2025.09.23

[seanmcilroy29]

Outline Action Item Details

2025.09.23 Agenda/Minutes

---

Time 0800 (PT) / 1600 (BST) - See the time in your timezone

• Chair – Adrian Cockcroft
• Chair - Pindy Bhullar
• Convener – Sean Mcilroy (Linux Foundation)

---

Antitrust Policy

Joint Development Foundation meetings may involve participation by industry competitors, and the Joint Development Foundation intends to conduct all of its activities in accordance with applicable antitrust and competition laws. It is, therefore, extremely important that attendees adhere to meeting agendas and be aware of and not participate in any activities that are prohibited under applicable US state, federal or foreign antitrust and competition laws.

If you have questions about these matters, please contact your company counsel or counsel to the Joint Development Foundation, DLA Piper.

---

Recordings

WG agreed to record all Meetings. This meeting recording will be available until the next scheduled meeting.

---

Roll Call

Please add 'Attended' to this issue during the meeting to denote attendance.

Any untracked attendees will be added by the GSF team below:

• Full Name, Affiliation, (optional) GitHub username

---

Agenda and Minutes

• Approve agenda
• Approve previous meeting minutes

---

Discussions

• Version 1.1 Release Status Update
• European Provider Outreach Results
• AWS Local Zones Data Integration
• Create Amazon data source automation
• Update Google Sheets with 2024 Amazon data
• Revisit AWS PUE data sources for 2024 updates
• Update Miro board with data flow visualisation

---

Review Issues and PRs

• [AI] Google data needs to be updated to 2024 #119
• [AI] Update AWS data needs to for 2024 #121
• [AI] AWS Local Zones need to be added to the region metadata #120

Discussions

• The team should consider clarifying when data is marked as an estimate in the documentation.

---

AOB

• Topics added during the meeting

---

Next Meeting

• 07th Oct

---

Action Items

• To be added

Issue dependency with other WGs Groups

No response

[mrchrisadams]

hi folks - I'm sending my apologies, I can't make it today. I'll try to update asynchronously later in the week.

[ReedMT86]

Attended

[adrianco]

Attended

[adrianco]

We also discussed the new GHG protocol update that @Henry-WattTime is part of and I created this issue to track it #128

[PindyBhullar]

Attended

[Henry-WattTime]

Attended

[seanmcilroy29]

Real-Time Cloud Working Group Meeting Minutes

Date: September 23, 2025
Time: 15:00 GMT
Meeting Type: Virtual Working Group Meeting
Chair: Adrian Cockcroft

---

Meeting Summary

The Real-Time Cloud Working Group convened to discuss updates to cloud provider carbon data for 2025, review the carbon intensity specification document, and receive critical updates on the Greenhouse Gas Protocol revision process. Key discussions centered on automating data extraction from cloud provider sustainability reports, finalizing the specification document for the Phenops Foundation, and understanding the implications of upcoming GHG Protocol changes, particularly for Scope 2 reporting.

---

List of Key Discussions Based on the Agenda

Administrative Items

• Personal updates and availability discussions
• Holiday season impacts on working group activities

2025 Cloud Provider Data Updates

• Status of AWS, Google, and Microsoft sustainability data releases
• Plans for automating data extraction processes
• AWS Scope 3 data release expectations

Carbon Intensity Specification Review

• Review of Sean's updates to the specification document
• Discussion of Chris's feedback from June (Pull Request Spec update #114)
• Naming conventions for carbon intensity metrics
• Timeline for finalizing and committing the specification

HSBC Case Study Development

• Overview of workload migration analysis using Real-Time Cloud dataset
• Carbon and cost optimization recommendations
• Green Software Foundation case study publication process

Greenhouse Gas Protocol Revision

• Critical update on GHG Protocol revision process and timeline
• Scope 2 working group developments
• Comment period: October 15 - December 15, 2025
• Implications for hourly REC tracking and corporate reporting
• Implementation timeline: 2027

Tool and Platform Updates

• Cloud Carbon Footprint tool status review
• Vista platform status review
• Kepler project and other API updates needed

---

Full Meeting Minutes

Meeting Opening and Administrative Updates

Adrian Cockcroft opened the meeting, noting he is currently in the UK for approximately another month while managing a property purchase. Parbinder Bhullar recently returned from safari vacation, and both acknowledged they had missed recent meetings due to holiday schedules during the summer period.

Attendees:

• Adrian Cockcroft - Chair
• Parbinder Bhullar (HSBC)
• Henry Richardson (WattTime)
• Mike Reed (AVEVA)

2025 Cloud Provider Carbon Data Update Session

Led by: Adrian Cockcroft

Adrian reviewed the current status of updating the Real-Time Cloud dataset with 2025 data from major cloud providers:

AWS Status:

• No significant new data released as of the meeting date
• Scope 3 data still pending release
• Team waiting to see what AWS publishes and how interesting the data will be
• Plans to extract any published data into specification format or discussion document to ensure visibility

Google Cloud Status:

• Updates available but require detailed review
• Adrian has not yet conducted comprehensive analysis

Microsoft Azure Status:

• No recent data review conducted
• Needs investigation for new sustainability reports

Data Extraction Automation Plans:
Adrian acknowledged that previous data updates were entirely manual processes. His goal for this update cycle is to implement automation, potentially using ChatGPT or similar tools to:

• Extract data from web pages and PDF sustainability reports
• Identify carbon intensity metrics matching the specification format
• Validate extracted data through manual review

The automation work has been delayed due to other commitments, including a presentation in Berlin the previous week and upcoming travel to Brazil.

HSBC Workload Migration Case Study

Presented by: Parbinder Bhullar

Parbinder described a comprehensive analysis conducted for HSBC examining potential carbon and cost savings from workload migrations:

Methodology:

• Used Real-Time Cloud dataset for regional carbon intensity data
• Employed CloudAbility workload planner tool for compute mapping
• Overlaid carbon data onto workload configurations
• Analyzed three regional scenarios: United States, Europe, and Asia-Pacific

Analysis Approach:

• Demonstrated potential savings by moving virtual machines between regions
• Provided dual optimization showing both cost reductions and carbon savings
• Created recommendations for specific workload movements (e.g., VM A to Region B, showing potential cost and carbon savings)

Important Caveats:
Analysis did not include additional considerations such as:

• Data sovereignty requirements
• Security constraints
• Regional availability and capacity
• Compliance restrictions

Previous Success:
The investment banking division had previously implemented similar recommendations, achieving substantial savings in both costs and carbon emissions.

Current Status:

• Recommendations presented but not yet implemented
• Additional analysis required to layer compliance and operational constraints
• Green Software Foundation has requested a case study publication

Publication Planning:
Parbinder will draft the case study but requires internal HSBC approval before public release, similar to the rigorous approval process experienced at UBS. The case study will:

• Describe the methodology and process
• Provide indicative savings figures without revealing confidential details
• Share findings with the working group for feedback before GSF submission
• Take time to navigate internal communications and approval channels

Working Group Engagement:
Adrian inquired about the proportional savings and whether the recommendations would be acted upon. The analysis successfully demonstrated the value of considering carbon alongside cost optimization, though implementation depends on resolving additional operational constraints.

Regional Considerations:

• Analysis covered workloads that could potentially move between countries within regions (e.g., within Europe)
• United States analysis focused on supplier switching within one country
• Singapore identified as a consistently high-carbon region to migrate away from
• Switzerland noted for strict data sovereignty requirements keeping workloads in-country

Carbon Intensity Specification Document Review

Led by: Adrian Cockcroft

Adrian provided an update on the carbon intensity specification document that Sean had updated or authored:

Current Status:

• Document updated with recent changes
• Chris provided feedback comments in June (documented in Pull Request Spec update #114)
• Questions raised about naming conventions for carbon intensity metrics
• Multiple similar metrics exist with long names requiring standardization
• Specification includes links to detailed technical definitions

Review Requirements:
Adrian requested Henry Richardson review the specification document, particularly Chris's June feedback, noting that Henry's previous input had been very specific about terminology precision.

Next Steps:

• Team needs to reach consensus that the document is sufficiently complete
• Once approved, commit the final version to the repository
• Original motivation was Phenops Foundation interest, though no recent communication received

Phenops Foundation Status:

• No engagement from Phenops Foundation on sustainability topics
• Organization appears focused on AI initiatives rather than sustainability work
• Described as "new shiny objects" taking priority over sustainability

Budget Dynamics Discussion:
Adrian observed organizational budget patterns where innovation budgets remain unavailable until board-level questions about AI trigger sudden funding availability, calling it the "FOMO budget" - only activated when executives fear missing trends.

Greenhouse Gas Protocol Revision - Critical Update

Presented by: Henry Richardson (WattTime)

Henry provided extensive information about the ongoing Greenhouse Gas Protocol revision process, representing a significant development for corporate sustainability reporting:

Scope and Timeline:

• Comprehensive revision underway with 2027 target implementation date
• Four separate working groups: Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3, and Actions and Market Instruments (AMI)
• Each working group operates on different timelines
• Scope 2 modifications represent particularly significant changes for the working group's focus

Scope 2 Working Group:
Henry participates in the Scope 2 working group and described it as "arguing with everyone about everything," acknowledging the complexity and contention of the discussions.

Comment Period - Action Required:

• Public comment period: October 15 - December 15, 2025
• Approximately 60 calendar days (exact duration unclear if business or calendar days)
• All organizations should ensure corporate sustainability teams are aware
• Critical decisions being made during this comment period

Major Proposed Changes:

• Potential shift to hourly tracking for Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)
• Significant increase in accounting burden for organizations
• Changes to location-based versus market-based accounting methodologies
• Revisions addressing organizations that both consume and supply electricity

Uncertainty About Regulatory Alignment:

• Unclear whether regulatory jurisdictions will adopt the updated protocol
• California and Europe are primary jurisdictions with current GHG Protocol requirements
• Questions remain about whether these regions will mandate compliance with the revised protocol or continue using existing rules
• If mandated by law, changes represent significant compliance burden

Impact Assessment:

• Scope 3 identified as particularly significant for AVEVA
• Scope 3 represents the most challenging category as it covers emissions outside direct organizational control
• Different working groups may produce conflicting recommendations

Working Group Perspectives:
Henry noted that GSF membership is diverse and likely holds disagreeing opinions on protocol revisions. The question of whether GSF could submit an organizational position was raised but remains unresolved due to the diversity of member perspectives.

Resources Provided:
Henry shared the GHG Protocol announcement link and offered to provide detailed briefings to organizational sustainability teams, noting his deep involvement means he knows "all the excruciating details."

Communication Strategy:

• Working group members immediately began notifying their organizational sustainability contacts
• Mike Reed forwarded information to AVEVA's sustainability team
• Parbinder planned to share with HSBC contacts and determine if internal briefing sessions are needed
• Adrian added information to the working group's Miro board in the regulators section

Carbon Measurement Complexity Discussion

The group engaged in a philosophical discussion about carbon measurement complexity:

Adrian observed: "The more you know about this, the more opinions you get that are really incompatible. It's like, how much carbon is in this thing? Well, it depends who's asking and what they want to do with the number."

Henry confirmed this accurately describes the challenge, acknowledging that different stakeholders require different measurement approaches depending on their use cases and regulatory requirements.

Tool Ecosystem Status Review

Led by: Adrian Cockcroft

Adrian discussed the need to review the status of various tools and platforms in the carbon measurement ecosystem:

Cloud Carbon Footprint:

• Development activity appears to have ceased
• Status requires verification through GitHub activity review
• Previously important tool for the community

Vista Platform:

• Parts of the website appeared to go offline at some point
• Unclear if the platform is still operational
• Requires investigation

Other Tools Requiring Review:

• Kepler project status
• Various carbon measurement APIs
• Carbonara (renamed to something else)

Adrian noted he needs to systematically review these platforms and update the working group's resources, particularly the Miro board that tracks available tools and platforms.

Additional Business and Action Planning

The group discussed upcoming work priorities:

Immediate Priorities:

1. Complete 2025 cloud provider data updates with automated extraction
2. Finalize carbon intensity specification document based on feedback
3. Review tool ecosystem status and update resources
4. Monitor GHG Protocol comment period and potential organizational responses

Personal Commitments:

• Adrian has Brazil travel the following week
• Property purchase in the UK will create distractions toward year-end
• First property in the US experiencing water leak issues requiring remote management
• Plans to install solar panels on UK property when purchase completes

Working Group Cadence:
With holiday season concluded, the group agreed to return to more regular meeting schedules and tackle the backlog of pending work items.

---

Topics to be Added to the Next Meeting

1. Cloud Provider Data Updates:

   • AWS Scope 3 data release analysis if available
   • Google and Microsoft sustainability report reviews
   • Automation implementation progress

2. Specification Document:

   • Henry's review of PR Spec update #114 and Chris's feedback
   • Consensus on naming conventions for carbon intensity metrics
   • Final approval and commit decision

3. GHG Protocol Developments:

   • Progress on organizational awareness and comment preparation
   • GSF position determination (if feasible given membership diversity)
   • Impact assessment for working group specifications

4. HSBC Case Study:

   • Draft review with working group
   • Internal approval status
   • Publication timeline with GSF

5. Tool Ecosystem:

   • Cloud Carbon Footprint status update
   • Vista, Kepler, and other platform reviews
   • Miro board resource updates

6. General Updates:

   • Member organization sustainability initiatives
   • WattTime data updates for 2024/2025
   • Real-Time Cloud dataset publication plans

---

Action Items

Action Item	Owner	Due Date	Status
Review AWS, Google, and Microsoft 2025 sustainability data releases	Adrian Cockcroft	October 2025	Pending
Implement automated data extraction from cloud provider reports	Adrian Cockcroft	October 2025	Pending
Review PR #114 and provide feedback on carbon intensity specification	Henry Richardson	October 2025	Pending
Draft HSBC workload migration case study	Parbinder Bhullar	TBD	Pending
Share case study draft with working group for feedback	Parbinder Bhullar	TBD	Pending
Navigate internal HSBC approval process for case study publication	Parbinder Bhullar	TBD	Pending
Share GHG Protocol revision information with organizational sustainability teams	All Members	October 15, 2025	In Progress
Update Miro board with GHG Protocol revision information	Adrian Cockcroft	Completed	Complete
Review Cloud Carbon Footprint tool status and GitHub activity	Adrian Cockcroft	October 2025	Pending
Investigate Vista platform operational status	Adrian Cockcroft	October 2025	Pending
Review Kepler project and other carbon measurement API status	Adrian Cockcroft	October 2025	Pending
Update working group Miro board with tool ecosystem status	Adrian Cockcroft	October 2025	Pending
Provide WattTime data updates for 2024/2025 when available	Henry Richardson	TBD	Pending
Consider GSF organizational position on GHG Protocol revisions	All Members / Policy Group	November 2025	Pending

---

Meeting Adjournment

Next Meeting: TBD - Regular schedule resuming post-holiday season
Meeting Adjourned: Approximately 16:30 GMT

Key Takeaway: The GHG Protocol revision represents a critical development requiring immediate organizational awareness and potential comment period participation. Working group members should ensure their corporate sustainability teams are informed and prepared for the October 15 - December 15, 2025 comment period.