspective.

THIRD “Member States should be called upon to enable the EU-wide roll-out of ICT tools
likely to trigger a shift in the behaviour of consumers, businesses and communities and at
the same time drive demand for innovative ICT solutions to optimise the energy
performance of their own operations.” This is probably the most interesting area and it is here we could see groundbreaking initiatives in m-government, m-health, m-education, m-business, etc. This would be especially interesting if we see new tools beyond current sectors that encourage a high quality resource efficient lifestyle and support new start-up companies that provide these kinds of innovative solutions.

A good division and it is important to keep them apart. The second and third will be a challenge, but I’m sure all of us working with this are willing to support if there is an opportunity.


2. Clear focus on buildings and transport (two areas where ICT can make a real difference)
There is a tendency in the communication to look at the incremental improvements (where a building can be more efficient and where logistics can be improved). These are important, but it is important to move beyond current sectors. If not we will only see a few smart meters and some logistic initiatives. These kinds of solutions can actually result in increased emissions over time as they don’t help us move beyond our current inefficient infrastructure.


3. A challenge to the ICT industry to develop methodologies that can measure the benefits.
It is just to agree with the commission:
”In the absence of a means by which consumers, whether individuals, businesses or public
administrations, can verify and compare potential energy-saving strategies offered by ICTs
and their cost effectiveness, the threat that so-called greenwashing will take market share
from solutions that offer legitimate benefits is very real.”

This is a real challenge to those companies that are really serious. But also for the initiatives/projects that are developing reporting standards. In both cases the support for a scientific methodology that can calculate the positive contributions from ICT have been less positive than it should… Hopefully this will change.


4. “Urban planning strategies incorporating end 2010 energy efficiency and carbon emissions”
This could become one of the most important part for EU, but only if a global and transformative perspective (that look beyond incremental improvements) can be included and where solutions are encouraged that can be exported/used in other parts of the world (especially the emerging markets).


5. Software innovations
I’m very happy to see that the commission includes a discussion about software companies writing that “There are roughly half a million software businesses in the EU. Typically employing 3 to 7 persons, these businesses have one of the highest levels of productivity and profitability of all sectors of the economy”. I have suggested an annual competition where ”code of the year” was given a prize. I think there is a huge untapped potential in software companies and look forward to more concrete initiatives in this area.

+++
A few things could improve below is a list of areas that I hope we will see in the recommendations, most of these already exist in the communication but needs to be clarified. Especially in order to ensure that this process end up in the same innovation hostile straightjacket that so often seem to be the end result in well intended processes in Europe. Some of these have been developed in more details earlier, see for example the following document that I wrote for WWF together with Ewa Thorslund from the association of Swedish IT companies for the Swedish government:

1. Clear responsibility
Too often new initiatives fall flat, as they don’t fit in existing structures. Many countries have conducted studies and looked into the potential of ICT as an enabler. Then when it comes to implementation nothing (or very very little) happens. The commission must not make this mistake.


2. Separate the 2% from the 98% even more
The distinction between Green IT/2%/IT’s own emissions and Greening with IT/98%/IT’s ability to help reduce the emissions in society is still not clear enough and
the enabling capacity of ICT is not dealt with in a systematic way. The focus on transport and buildings is good, but a strategy must go further to ensure that the really innovative solutions are allowed to get support. It is not a significant problem for this communication, but for a strategy it is very important to separate the two so that no confusion can emerge regarding targets and resources.


3. Frame the recommendation within the concepts of “low- and high carbon feedback” or “20th century and 21st century infrastructure”
One of the major challenges with ICT is that it can deliver significant short-term reductions that can lock us in a high carbon infrastructure unless the feedback from the investments results in further reductions. Logistic improvements can make single vehicles a lot more efficient, but the result is often that the total amount of vehicles increases. Increased flexiwork can result in dramatic reduction of commuting and office space, but can also result in more flying.

Even more interesting is that many ICT investments can trigger further reductions, but this will only happen if a supporting framework exists. Keep your eyes open as a new report will come next week that describe this in detail for virtual meeting and teleworking. It will be posted here as soon as it is public.


4. Global perspective
The commission focus is obviously EU, but the need for smart solutions is global, and the need to ensure economy of scale and accelerated reductions of CO2 emissions require us to think global and to develop global strategies. Many of the leading ICT companies also work global


5. Trade/innovation perspective
I would like to see a chapter that include a concrete strategy to encourage trade (export and import of low carbon ICT solutions)

Let’s hope that communication can translate into concrete action.

PS
I hope that Sweden can move to the forefront in this area and support this work during the presidency and the climate meeting in Copenhagen where IT and other solution sectors could be supported to move to the front of the discussion.

The low carbon innovation movie on Youtube

Just trying to see if it is possible to put a Youtube clip here (and if it is possible to rate an embedded version):

High quality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP8Frk2VidQ&fmt=18

Not so high quality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP8Frk2VidQ