Jakson Your Cloud Has a Dirty Secret: The Hidden Carbon Footprint of Your Company’s Tech with Tim Prosser täydellinen litterointi

technology today is out of sight and mostly out of mind. 00:02:19.039 --> 00:02:20.319 This is starting to change. 00:02:20.560 --> 00:02:28.400 Technology, as we all know, is intricately linked into every aspect of our lives in our communication, our banking, our work and entertainment. 00:02:28.639 --> 00:02:38.159 For individuals wishing to align with a Paris 1.5 existence, 40% of your individual carbon budget is consumed by your digital exhaust, your digital existence, if you like. 00:02:38.400 --> 00:02:49.680 Just for a moment, think of all those emails, those photos, those videos, those streaming services, the online meetings, increasingly artificial intelligence, data centers, electronic devices you use every day. 00:02:50.000 --> 00:02:56.080 And it's digital emissions generated by over 5 billion people globally, now connected to the internet, a staggering number. 00:02:56.400 --> 00:03:01.680 On average, they spend seven hours a day connected to the internet or to their electronic devices. 00:03:01.919 --> 00:03:11.680 For organizations facing strategic and regulatory climate disclosures, surfacing and accounting for these emissions generated from the use of enterprise is complex. 00:03:11.919 --> 00:03:15.360 However, it is maturing fast as that understanding uh evolves. 00:03:15.599 --> 00:03:30.319 Much of the data used to populate IT emissions reporting today is sourced from a diverse, a very diverse range of suppliers, all using different frameworks, different approaches, probably not a problem unfamiliar to those in the sustainability world. 00:03:30.560 --> 00:03:34.879 And they all have varying degrees of maturity and coverage. 00:03:35.120 --> 00:03:57.919 However, it's vital, vitally critical for receiving organizations to undertake appropriate levels of due diligence on these contributions by a beware, you might say, to adequately understand the shortfalls in the data before being ingested and hard-baked into organizational baselines and transition plans, or I'm sorry to say, prepare yourself for some very big surprises down the track. 00:03:58.159 --> 00:04:08.240 To your specific question, some of the questions to surface with your technology suppliers may include: does the service provider's sustainability data cover all scopes, one, two, and three? 00:04:08.479 --> 00:04:09.840 Does it also include water use? 00:04:10.000 --> 00:04:10.719 Many, many don't. 00:04:10.879 --> 00:04:11.599 They exclude that. 00:04:11.759 --> 00:04:13.280 What is the age of the carbon data? 00:04:13.360 --> 00:04:15.360 Is it hourly, daily, monthly, quarterly? 00:04:15.599 --> 00:04:18.160 There's a huge variety in reporting frequencies. 00:04:18.319 --> 00:04:22.399 And the calculation period, is it based on per hour, which is ideal? 00:04:22.480 --> 00:04:23.439 That'd be fantastic. 00:04:23.680 --> 00:04:26.240 Daily, weekly, monthly, or sometimes quarterly? 00:04:26.399 --> 00:04:31.680 So if you're reporting on something that's already six months old, your ability to do do something with it today is pretty limited. 00:04:31.920 --> 00:04:35.759 Does the service provider cover all products and services you have with them? 00:04:35.839 --> 00:04:38.879 Or have they only selected a few hero products, for example? 00:04:39.120 --> 00:04:43.360 Is the reporting provided at a detailed product resource or instance level? 00:04:43.439 --> 00:04:51.199 So, for example, in cloud, is it reporting in the individual component or the cloud environment that you consume, or is it more at a general account level? 00:04:51.439 --> 00:04:55.040 The geographic breakdown is also really important to understand. 00:04:55.199 --> 00:04:57.040 So, for example, is it is it Asia Pacific? 00:04:57.120 --> 00:04:57.680 Is it Australia? 00:04:57.839 --> 00:04:58.319 Is it Europe? 00:04:58.399 --> 00:04:59.519 Is it New South Wales? 00:04:59.680 --> 00:05:00.399 Is it Sydney? 00:05:00.560 --> 00:05:01.040 What level? 00:05:01.279 --> 00:05:08.879 And that's really important to understand because of the emissions profile from the energy, the electricity that it consumes, is really very different depending on where it is. 00:05:09.040 --> 00:05:19.439 And one thing that's really important to ask around the future maturing of all this is is there an API connection for integration and automation into organisational systems? 00:05:19.519 --> 00:05:21.839 Because you don't want to be doing this in spreadsheets, believe me. 00:05:22.079 --> 00:05:23.839 I think we're already there, we realize that. 00:05:24.079 --> 00:05:31.680 And the last question I'd really like to surface is is this service provider ISO 140064 verified? 00:05:31.759 --> 00:05:41.439 Um, as listeners may know, this is a set of international standards providing a framework for organizations to quantify, monitor, report, and verify their greenhouse gas emissions. 00:05:41.759 --> 00:05:43.360 Yeah, that's really interesting, Tim. 00:05:43.439 --> 00:06:00.399 And I wonder to contextualize this for our listeners, do you have some case studies or examples where you have seen a big variance between, you know, what's been reported and particularly reported based on those estimations versus actual Absolutely. 00:06:00.480 --> 00:06:07.360 So I was very keen to connect with real life experience rather than the theory and the intention. 00:06:07.600 --> 00:06:13.439 So during my visit, I took the opportunity to make um several connections with practitioners who are actually living and breathing this. 00:06:13.600 --> 00:06:21.040 London is right at the epicentre of the financial services industry, so I spent a bit of time in Canary Wharf and other locations across the city. 00:06:21.120 --> 00:06:37.279 Um and this included connecting with representatives of global financial services, um, organizations we will all be familiar with, they're all on the high street, the UK government's Digital Sustainability Alliance, and nonprofits working to help to

develop support tools and surface and account for digital emissions. 00:06:37.439 --> 00:06:48.079 In the financial services sector alone, non-financial operational emissions across all scopes generated from the use of technology make up a significant percentage of emissions. 00:06:48.160 --> 00:06:55.839 And I'm talking in the 25 to 35% of all declared operational emissions, non-financial, I might add. 00:06:56.160 --> 00:07:04.000 So financial institutions, as we know, are usually driven by large, heavy regulated, secure corporate systems and relatively large employee base. 00:07:04.160 --> 00:07:07.920 So, for example, here in Australia, Combank has 45,000 employees. 00:07:08.000 --> 00:07:13.920 I think organizations like HSPC, it's more like 250,000 globally, very large numbers. 00:07:14.079 --> 00:07:20.959 It's an organizational technology profile that is similar in scale to the insurance or the media and com sectors. 00:07:21.040 --> 00:07:24.720 So they're both very enterprise technology heavy industries. 00:07:24.879 --> 00:07:27.279 So those are ones to really look at. 00:07:27.439 --> 00:07:37.519 So leading organizations with net zero commitments are increasingly embedding sustainability, as we know, into leadership KPIs or every aspect of their business strategy. 00:07:37.680 --> 00:07:44.399 Um, and intuitive tech leadership teams are leaning into tech, what I call tech emission discovery. 00:07:44.560 --> 00:07:49.360 After all, you can't see what you don't measure, um, and that that's leadership in my book. 00:07:49.600 --> 00:08:01.519 Progressive sustainability organizations are embarking on an exercise of bottom-up discovery rather than top-down based on traditionally finance-based calculations from invoicing, which is where many organizations are starting. 00:08:01.600 --> 00:08:14.480 Um, but it covers discovery across the entire technology supply chain, covering all kinds of hardware, software, cloud services, data centers, telecom, and increasingly the noisy AI services. 00:08:14.639 --> 00:08:31.040 It's not uncommon for technology suppliers to only include scope one and two emissions data in their reporting, you know, buyer beware, I mentioned, and in some cases only report on a limited set of products or services, as I mentioned, and quite often using market average rather than location-specific um disclosures. 00:08:31.279 --> 00:08:38.720 It's also worth calling out that the disclosure of water, which we mentioned earlier, and location data is vitally important in initial discovery. 00:08:39.039 --> 00:08:44.000 And I mean outside financial services, Tim, you mentioned insurance and media. 00:08:44.240 --> 00:08:49.600 Why are those industries more likely to be exposed to undercounting of the digital footprint? 00:08:50.320 --> 00:09:01.279 Undercounting is a broad issue across all industries, but I think in relation to their intensive use of enterprise technologies, it just means that that elevates the number. 00:09:01.519 --> 00:09:12.559 By contrast, if you look at high polluting industries in resources or energy, for example, they have much bigger problems elsewhere on their emissions profile, and technology is just a tiny part of that overall profile. 00:09:12.720 --> 00:09:27.360 But organizations in the three that I mentioned, um, and this draws on research from McKinsey from a couple of years ago that we we can include in the show notes for for your listeners, highlights these three industries where technology makes up a significant contribution of that overall profile. 00:09:27.519 --> 00:09:29.360 Again, communications, media and services. 00:09:29.440 --> 00:09:37.759 Just think of all that type video streaming, particularly, you know, uh the broadcasters, um, Netflix, banking investment services. 00:09:38.000 --> 00:09:46.399 IT, technology uses IT in order to secure your money in a highly regulated environment, and that tends to require an awful lot of technology. 00:09:46.639 --> 00:09:49.519 Insurance, there are many, many different products in insurance. 00:09:49.679 --> 00:09:54.960 Think of car, think of individual, house, personal insurance, and there's very little crossover. 00:09:55.200 --> 00:09:59.519 Uh they operate in silos, so there's technology stacks by particular insurance types. 00:09:59.600 --> 00:10:04.240 So there's a uh a challenge around efficiency across insurance in that respect. 00:10:04.480 --> 00:10:09.039 So that that's probably why there's a significant build-out of technology to support those silos. 00:10:09.440 --> 00:10:18.639 Yeah, that's a really interesting call out for any individuals that are working in these industries and they may have not considered the footprint of their IT infrastructure. 00:10:18.799 --> 00:10:26.879 On that, I also want to double-click on something you mentioned earlier, which is saying that spreadsheets are no longer tolerable, and this is particularly at audit level. 00:10:27.039 --> 00:10:34.480 What would you say that practitioners should be moving towards to ensure that you know high provenance, credible reporting to be put in place? 00:10:34.879 --> 00:10:44.000 As you rightly point out, Loretta, we're rapidly moving towards sustainability practices that demand trustworthy, traceable, and auditable insights at scale. 00:10:44.399 --> 00:10:51.519 This requires organizations to treat sustainability data with many of the same controls as financial data is treated today. 00:10:51.759 --> 00:10:55.759 That might alarm some people, but that's that's where we need to be and that's where we're heading for sure. 00:10:56.000 --> 00:11:06.480 In practical terms, this requires close collaboration with peers in finance, sustainability, and IT, or as we're beginning to start to call the sustainability value triangle in organizations. 00:11:06.720 --> 00:11:12.639 It's a relationship based on established trust with foundation built on high quality, high-integrity data. 00:11:12.799 -->

00:11:28.240 The move from static reports to auditable, governed reporting involves immutable records and audit trails that require automated schedule-driven reporting, but where methods are documented and access is strictly controlled on the job role. 00:11:28.480 --> 00:11:33.840 Many of those facets are very familiar to those that work in worked in heavily regulated industries. 00:11:33.919 --> 00:11:40.960 I've worked in aerospace, financial services, energy, for example, and I can see evidence of that in traditional business enterprise systems. 00:11:41.360 --> 00:11:46.480 One of the things that you saw when you're in the UK was this emissions true-ups. 00:11:46.639 --> 00:11:54.480 How are you seeing Australian organizations currently being exposed to greenwashing litigation for their existing digital claims? 00:11:54.879 --> 00:12:02.639 This is certainly an issue on the minds of Australian boards at the highest levels of Australian business, if not specifically yet in the IT department. 00:12:02.799 --> 00:12:07.840 That time will come, though, I have absolutely no doubt, probably within the next two or three years, if I reckon. 00:12:08.000 --> 00:12:21.200 As listeners will be aware, the Australian Corporate Consumer Regulator has been very active in the last three years calling out over 47 organizations for misleading consumers on product or services in greenwashing claims. 00:12:21.360 --> 00:12:26.159 Several cases resulting in multimillion dollar high court penalty settlements. 00:12:26.320 --> 00:12:43.120 The regulator has also made it very, very clear in a number of events I've attended where I've heard them publicly speak that they expect full compliance with new mandatory climate disclosures by the 8,000 or so Australian businesses required to report within with a three-year moratorium on broader stakeholder litigation. 00:12:43.279 --> 00:12:47.519 However, that doesn't really mean that they've got three years to get ready for this. 00:12:47.840 --> 00:12:51.919 There are already very active, noteworthy cases in the last couple of years. 00:12:52.080 --> 00:13:00.159 An increasing number of litigation cases are coming from community groups, which in turn is driving corporate behavior or, in some cases, a bit of paranoia. 00:13:00.399 --> 00:13:01.519 Rightly so, I might add. 00:13:01.840 --> 00:13:04.480 Examples include last year's Parents for Climate v. 00:13:04.639 --> 00:13:12.000 Energy Australia case, which has since moved into the broader energy sector in Australia, around 100% energy, green energy claims. 00:13:12.240 --> 00:13:26.720 And internationally, last year, the Venuatu students in the ICJ ruling and back to Australia, Climate Integrity's ACCC referral relating quantities carbon flight offset program, which is still before the regulator. 00:13:26.960 --> 00:13:39.759 Specifically relating to IT or sustainable IT, the Australian government announced environmentally sustainable procurement policies in July last

year, which not many people are aware of, aimed at all ICT purchases over$1 million. 00:13:40.159 --> 00:13:46.159 This includes all Australian public service entities and suppliers and includes environmental claims made suppliers. 00:13:46.320 --> 00:13:58.159 So what we're starting to see is it's starting to fall into the IT industry, possibly with unsuspecting IT practitioners unaware this is coming because if they're not involved in sustainability, they wouldn't see it. 00:13:58.480 --> 00:14:05.600 Tim, I want to kind of pivot the conversation to a few articles that you've written last year and this year. 00:14:05.759 --> 00:14:13.279 One was the 2026 Australian Cloud Reality Check and the IT sustainability maturity assessment that I'd love to talk about. 00:14:13.519 --> 00:14:15.600 Maybe we'll start with the maturity assessment. 00:14:15.679 --> 00:14:18.639 I'd love to have our listeners to hear what's that all about? 00:14:19.039 --> 00:14:27.600 Where would you say that most Australian corporations are sitting in that maturity scale for people, process, and technology? 00:14:28.720 --> 00:14:33.440 But before I go on and answer that question, I just want to give a call out to Dan for inspiring me to write those blogs. 00:14:33.519 --> 00:14:38.399 I've written 20, 25 in the last six months, and Dan kind of inspired me to trigger that. 00:14:38.480 --> 00:14:45.679 So yes, I it's just it's it's a really good excuse to go deep on a certain topic and teach yourself and document it in the process. 00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:46.639 So thanks, Dan. 00:14:46.960 --> 00:14:47.279 Definitely. 00:14:47.519 --> 00:14:52.720 It is no small feat to be able to write that many pieces in a very short period of time. 00:14:52.879 --> 00:14:54.960 It's been phenomenal to see what you've been able to do with it. 00:14:55.200 --> 00:14:58.559 So back on the IT sustainability maturity assessment. 00:14:58.639 --> 00:15:02.720 So this was created by a global nonprofit called Sustainable IT. 00:15:02.879 --> 00:15:08.960 Um, and it's a global community of uh sustainable IT practitioners, as the name suggests. 00:15:09.120 --> 00:15:23.519 The maturity assessment, now in its second year, is a free global assessment to help organizations um understand where they sit today on their IT sustainability journey and then benchmark themselves against a specific region or industry to understand what the neighbors are doing. 00:15:23.679 --> 00:15:29.600 The tool itself then helps participants establish a goal for where they aspire to be in two or three years' time. 00:15:29.759 --> 00:15:37.279 As you mentioned in the question, the assessment covers 45 questions across three broad dimensions of people, process, and technology. 00:15:37.440 --> 00:15:49.679 Under people, you're looking at things like awareness and commitment of your staff, the IT strategy and how it aligns with sustainability, ambition, or goals, and the resources you have access to and people to support that journey. 00:15:49.919 --> 00:15:59.840 Under process, you're looking for things like data processes and tools, the governance, the performance measurement, the change management in the transition of the organization in that journey. 00:16:00.159 --> 00:16:09.919 The training and culture, are you bringing people along and giving them the tools and the knowledge to actually execute, and the and the procurement processes that need to be changed and adopted. 00:16:10.080 --> 00:16:20.000 Then, more specifically in technology, you're looking at the enterprise architectures, how you're designing the future of the organization, all the tools and the supports to execute your business. 00:16:20.159 --> 00:16:24.720 But you're looking at infrastructure management, which includes security and governance of that. 00:16:24.879 --> 00:16:30.799 These are all terms that are very familiar to the IT community, and we're now looking at them from a sustainability lens. 00:16:30.879 --> 00:16:34.960 So this is a relatively straightforward five-minute questionnaire assessment to do. 00:16:35.200 --> 00:16:37.279 Multiple choice, no, no, no block text. 00:16:37.440 --> 00:16:42.720 You get the opportunity to score yourself or your future state in one of five ratings. 00:16:42.879 --> 00:16:44.399 So are you at the beginning level? 00:16:44.480 --> 00:16:45.120 So i.e. 00:16:45.279 --> 00:16:48.159 there's no governance for sustainability initials, very basic. 00:16:48.240 --> 00:16:51.279 It's unstructured, so there's limited governance for sustainability. 00:16:51.440 --> 00:16:55.440 Everyone's kind of doing all kinds of stuff, but it's not really organized and structured. 00:16:55.679 --> 00:17:03.919 Defined, so that's kind of a level three, where it's clearly defined responsibility and accountability, but there's still quite a lot of room for improvement. 00:17:04.079 --> 00:17:17.279 Managed where there's continuous monitoring of progress and a repeat improvement around that, and optimized the ultimate end goal where sustainability is embedded in enterprise and governance and well understood and executed. 00:17:17.519 --> 00:17:22.880 Sounds like utopia, that last one, but that's certainly where we're heading. 00:17:23.119 --> 00:17:32.799 Last time the global assessment was completed in 2024, the organizational mean globally revealed an unstructured current state with an ambition to be managed. 00:17:33.039 --> 00:17:35.839 Reminder, unstructured is limited governance for sustainability. 00:17:35.920 --> 00:17:42.480 That will come as no surprise to listeners on this, with a kind of a global ambition wanting to be managed. 00:17:42.559 --> 00:17:46.880 So essentially currently a level two wanting to be level four. 00:17:47.039 --> 00:17:49.359 Notably, not optimized, which was interesting. 00:17:49.519 --> 00:17:56.559 Optimized is comes with a lot of cost and a lot of potentially overhead, and that seemed to be a little bit ambitious for this community.

00:17:56.799 --> 00:18:03.759 Of interest, the highest rating individual scores were awareness and commitment among people, staff, which is interesting. 00:18:04.240 --> 00:18:07.200 Technology architecture is requiring the most improvement. 00:18:07.279 --> 00:18:15.359 So we're not really designing for sustainability in the future organization, which is definitely a call out for improvement. 00:18:15.759 --> 00:18:23.200 The 2025 assessment remains open, so we can certainly include a link in the show notes of the podcast and listeners for those interested in learning more. 00:18:23.519 --> 00:18:25.599 Certainly encourage you to jump on and uh give it a go. 00:18:25.839 --> 00:18:34.480 Yeah, I think that would be a very interesting exercise to do and maybe a nice bridge for sustainability folk to start engaging with uh with their tech peers. 00:18:34.720 --> 00:18:42.480 Building on that, some recent research classified all Australian cloud environments with either an E or an F rating. 00:18:42.640 --> 00:18:50.079 What specific factors are you seeing as dragging our local cloud efficiency so far behind the global A-rated standard? 00:18:50.319 --> 00:18:55.039 So just a caveat to start with, I'll be more specific and drill down on the all cloud environments. 00:18:55.119 --> 00:19:02.319 This really focuses on the main hyperscalers from Microsoft, Azure, Amazon AWS, and Google Cloud, those three specifically. 00:19:02.559 --> 00:19:07.039 Simply put, Australia's power grid today still relies on fossil fuels, coal and gas. 00:19:07.279 --> 00:19:20.000 Build out of additional renewable power generation, power generation remains on the critical path to decarbonize our grid, but remains very behind schedule to meet our 2030 targets, which is now less than 48 months away. 00:19:20.240 --> 00:19:32.559 Major hyperscaler cloud environments hosted in Australia operate predominantly out of Melbourne, Canberra, and Sydney, all of which source their power from the national electricity market, or as we refer it, the NEM. 00:19:32.880 --> 00:19:43.759 Emissions generated by hosting workloads in a dirty F-rated cloud environment can be as much as 99% higher in CO2 emissions than a green hosting region. 00:19:43.839 --> 00:19:48.799 And we're comparing ourselves to Scandinavia, parts of Europe, Canada, those kind of examples. 00:19:48.960 --> 00:20:00.319 Unfortunately for Australia and much of the Asia Pacific, most cloud environments are hosted in E or F-rated regions, which doesn't give us a lot of wriggle room for sustainability-focused organizations. 00:20:00.559 --> 00:20:10.720 The exception, however, is New Zealand, which is rated B, which benefits from a very low carbon energy grid where power is sourced from a combination of hydro, geothermal, and wind. 00:20:10.960 --> 00:20:17.440 Many of these cloud environments underpin Australia's national digital infrastructure, supporting services, as we mentioned earlier. 00:20:17.599 --> 00:20:23.759 Every time we pick up a device to send a message, join a video call, run an internet search, purchase goods, pay a bill online. 00:20:24.079 --> 00:20:35.680 All these systems relied on by government and business to provide services such as banking, communications, emergency response, even Australia's passport tax and welfare systems are all based on these platforms. 00:20:35.920 --> 00:20:45.680 And Tim, do you think there's any realistic pathways for Australian regions to replicate that success of, you know, that B-rated cloud in New Zealand? 00:20:45.839 --> 00:20:49.759 We know that one of the Azure data centers was rated with a B. 00:20:50.000 --> 00:20:53.359 Is there a realistic pathway for Australian regions to replicate this? 00:20:53.759 --> 00:20:57.680 I'm going to be quite blunt and say this remains a significant challenge for Australia. 00:20:57.920 --> 00:21:04.880 Our largest coal-fired power station in New South Wales got extended for another two years, which is an indication of how challenging this is. 00:21:04.960 --> 00:21:09.279 That provides between 20 and 25% of the state's power in New South Wales. 00:21:09.440 --> 00:21:19.680 Today, the best states for renewable energy grid, um, Tasmania, South Australia, where last year 95 and 84% of electricity generation respectively came from renewable sources. 00:21:19.839 --> 00:21:28.720 Unfortunately, that's not the case in Victoria, New South Wales, and the ACT, where much of Australia's cloud workload is hosted today. 00:21:28.960 --> 00:21:40.079 It will be several years before Australia's cloud environments inch up the scale from their ERF ratings, and more than a decade, I believe, before they appear anywhere close to New Zealand's current position. 00:21:40.240 --> 00:21:49.599 Much of the challenge for green IT centers around a two speed, kind of what I call renewable economy, one being demand, the other being supply. 00:21:49.759 --> 00:21:59.759 The renewable energy builder of supply in Australia is complex, heavily regulated, and reliant on government intervention over many, many years, while on the demand side, technology customers. 00:22:00.160 --> 00:22:13.440 Including cloud hyperscalers, data centers, and increasingly AI platforms are moving fast with very short-term horizons, sometime as little as two or three years, from turning a sort of soil to having a building erected and operational. 00:22:13.920 --> 00:22:33.119 As an illustration for listeners, generation of one kilowatt hour of electricity in the 12 months of 2025 had a carbon intensity of 41 grams of CO2 in New Zealand, 56 grams in Tasmania, 156 grams in South Australia, and get this 464 grams in Victoria. 00:22:33.279 --> 00:22:40.319 And the prize goes to New South Wales and ACT, 481 grams of CO2 per unit of electricity. 00:22:40.480 --> 00:22:56.000 Now that's a massive difference, and we need to draw some attention to organizations and practitioners to make sure they have agency choice around where

they're placing their workloads because essentially they're going to have to invest in offsets if they're going to meet their carbon budget objectives. 00:22:56.240 --> 00:23:19.680 And interestingly, research modeling late last year by the Australian federal government's Clean Energy Finance Corporation found that new electrical demand from data centers would result in the tightening of the electricity supply and could lead to significant wholesale power price increases, specifically plus 26% in New South Wales and plus 23% in Victoria by 2035. 00:23:19.920 --> 00:23:32.480 Crucially, this unmanaged load growth would require greater reliance on fossil fuel generation sources in the short term, resulting in a plus 14% increase in grid emissions across the NEM. 00:23:32.799 --> 00:23:36.559 And that's equivalent to another 6 million tons of CO2 annually. 00:23:36.720 --> 00:23:38.480 A worrying precedent if proven out. 00:23:38.559 --> 00:23:42.799 And I think yesterday's coal-fired power station extension is evidence that that is actually happening. 00:23:43.039 --> 00:23:43.279 Yeah. 00:23:43.440 --> 00:23:52.079 And I mean it just brings to the fore the role that energy security and national security will continue to play for organizations operating in Australia. 00:23:52.319 --> 00:24:00.960 Speaking of, from a commercial and operational perspective, you've just laid out a very complex system in which organizations are operating within. 00:24:01.119 --> 00:24:05.119 Some they can control, some they're they're going to have to be a little bit patient. 00:24:05.359 --> 00:24:19.519 If that is the case, how do you see sustainability and finance partnering with IT to better collaborate in order for them to be able to turn this into a commercial value driver that they can utilize to their benefit? 00:24:19.839 --> 00:24:32.960 So the path from compliance reporting, as we put it, or a chore, I think was the phrase you used, to commercial value really hinges on turning sustainability data into strategic insight and ultimately, the reason we're all here, action. 00:24:33.119 --> 00:24:42.000 The sustainability triangle, as I referred to earlier, helps structure collaboration across the three major functions of sustainability, finance, and IT. 00:24:42.160 --> 00:24:46.880 Ultimately to drive sustainable value creation in any organization. 00:24:47.039 --> 00:25:04.799 The model helps define a set of joint value objectives and governance, elevate data as a commercial asset, as we mentioned earlier, and build the business case and the funding model for sustainability, whilst integrating planning and decision making ahead of operationalizing collaboration to day-to-day routines. 00:25:05.039 --> 00:25:14.400 Critically, it helps address the technology footprint, the responsible use of artificial intelligence, and manage the change and shifting mindset amongst employees. 00:25:14.559 --> 00:25:26.559 Of note, and this is a flag for work that's underway with a sustainable IT nonprofit at the moment, this year in 2026, we are looking to develop templates and tools in the IT business case modeling community. 00:25:26.640 --> 00:25:29.680 So that that that's definitely a live project as we talk. 00:25:30.799 --> 00:25:37.920 I'd like to ask Tim, bringing bringing back that conversation around how do we connect better with that IT function? 00:25:38.720 --> 00:25:44.400 A lot of the times the report serves as a bit of a truth-telling exercise for the organization. 00:25:44.799 --> 00:25:51.039 And in particular for processes that haven't been looked at before, a really good example would be asset management. 00:25:51.200 --> 00:26:02.720 What would you say from your experience working with all these organizations are the internal IT processes that are usually the messiest when they are exposed with this sustainability lens? 00:26:02.960 --> 00:26:13.359 I think really, Loreto, the jury is still out for that award with several contenders vying for line honors across procurement, finance, software and hardware asset management, as you mentioned. 00:26:13.680 --> 00:26:19.039 But don't forget things like building management systems or integrated supplier billing systems. 00:26:19.200 --> 00:26:26.000 This space is evolving rapidly as solutions are built out and processes and tools are maturing. 00:26:26.160 --> 00:26:36.000 However, it now is a really good time for sustainability and IT leaders to get their heads together to determine what success looks like on behalf of their organization. 00:26:36.240 --> 00:26:41.200 Or to put it another way, what standards you as an organization are unwilling to walk past. 00:26:41.359 --> 00:26:42.960 Like what is your minimum standard? 00:26:43.200 --> 00:26:51.519 Be very, very clear in setting your expectations demanded of your technology suppliers and don't just ingest what they provide because you'll be in trouble if you do that. 00:26:51.680 --> 00:26:57.759 When you can't be clear on which path they need to take, any road will ultimately not support your sustainability goals. 00:26:57.839 --> 00:26:59.599 So be clear in what you expect. 00:27:00.000 --> 00:27:00.480 Absolutely. 00:27:00.640 --> 00:27:08.319 And we've previously spoken with you about our listener taking the CIO out for lunch in order to build that relationship out further. 00:27:08.480 --> 00:27:22.079 As the CIO's influence continues to grow on all things ESG, as well as across the entire org, what is the one technical KPI you think sustainability managers should be asking for in their next meeting? 00:27:22.400 --> 00:27:24.960 I'm going to talk about unit economics. 00:27:25.119 --> 00:27:30.559 So understanding and tracking how much carbon-specific key business transactions generate. 00:27:30.720 --> 00:27:32.960 Now that might sound where where's he going with this? 00:27:33.119 --> 00:27:38.240 So many organizations already map their underlying technology use to business function.

00:27:38.559 --> 00:27:41.759 This metric is purely an extension of that to add emissions. 00:27:41.839 --> 00:27:48.480 So rather than looking at money, you're just adding a carbon budget in CO2 or tons of CO2 per transaction. 00:27:48.880 --> 00:27:53.839 Your most relevant metric will be key to driving a specific business process. 00:27:54.079 --> 00:28:04.160 So where your organization adds value to something for customers, for example, in banking, financial track transaction and mapping to the emissions generated at transaction level, for example. 00:28:04.400 --> 00:28:14.160 Ultimately, this is with an aim to uh aim of breaking the link between business growth and carbon to become more emissions efficient in your business processes. 00:28:15.279 --> 00:28:16.640 Super interesting. 00:28:17.200 --> 00:28:33.359 So, Tim, if you think about our listener and the types of organizations that they work for, what would you say is the one key takeaway that you would want them to take from this episode to prepare for changing the way they measure digital sustainability? 00:28:33.759 --> 00:28:35.119 Find and recruit the helpers. 00:28:35.279 --> 00:28:37.119 I think that's probably my takeaway. 00:28:37.440 --> 00:28:43.279 So over one million people work in technology-related jobs in Australia, over 8% of the working population. 00:28:43.519 --> 00:28:46.880 I think we touched on this in the last podcast I was on. 00:28:47.119 --> 00:28:54.400 Research repeatedly shows that many of these tech workers are looking to align their role with impact purpose and ultimately sustainability. 00:28:54.559 --> 00:28:57.440 Extend an invitation, and you may be surprised who shows up. 00:28:57.680 --> 00:28:58.160 I love that. 00:28:58.400 --> 00:28:59.759 If you give them the opportunity. 00:29:09.440 --> 00:29:13.200 Now, for me, this is a difficult question because I I consume all kinds of stuff. 00:29:13.279 --> 00:29:17.039 Some of it I'll pass on, but but I'm gonna I'm gonna share two books with you. 00:29:17.200 --> 00:29:27.440 So one is uh a hot off-the-press publication in its second edition, the Sustainable IT Playbook by Nicholas Umberg and Richard Pasco, who I've met and spoken to several times. 00:29:27.680 --> 00:29:32.880 It's a hand-on guide to designing and scaling sustainable IT strategies for the digital age. 00:29:32.960 --> 00:29:33.920 So it's really a handbook. 00:29:34.160 --> 00:29:41.519 It's predominantly aimed at IT audiences, but from a sustainability practitioner, it might be a good gift to give you CIO when you go for a coffee. 00:29:41.680 --> 00:29:49.440 And then also a recommendation that came to me over Christmas from a highly respected source, and Barack Obama is all over it as well. 00:29:49.519 --> 00:29:57.359 And for some reason I'm late to this book, The Ministry of the Future, published in 2020 by American science fiction writer Kim Stanley Robinson. 00:29:57.440 --> 00:30:04.079 It's a climate fiction cli-fi novel that helps future thinkers among us light up our imagination about a future world. 00:30:04.160 --> 00:30:07.519 So I needed a bit of pick-me-up fiction, I think, over the Christmas holidays. 00:30:07.599 --> 00:30:09.119 So that was my recommendation. 00:30:09.519 --> 00:30:16.640 Next question is who is someone that has inspired you that you think we should have on this podcast? 00:30:16.960 --> 00:30:19.039 So, so many people to this question. 00:30:19.200 --> 00:30:32.880 I'm always inspired by people in sustainability and and the climate worlds and the way they continue to inspire me every day and actively demonstrating resilience, resourcefulness, grit, determination, focus, and ambition. 00:30:33.039 --> 00:30:44.799 But the one specific person I would really highly recommend is that you should have a chat to is Nick Seaton, the CEO of Parents for Climate, and the driving force behind holding major corporates to account in the energy sector. 00:30:44.960 --> 00:30:55.680 I was lucky to be invited to their end-of-year celebration last year, and the energy in the room of the community that Nick and the team are building is well, it's a force to be reckoned with, so watch out 2026. 00:30:56.000 --> 00:30:56.400 Very good. 00:30:56.559 --> 00:30:57.039 I love it. 00:30:57.200 --> 00:30:58.559 We will uh shoot Nick a message. 00:30:58.880 --> 00:31:02.640 What is one piece of positive climate news that you can share with us? 00:31:02.960 --> 00:31:09.920 Hopefully it's positive, but I really, and I know you do too, Dan, look forward to January in the publication of Nat Bullard's presentation. 00:31:10.160 --> 00:31:13.519 Nat was the former Bloomberg New Energy Finance Analyst. 00:31:13.680 --> 00:31:17.599 It sounds horrendous, but he publishes very graphic 200 slides every year. 00:31:17.759 --> 00:31:19.759 It sounds like uh, whoa, 200 slides. 00:31:19.839 --> 00:31:21.519 How could that be uh engaging? 00:31:21.680 --> 00:31:27.839 Um, this year is quite different, I think, from from my first past review of of the slides, but it's really informative. 00:31:27.920 --> 00:31:34.319 He's obviously asking questions, mulling over some interesting points around decarbonisation and climate globally. 00:31:34.400 --> 00:31:35.440 So certainly look out for that. 00:31:35.759 --> 00:31:36.079 Awesome. 00:31:36.160 --> 00:31:38.400 I'm I'm very excited to to check out this year's. 00:31:38.720 --> 00:31:40.000 And Tim, final question. 00:31:40.240 --> 00:31:45.359 If we gave you a magic wand to change one thing in the world, what would you do with it? 00:31:45.680 --> 00:31:51.759 So in my um appearance last time, I waved a wand for a price on carbon, assuming that wish still stands. 00:31:51.839 --> 00:31:58.160 Um I want to double down this time um more specifically around carbon border adjustment mechanism maturity. 00:31:58.240 --> 00:32:07.359 Um, that sounds very dry, but putting a price on carbon really does drive some of the business incentives away from polluting existing products and services. 00:32:07.519 --> 00:32:17.039 Several governments are quite some ways down the path of implementing various forms in in Europe, China, and the UK, maybe even in Australia or part of an APAC CBM. 00:32:17.119 --> 00:32:17.599 So we'll see. 00:32:17.839 --> 00:32:18.240 Excellent. 00:32:18.400 --> 00:32:22.319 That is a very, very good use of uh of the magic wand once again. 00:32:22.480 --> 00:32:25.440 Uh Tim, thank you for coming back to join us. 00:32:25.599 --> 00:32:26.880 We love talking to you. 00:32:27.039 --> 00:32:32.000 Every conversation we have with you, we walk away having learnt something deeper and and broader. 00:32:32.160 --> 00:32:33.359 And this is no exception. 00:32:33.519 --> 00:32:47.759 One of the great things about digital sustainability is moving so fast and is having to respond to so many different pressures coming at it, whether they be legacy or whether they be the future arriving in the present, even faster than we probably predicted. 00:32:47.920 --> 00:32:53.119 And so, yeah, always a standing invitation to come and join us on the Green Fix whenever you see fit. 00:32:53.359 --> 00:32:54.400 Thanks, Loretta and Dan. 00:32:54.480 --> 00:32:54.960 A pleasure. 00:32:55.119 --> 00:32:55.599 Cheers. 00:32:56.400 --> 00:33:00.480 This was Green Fix with your hosts Loretta Gutierrez and Dan Levington. 00:33:00.799 --> 00:33:05.680 You can get your Green Fix every two weeks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Pocket Cast.