The site selection process is one of the top ways to influence your ability to run a green data center.  Power generation composition defines your carbon footprint.  The site environmental condition defines your choice of cooling systems. Mike Manos adds his opinion on this topic.

So you might be thinking, ‘Great, I just need to find the areas that have cheap power and a good Carbon Emission Factor right?’  The answer is no.  Many Site Selection processes that I see emerging in the generic space start and stop right at this line.   I would however advocate that one takes the next logical step which is to look at the relationship of these factors together and over a long period of time.

But, what most people miss focusing on these technical details is the network you choose when you start down the process.  One of the insider data center discussions I have had is how people don't understand the vendor networks that exist.  Almost every vendor has a network of people who they work with as preferred vendors.  The relationships are not always transparent and can have referral fees for diverting new business.  Customers may think they get around the requirement for competitive bidding requirements, but the bidding may not be as competitive as you think as many vendors cannot get into a bid if they don't have an established relationship with the group controlling the bid process.

The ones to be most suspicious of are the ones who make repeatedly claims of being objective and independent.  It is analogous to someone who says "trust me."  But it sounds like "don't trust me" to me.

How do you get out of this mess, as the data center owner you need to be in control of your own destiny and open your eyes to complexity of the relationships. 

Also,  following others can make your life easier as someone with more resources has run a more thorough analysis.  Mike Manos discusses how others are following Microsoft to Chicago.

We have seen many examples like Quincy, Washington and San Antonio, Texas where the site selection process has led to many Data Center providers locating in the same area to benefit from this type of analysis (even if not directly exposed to the criteria).  There is a story (that I don’t know if its true or not) that in the early days when a new burger chain was looking to expand where it would place its restaurants, it used the footprint of its main competitor as its guide. The thinking was that they probably had a very scientific method for that selection and they would receive that same ancillary benefit without the cost and effort.   Again, not sure if that is true or not, but its definitely something likely to happen in our industry.

In many markets these types of selections are in high demand.   Ascent Corporation out of St. Louis is in the process of building a modern facility just down the street from the Microsoft Mega-Facility near Chicago.   While Ascent was a part of the original Microsoft effort to build at that location, there has been an uptick in interest for being close to that facility for the same reasons as I have outlined here.  The result is their CH2 facility is literally a stones throw from the Microsoft Behemoth.  The reasons? Proximity to power, fiber, and improved water infrastructure are already there in abundance.  The facility even boasts container capabilities just like its neighbor.   The Elmhurst Electrical Substation sits directly across the highway from the facility with the first set of transmission poles within easy striking distance. 

The Generation mix of that area has a large nuclear component which has little to no carbon impact, and generates long term stability in terms of power cost fluctuations.   According to Phil Horstmann, President of Ascent, their is tremendous interest in the site and one of the key draws is the proximity of its nearby neighbor.  In the words of one potential tenant ‘Its like the decision to go to IBM in the 80s.  Its hard to argue against a location where Microsoft or Google has placed one of its facilities.’

This essentially dictates that there will be increasing demand on areas where this analysis is done or has been perceived to be done.   This is especially true where co-location and hosting providers can align their interests with those commercial locations where there is market demand.  While those that follow first movers will definitely benefit from these decisions (especially those without dedicated facility requirements), first movers continue to have significant advantage if they can get this process correct.

But, as Mike points out you rarely get as good a deal as those who are the first movers.

While those that follow first movers will definitely benefit from these decisions (especially those without dedicated facility requirements), first movers continue to have significant advantage if they can get this process correct.

I met with a friend who has worked in the high tech start-up environment and currently works in a company that has a data center presence, and he is thinking of a career change over to data centers.  We spent a couple of hours discussing many topics, a who's who in the industry, dynamics of how the industry works, and systemic problems in the current ways.

A systemic problem is a problem due to issues inherent in the overall system,^[1][2] rather than due to a specific, individual, isolated factor. Contrast with pilot error, user error or mistake.

A change to the structure, organization or policies in that system could alleviate the systemic problem. On an Ishikawa diagram (fishbone diagram) of cause-and-effect links, the source of the problem can be said to be a common cause, rather than a special cause.

My friend showed me some jobs he was thinking of applying for, and some ideas started to gel together on problems the data center industry have.

One, data centers are computers.  Google threw this idea out there.

Google: The Data Center Is the Computer

By Stacey Higginbotham Jun. 15, 2009, 11:47am PDT 1 Comment

61

As folks increasingly store and access information online, the data centers powering cloud services need to be managed more like a single computing entity rather than a bunch of servers, according to a Google white paper (Google calls it a mini-book) released today.

The paper lays out the concept of warehouse-scale computers (which we have previously referred to as both web-scale computing and mega data centers), specifically how to build out the infrastructure to support Internet services managed across thousands of servers. Google’s Luiz Barroso, a distinguished engineer, and Urs Hölzle, SVP of operations, both of whom help manage and build out Google’s data center, lay out their definition of WSCs:

Most data center projects are projects where fiefdoms battle for control of budget and resources - facilities, real estate, IT ops, application groups, and various users.

Most projects start with a data center project approval at the executive level and an approval of a budget. Then the real estate group takes control on site selection.  Consultants are hired for the site selection process to figure out the right data center site.  Lots of hours are spent interviewing people making the project more complex and more expensive.

Each group maneuvers to be the owner of a piece, and it sets you down a path without an overall design.

How many site selection companies are thinking like Mike Manos's post on site selection?

Site Selection,Data Center Clustering and their Interaction

July 14, 2010 by mmanos

I have written many times on the importance of the site selection for data centers and its growing importance when one considers the regulatory and legislative efforts underway globally.   Those who make their living in this space know that this is going to have a significant impact on the future landscape of these electronic bit factories.   The on-going long term operational costs over the life of the facility,  their use of natural resources (such as power) and what they house and protect (PII data or Personally Identifiable Information) are even now significantly impacting this process for many large global firms, and is making its way into the real estate community.  This is requiring a series of crash courses in information security, power regulation and rate structures, and other complex issues for many in the Real Estate community.

...

The Generation mix of that area has a large nuclear component which has little to no carbon impact, and generates long term stability in terms of power cost fluctuations.   According to Phil Horstmann, President of Ascent, their is tremendous interest in the site and one of the key draws is the proximity of its nearby neighbor.  In the words of one potential tenant ‘Its like the decision to go to IBM in the 80s.  Its hard to argue against a location where Microsoft or Google has placed one of its facilities.’

How can a data center site be picked without a data center design?  Do you pick a data center design and then figure out sites?  If you have not picked your cooling system design, how do you know the affect of the water supply is and the impact of water on your design.

Tying into the power conversation is that of water.  With the significant drive for economization (whether water based or air-based)  water continues to be a factor.  What many people don’t understand is that in many markets the discharge water is clean to dump into the sewage system and to ‘dirty’ to discharge to retention ponds.  This causes all kinds of potential issues and understanding the underlying water landscape is important.   The size of the metropolitan sewage environments, ability to dig your own well efforts, the local water table and aquifer issues, your intended load and resulting water requirements, how the local county, muncipality, or region views discharge in general and which chemicals and in what quantities is important to think about today.  However, as the use of water increases in terms of its potential environmental scrutiny – water is quickly rising on the site selection radar of many operators and those with long term holds.

The industry standard is you pick a site, spent million dollars plus on site selection consultants, buy a site after a long evaluation period.  Then, the rest of the system never says a word about you picking a bad site.

I get a good laugh whenever people criticize another person's site selection.

One of the ways you can change site selection is to bring in the top data center construction companies to evaluate your site before you make your final selection. "here are the 2 - 3 sites I am looking at to build a data center.  Can you tell me the pros and cons for the sites?"

I got this idea talking to data center construction executive when he said they had won a new construction project and thank god the customer didn't pick the site in another state that was a crappy site.  "Why don't you get involved before a site is selected?"  After more chatting, figured out the site selectors want to close the deal with a site selection process they control.  Bringing in data center construction experts decreases their control and shifts the control to the customer.  This is bad for the commercial real estate process.  We need to remove conflicts on interest by keeping suppliers who would influence the decision process isolated.  BS!!!

If you take the idea to the next step, why not invite the electrical contractors to the site as well.  Electrical systems are the dominant cost in a data center project.  Site characteristics will affect the electrical systems and the costs.  Why not get the electrical contractors input too.  Cooling and water would be easy to add.

Hope this gets you thinking on how to change your site selection process.

A holistic approach thinking of the data center as a computer is better than following the status quo. A process of hiring a bunch of experts who have limited knowledge on how data centers are computers.