Jemma Singleton – Newcastle University Library
Introduction
Newcastle University Special Collections and Archives, UK provide access to historic physical and digital materials for research and teaching purposes to both internal and external audiences. To date, there hasn’t been a consolidated understanding of the carbon footprint of digital activities designed to aid research purposes. The recent activities to evaluate two types of software infrastructure (an in-house vs externally supplied product) provided an opportunity to compare the carbon footprint of each system. In the future it is hoped that this methodology can be applied to the complete workflow activities around digital preservation within an archival context.
Why we got involved in testing the DPC’s Carbon Footprint Toolkit
I got involved with this project because I was interested to understand how carbon generation practices occurred, and at what scale carbon is generated in a number of digital processes that occur as part of our digital preservation activities. I was also fortuitously involved in an time-bound internal project (evaluating two digital library research platforms) that could be enhanced by participation in the carbon calculation working group.
What we chose to focus on
Our main focus was to establish carbon generation values of a cloud-based vs on premise platform infrastructure. A secondary focus was to see if these two different ways of digital hosting has knock on carbon footprint implications for digital activities concerning metadata management, networking, administrative user and end user input.
What we achieved
The achievements of this process has been the generation of a carbon footprint comparison between two digital research systems. In particular, the carbon generation values between on premise vs in cloud storage. This may influence the internal evaluation of said systems and decisions about sustainable implementation choices. This case study has demonstrated that carbon calculation tools can be implemented at a wider university level as a guide to make appropriate digital platform choices.
Further achievements include: an awareness of how carbon calculations are affected by networking digital data through cloud-based servers at an increased capacity to on premise hosting. The eventual carbon calculation for on premise hosting still needs to be finalised which will affect eventual summary totals. A surprising result of analysing carbon generation activities revealed that non-digital administration of short-term projects (such as project-based travel) can really add to the carbon generation weighting. This finding will hopefully encourage colleagues to think carefully about the necessity of their travel for collaborative projects.
There has also been a sense of personal achievement in critically analysing appropriate sources of carbon generation data from multiple parties.
Lessons learned
My main lesson learned from participation in this group is an awareness of where the biggest carbon generators are within digital activities. This means that opportunities can be identified to reduce carbon generation or substantiate appropriate carbon generation in the most sustainable way.
Further lessons have identified areas of industry opacity or lack of knowledge with regards to carbon generation.
In a more practical sense, I have learnt that information about resource requirements, especially for digital networking and download traffic, can be accessed using the ‘inspect’ function on websites.
Next steps
-
Promote an analysis of potential environmental impact into future digital preservation operational and policy decisions.
-
Conduct a carbon calculation baseline for special collections digital preservation ingest, processing and accessibility workflows.
-
Investigate awareness, or improve communication, with internal and external IT service providers about knowledge and access to embodied carbon information.
-
Promote increased organisational awareness about utility of the DPC’s Carbon Footprint Toolkit to aid strategic planning.