The Government Accountability Office has identified a number of leading green IT practices used by federal, state, and local government and private-sector organizations that could save millions of dollars if implemented by additional agencies.
According to a GAO report released last week, several agencies have taken steps to implement federal green IT requirements but aren’t able to effectively measure the results of those efforts.
GAO recommended the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in conjunction with the White House Council on Environmental Quality, direct agencies to implement the leading practices as well as develop baselines for their green IT-related goals and, where possible, targets that measure energy or cost savings or other quantifiable benefits.
The agencies agreed to encourage the use of leading green IT practices but did not agree that additional guidance was needed for measuring performance.
The practices include enhanced leadership, dedicated funding, prioritization of efforts, and improved employee training, as well as acquiring IT equipment with the highest energy efficiency ratings; consolidating equipment and services; reducing use of paper; and using new, more efficient computers. For example, the GAO report states, a 2009 survey of federal employees found agencies spend about $440.4 million per year on unnecessary printing. By contrast, in the non-federal sector, a major IT equipment company implemented managed print services that reportedly reduced the number of printers by 47 percent globally, cut per-page print costs by up to 90 percent, and saved more than $3 million in 2 years in the United States alone.
The GAO report was based on six agencies’ green IT practices (the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, and Health and Human Services; the Environmental Protection Agency; and the General Services Administration).
GAO found the agencies had developed sustainability performance plans and taken additional steps to implement federal requirements. However, GAO also found that the overall effectiveness of the agencies’ efforts cannot be measured because key performance information is not available. Specifically, the report states, the agencies have not identified the information needed to measure the progress or results of their efforts. For example, the agencies have generally not established baselines (starting points) or developed performance targets that are consistently defined in terms of quantifiable benefits, such as a reduction in energy.