Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Wants To Nix Data Center Backup Generators
1sockchuck writes "Data centers operators often tout their diesel backup generators as a symbol of their reliability. So why does Microsoft want to get rid of them? Microsoft says diesel generators are 'inefficient and costly' and is looking at alternatives to supply emergency backup power for its server farms, including fuel cells powered by natural gas. One possible option is the 'Bloom box,' which both Apple and eBay are using in their data centers (albeit with biogas as the primary fuel). Bloom is positioning its fuel cells as a way to forego expensive UPS units and generators, using the Bloom box for primary power and the utility grid for backup. It's a pitch that benefits from the current low price of natural gas." (Microsoft would like to stop using so much water, too.)
Amazing! we replaced our backup generators....with backup generators! Good thing we don't need those heavily invested generators anymore, we'll just buy more!
Now we don't need generators! /facepalm
It ain't what they call you. It's what you answer to. http://mylyceum.us/
There is nothing wrong with diesel emergency backup generators (keyword EMERGENCY BACKUP). They are easy to run and maintain, assuming you have a basic understanding of engines. Check the oil and fire them up every 6 months or so, plus a mechanic taking a good look once a year or so. They are large, so it easy for someone to get in there and replace parts. You can fuel them by getting diesel from any gas station in the area. And if they break, there are thousands of mechanics which can fix them, local to pretty much anywhere that has civilization.
The "Bloom Box", on the other hand, is a specialized piece of equipment which only a few people know how it actually works. It uses a niche fuel source, not going to find that at a Shell station down the road.
sudo make me a sandwich
Microsoft says diesel generators are 'inefficient and costly'
The real prob, assuming you live outside 3rd world areas, is the local electric power co is more reliable than transfer switches and generators.
Its legendary in the telco biz how many outages faulty transfer switches and generator testing "accidents" cause.
Local power causes many fewer outages, but the PR of "we're down because of no generator" "competitors have gens" means we have to lower our quality of service by installing generators, which is too bad. The customers are so dumb they'd rather have 10 hours of outage per decade due to x-fer switch issues than 1 hour of outage per decade due to power failures.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
I hear there's this great new energy device called an E-Cat that's just coming into the market!
It was covered by Slashdot when the first demo plant went online.
It's now a year later, and the company is willing to sell units to anyone. Check here for details! Or this great WIkipedia article.
It sounds like a perfect high-tech replacement for old-style backup generators!
(For those of you who can only read English the way a compiler reads code: yes, I'm being sarcastic.)
If they replace backup generators with some alternate technology. I hope that they actually make sure it is reliable first. And that it stays reliable over time. (eg, three years later, you suddenly need it, does it still work?)
They're not just replacing it though; they're flipping it. The primary power source will be on-site generation, with the backup being the grid. So reliability becomes less of a concern -- the onsite system is running constantly, meaning any faults will be found pretty quickly and it'll drop to grid power while you troubleshoot those. Meanwhile, the only maintenance they need to worry about on the backup system is a couple wires and the actual switching system. It's not like a diesel backup system where you have to run it every couple months anyway.
This seems like it would be a lot more reliable than the usual system, even if their new natural gas generators aren't. Because you'll never have a situation where you go to switch to backup only to discover some part on the generator broke while it was sitting idle.
Of course, they're going to end up spending more money on manpower to keep their local generation systems maintained, since they'll be running all the time -- which makes me wonder if that's what would really be driving any improved reliability.
That'll be really great until the grid goes down and takes the natural gas pumping stations down with it.
To be fair, they've improved data storage reliability as a result of incidents like these. Now, when you provision a storage account under Azure, there's a check box (checked by default) that turns on "global backup". When on, any data written to storage is fanned out across two geographically diverse data centers.
Say what you will about their technical mistakes, Microsoft does learn from them. As far as their decisions when it comes to product development and marketing, though, they don't appear to have learned a damn thing in the last decade.
John
Around here, there are HUGE liquid storage natural gas tanks that hold weeks to months of fuel. The distribution system just works based on the naturally high pressure of the gas, no pumping involved. Natural gas still works, even with weeks of power outages.
Gas stoves are nice for winter power outages.
Ours are only tested annually.
Our hospital backup generators.
All two of them.
And one of them is guaranteed to fail every time.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".