READERS’ CORNER

As a Fellow of the RGS-IBG, I have enjoyed Geographical and its diverse articles for many years. However, I was not impressed by the concluding paragraph of the November Worldwatch article entitled ‘BIG Computing’.

The author raises a valid point concerning the CO emissions resulting from large scale computing, but the concluding paragraph is simplistic in the extreme. I have worked in the E&P Industry for over 35 years, I am a Fellow of the Geological Society, and a member of the EAGE and SPE (Society of Petroleum Engineers). I do not dispute that Amazon and Microsoft are forming business partnerships with the oil & gas majors, now rebranding themselves as energy companies as they diversify into renewables. These new style arrangements are termed sustainable energy agreements and represent a new form of innovative deal, in which renewable energy is supplied to the European data centres in return for their facilities.

Europe is leading the global energy transition, and the re-branded energy majors are investing heavily, their intellectual and physical assets being employed in the flagship

North Sea CCS and hydrogen projects in the surrounding waters. Among others: the Oil & Gas Climate Initiative sponsoring Net Zero

Teeside, managed by BP; Shell’s long contribution to the ACORN CCS/hydrogen project to the east of Aberdeen; and Equinor’s commitment to the North of England H21 project, and the Northern Lights project offshore Norway, importing CO for storage from around Europe.

All these projects require BIG computing. Ultimately, the provision of computing resources is irrelevant of the nature of the project. What is relevant, is the emphasis on renewable energy.