Executive Summary

The world’s business happens in data centers. While data centers are typically associated with technology companies, every industry in every corner of the globe needs space to store and process valuable data.

To meet the demands of the modern, AI-driven era, data center capacity will have to dramatically expand. Data center operators need to pursue greenfield projects, building new facilities from the ground up, as well as brownfield projects that modernize older data centers or retrofit other kinds of existing structures.

Creating more capacity is a straightforward goal. However, greenfield and brownfield data center buildouts come with their own respective sets of challenges. Greenfield and brownfield projects also offer different advantages, and an organization has to be strategic in their approach.

This paper aims to assess both strategies. After tracing the evolution of the data center market to the current capacity crunch, this paper identifies the key criteria for any project: meeting cost, sustainability and safety objectives. It details why these are a data center operator’s main priorities and how to meet them.

Next, this paper dives into why an organization may want to embark on the costly, ambitious endeavor of a greenfield data center buildout and what challenges may arise. Then it explores the advantages of brownfield buildouts, which are especially appealing for any organization with substantial investments in existing infrastructure that still hold value.

Lastly, in both greenfield and brownfield buildouts, immediate power delivery is an essential consideration. This paper demonstrates how nickel-zinc (NiZn) battery chemistry, an innovation in battery technology led by ZincFive, delivers immediate power while helping to address many of the obstacles that slow down both greenfield and brownfield projects.

Given the major investments needed to build a modern data center — whether from the ground up or otherwise — decision-makers are sure to consider the most reliable, future-proof technologies available. NiZn battery technology is becoming more common in the data center world as infrastructure operators look for safe, sustainable, cost-efficient ways to grow.

Background and Current Challenges

The data center market has its origins in the mid-1900s, when IBM housed mainframes in designated computer rooms. Since then, the concept of a data center has come to refer to any facility that offers dedicated space for centralized computer and telecommunications systems. In addition to the requisite compute, storage and networking hardware, data centers comprise supporting infrastructure such as power sources, backup power systems and cooling systems.

An enterprise that needs to leverage computing or telecom capabilities has a few options. First, it can build an on-premise data center for its own use. Alternatively, it can use a colocation facility, where computing resources like servers and storage devices are available for rent. The colocation host covers expenses like power, cooling infrastructure and physical security, benefitting from the economies of scale that come from hosting multiple customers. An enterprise can also choose to run its digital operations via cloud-based applications housed in hyperscale data centers — massive facilities run by technology giants like Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft.

The amount of data that flows through data centers has skyrocketed in the digital age. One way to measure data center growth and activity is by their power consumption; this helps us gauge the power draw of the actual servers housed within a data center, which may not directly correlate with a facility’s physical footprint.

In 2014, data center power consumption in the US amounted to approximately 7 gigawatts. By 2022, it reached 17 GW, and it is expected to reach 35 GW by 2030, according to McKinsey analysis¹ — more than doubling in less than a decade. Meanwhile, most of the growing demand for data center power is coming from hyperscalers and colocation facilities. In 2014, enterprises were responsible for nearly 60% of data center power consumption; they now account for around 20%.

Data center demand is growing because commerce, communication and other elements of everyday life are increasingly happening in the digital sphere. The beginning of the AI era is sending demand even higher; enterprises and organizations are taking a growing interest in generative AI, which requires more processing power and more storage.

To keep up with this demand, data center operators will need to create more space. As of mid-2023, data center vacancy rates were declining across the globe². In Q1 2023, Northern Virginia — by far and away the largest data center market — had a vacancy rate of just 1.8%, down from 2.6% a year earlier.

Given market realities — such as data center operators’ budget constraints and the sunk costs of legacy infrastructure — meeting demands for capacity will require a two-fold approach. First, many organizations will find it worthwhile to build entirely new, modern data centers. Building from the ground up on a previously-undeveloped site is known as greenfield construction. Alternatively, it may be more logical for an organization to retrofit existing facilities. Modernization projects that leverage existing facilities are referred to as brownfield projects.

Both brownfield and greenfield data center projects face a number of challenges, including supply chain disruptions, talent shortages, construction delays, a changing regulatory environment and real estate constraints.

Additionally, the industry will have to overcome major power supply constraints, a challenge that’s slowing down data center development around the globe. Supplying sufficient power to data centers will require adequate power generation, as well as improved transmission and distribution. Data center developers can also tackle the challenge with infrastructure that uses power more efficiently.

Given the myriad challenges facing the IT industry, there are key considerations for any data center buildout.

Key Criteria for Greenfield and Brownfield Projects

Any brownfield or greenfield data center buildout must be cost effective, meet increasing sustainability mandates and meet safety requirements.

Cost

Data center operators are making major investments to expand and upgrade their facilities. The global data construction market is forecasted to grow from $50.34 billion (as of 2022) to $73.43 billion by 2028. A decade ago, data center spending accounted for roughly 36% of overall IT spending. Now, it’s projected to account for nearly 53%.

Hyperscalers continue to make eye-popping investments in new facilities. Amazon Web Services in January 2024 announced it would spend 2.26 trillion yen³ (15.3 billion USD) on cloud infrastructure in Tokyo and Osaka between now and 2027. At the same time, Google announced a new $1 billion investment⁴ on just one new data center on a 33-acre site in the UK.

Given the sizable investments at stake, data center operators want every dollar well spent. Furthermore, organizations face serious macroeconomic headwinds such as persistent inflation combined with high interest rates, global political uncertainty, and supply chain disruptions that have increased construction and procurement costs. Limited real estate availability also drives up costs in regions where data center operators want to expand their facilities. Meanwhile, data center operators must look past their initial construction costs and consider the evolution of operating expenditures as well as capital expenditures.

Data center buildouts can keep costs in check with wise investments in different components. Cooling systems, for instance, can account for 15% to 20% of the overall cost of a data center project⁵, making the system design a financially critical decision.

Nickel-zinc batteries, meanwhile, can reduce equipment costs in multiple ways. ZincFive’s battery cabinets offer the smallest footprint-per-watt on the market, minimizing the amount of costly real estate that must be dedicated to backup power systems.

NiZn batteries are also low maintenance and have long life; ZincFive battery cabinets come with a 10-year warranty, as do some lithium-ion battery cabinets. By comparison, traditional lead acid battery cabinets come with a warranty lasting around 3 to 7 years. Additionally, since nickel-zinc battery technology has no thermal runaway at a cell level, it can operate at a wider temperature range than competing battery technologies, saving money on cooling systems.

A decade ago, data center spending accounted for roughly 36% of overall IT spending. Now, it’s projected to account for nearly 53%.

BC 2 Battery Cabinets Powered by Nickel-Zinc Batteries

Sustainability

Increasingly, every data center buildout must consider its environmental impact. Data center architects and operators are expected to rely on renewable energy when possible, minimize energy consumption and use energy as efficiently as possible. These goals are tracked in part by measuring a data center’s power usage effectiveness (PUE), water usage effectiveness (WUE), and carbon footprint.

As governments grapple with climate change, they’re imposing new sustainability requirements on the data center market and the broader economy. The European Union, for instance, updated the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED)⁶ in 2023, requiring data centers to monitor and report their energy consumption and emissions. In the United States, states have largely driven the regulatory environment. For instance, California last year adopted two new laws⁷ requiring companies to disclose more information related to their greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related financial risks. Corporate entities are also feeling the pressure to achieve certain sustainability goals from their shareholders and the general public. According to Gartner⁸, 2022 was the first year surveyed CEOs called environmental sustainability a top 10 strategic business priority.

There are a variety of tactics that data center architects and operators can leverage to meet these sustainability requirements. Hyperscalers, for instance, are adopting innovative air-cooling solutions to drastically cut back on data center water usage.

NiZn batteries are more environmentally friendly than other battery chemistries. A Climate Impact Profile by Boundless Impact Research and Analytics⁹ found that, compared with lead-acid and lithium batteries, NiZn has advantages with lower GHG emissions, water footprint, energy footprint, and other sustainability metrics. Specifically, NiZn batteries’ lifetime greenhouse gas emissions are 4x lower than lead-acid and 6x lower than lithium-ion emissions. Meanwhile, a NiZn battery demands 96% less water from cradle to gate than the average lithium-ion battery. The energy footprint, manufacturing to gate, for NiZn is 23%-33% less than that of lithium-ion batteries and lead-acid pure-lead batteries.

Nickel-zinc batteries use common, widely available, conflict-free materials. Nickel and zinc are abundant in the Earth’s crust, respectively, 4x and 5x more than lithium and lead. They are also fully recyclable, environmentally friendly with a low carbon footprint, and not hazardous.

Because NiZn batteries are highly recyclable, they are a logical component of a “circular economy.” The concept of a “circular economy,” which is gaining traction in corporate conversations, refers to a holistic system that minimizes waste and pollution, keeps products in use, and regenerates natural resources.

Safety

As more data centers are built around the globe, delivering mission-critical services for countless businesses and entities, safety is paramount.

Fires are not only an obvious safety risk within the data center but also a real business risk. The Uptime Institute found that 7% of data center outages in 2023 were caused by fires¹⁰. While not all data center fires are the result of batteries, components such as lithium can certainly accelerate fires, potentially destroying millions of dollars of servers.

Consequently, data center operators have to invest in proper fire suppression, deflagration venting and other safety features. Alternatively, they can invest in safer technology.

NiZn battery chemistry is inherently safer than both lead-acid and lithium-ion, with no thermal runaway at the cell level. The aqueous electrolyte lacks the flammability and reactivity of organic solvent-based electrolytes used in lithium batteries, which, when failed, can emit toxic fumes.

Compared to lead-acid batteries, ZincFive’s nickel-zinc batteries do not out-gas during normal operation.

UL 9540A testing shows that ZincFive’s nickel-zinc batteries do not exhibit thermal runaway, making them non-flammable and non-reactive to air and water.

The result is reduced safety-related infrastructure, lower costs, and peace of mind.

Greenfield & Brownfield Data Center Projects

Greenfield Data Center Projects

As the demand for data center capacity continues to grow, hyperscalers are leading the way in greenfield deployments. Hyperscalers have the capital to start from scratch. It takes significant resources to scout out available real estate in strategically sound locations, and then build an entirely new facility that can accommodate leading-edge innovation. A new hyperscale data center typically costs upwards of $200 million, with the potential to reach into the billions.

In 2023, hyperscalers operated approximately 900 data centers worldwide, according to Synergy Research Group, accounting for about 37% of worldwide capacity. Overall data center capacity is expected to double by 2028, with hyperscalers accounting for more than half of it.

Building a greenfield data center is about more than simply adding capacity. As hyperscalers extend their reach to new markets and geographic regions, they need to bring their infrastructure closer to their customers. Furthermore, cloud customers are increasingly reliant on distributed workloads, leveraging data centers in different regions of the world to better serve their own customers. More distributed infrastructure also allows cloud customers to better utilize edge-based technologies.

Building from the ground up also gives an organization the opportunity to take different design approaches. Traditionally, data center buildouts take a stick-built approach: materials are delivered to the site of construction, and the facility is built from the ground up. However, data center operators are increasingly turning to modular designs, relying on pre-built components to quickly establish a larger data center footprint.

Modular data centers represent a small but growing portion of the market: in 2022, they accounted for 3.6% of overall data center revenue, according to research firm Omdia. That figure should reach 5% by the end of 2026. The modular data center market in 2026 is forecast to be worth $5.25 billion, up from $3.25 billion in 2023.

In some cases, an organization may want to take a hybrid approach, building a custom-designed data center that includes pre-built power or cooling modules. With current mainstream battery technology, this can be a challenging approach. With some lithium-ion batteries, for instance, a standalone power module would need to include an HVAC system to ensure a maximum temperature within the module of 28 degrees Celsius. It would require a fire suppression system and a deflagration vent. The entirety of the internal structure would have to meet higher burn ratings. On top of all that, these changes to the structure of the container in some areas require different permitting, taxation, and can hamper the data center’s overall footprint.

By comparison, with NiZn battery technology, the option of installing a power module outside of a main server building becomes significantly simpler, safer and more cost effective. Given that NiZn batteries have no thermal runaway at the cell level, the modular unit does not require a fire suppression system. Additionally, container operations can reach up to 35 degrees Celsius; thus, it reduces cooling costs and reduces the footprint occupied by the HVAC system. NiZn batteries also offer higher power density, discharging high levels of power quickly. Compared to conventional lead-acid batteries, ZincFive’s NiZn batteries offer up to 3x the power density while being half the size and one third of the weight.

All told, using NiZn batteries instead of lithium-ion batteries can reduce the length of a modular power container by several feet. This is noteworthy, given that the average container costs approximately $10,000 per foot. Additionally, ZincFive’s modular battery cabinets are significantly more cost effective because the batteries ship from the ZincFive factory to their destination inside the cabinet. Due to the volatile nature of lithium-ion batteries, some brands must be shipped separately and installed upon arrival.

Meanwhile, hyperscalers intent on optimizing the footprint of new data centers have resources they can leverage, such as the Open Compute Project’s data center design principles.

For instance, the collaborative industry organization — helmed by major companies including Meta, IBM, Intel, Nokia, Google and Microsoft — opted to include a distributed offline backup power strategy in its design principles, as opposed to a standard inline centralized UPS for backup power. ZincFive’s in-rack battery backup units allow data center organizers to take a distributed approach.

As with any major capital investment, a number of external factors can impact the construction of a greenfield data center. Macroeconomic headwinds, global political uncertainty and supply chain challenges all impact the data center market. In key markets, the limited availability of land — whether due to high costs, political interference or both— is a major challenge. 

Northern Virginia, for instance, is the largest data center market in the world and remains a desirable location for new infrastructure. However, data center buildouts have experienced delays in recent years, in part because of local opposition.

Limited power capacity is also a serious constraint on the greenfield data center market. In Singapore, for instance, the government in 2019 enacted a three-year moratorium on data center construction in response to the energy consumption they require. Meanwhile, in London — the second-largest data center market — “a key electricity substation upgrade in the western corridor has been delayed,” according to CBRE. “As a result, securing power from the grid operator is almost impossible for the next few years. This is a problem for the hyperscalers, given their desire to expand their availability zones in the western corridor.”

Brownfield Data Center Projects

While greenfield buildouts will significantly contribute to the growth of the overall data center market, breaking ground on an entirely new facility isn’t always the logical way to build more capacity.

Organizations of all kinds — including hyperscalers, enterprises, medical facilities and educational institutions, to name a few — have existing data centers or other sites that they can retrofit with modern data center technology. Brownfield buildouts allow organizations to leverage the real estate already in their possession, as well as legacy IT equipment. By pursuing a brownfield buildout, an organization can potentially avoid the regulatory hurdles that can slow down greenfield projects. All told, brownfield projects can be completed relatively quickly and with a smaller budget.

Brownfield projects are sure to look more appealing to enterprises ready to integrate AI into their workflows. While hyperscalers are already making significant investments in AI-powered products, the opportunities to leverage AI extend far beyond the walls of Microsoft or Google. Nearly half of organizations surveyed last year said they were evaluating the business use cases for AI. However, to keep up with the demand generated by AI, data center capacity will need to grow by nearly 300%, according to one estimate.

Modular data center expansions provide ways for organizations to quickly add capacity to existing operations. For instance, an enterprise could add a power module unit outside of its existing data center, delivering more power capacity to support increasing compute power within a facility. Alternatively, adding a power module outside of the data center would allow an enterprise to strip out old power and cooling infrastructure that sits within the facility, occupying valuable floor space. As is the case for greenfield projects, brownfield projects can add power modules that leverage NiZn battery technology for simple, safe and cost effective power expansions.

NiZn batteries also provide an option for data center operators who want to replace existing lead-acid batteries with a safe, longer-lasting and more sustainable option. ZincFive offers a NiZn drop-in replacement for lead-acid UPS batteries. It is adapted to use the same charging system as lead-acid batteries, making the replacement process seamless. NiZn batteries have an operating life up to 3x that of lead-acid batteries, thanks to the stable, non-corroding positive nickel current collector in nickel-zinc batteries.

NiZn batteries also give data center operators a way to make existing facilities more sustainable. Generally speaking, sustainability goals are easier to reach with greenfield projects, which can use the most sustainable components for every part of the facility. Brownfield projects may include building materials that are less energy efficient, for instance. Older buildings may also have different layouts that simply make them harder to cool efficiently. However, the cradle to grave carbon footprint of a nickel-zinc battery is significantly less than lead-acid or lithium batteries.

Additionally, NiZn batteries’ lifetime greenhouse gas emissions are 4x lower than lead-acid and 6x lower than lithium-ion emissions. Furthermore, nickel-zinc batteries use common, widely available, conflict-free materials.

Brownfield projects face many of the same external challenges as greenfield projects, including economic headwinds and supply chain disruptions. While limited real estate can be a challenge for greenfield projects, it may counterintuitively serve as an advantage for brownfield buildouts — there may be economic incentives available for organizations that can modernize older buildings.

Data center operators may also run up against resistance within their own organization, if leaders are inclined to use existing infrastructure as long as possible before undertaking modernization projects. However, technologies like NiZn can help make a compelling case for facility upgrades. For one thing, NiZn batteries are more reliable than lead-acid or lithium-ion batteries — the cells remain conductive even when weak or depleted. Most leaders would agree that the risk of letting business-critical systems fail is not worth taking simply to squeeze a few more years out of existing battery backup systems. Furthermore, NiZn batteries can help reduce operating costs by reducing the need for safety infrastructure.

Conclusion

Data center operators have reached a critical point where they must decide how to add capacity to their operations. If they do not, they risk being left behind while competitors host new, in-demand, power-hungry AI tools.

There are a few key considerations for every data center buildout: cost, safety and sustainability. Along with other bleeding-edge technologies, ZincFive’s field-proven nickel-zinc battery technology can help data center architects and operators meet requirements in each of these areas. Entities that need more data center capacity can pursue greenfield projects or brownfield projects. One route may make more sense than the other, given an organization’s size, existing infrastructure, available capital and capacity needs.

In each of these scenarios, incorporating nickel-zinc battery technology is a wise choice.

Citations

1 https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-telecommunications/our-insights/investing-in-the-rising-data-center-economy

2 https://www.cbre.com/insights/reports/global-data-center-trends-2023

3 https://press.aboutamazon.com/aws/2024/1/aws-plans-to-invest-2-26-trillion-yen-into-its-japanese-cloud-infrastructure-by-2027

4 https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/google-to-invest-1-billion-in-united-kingdom-data-centre-302038632.html

5 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230703133703/en/Worldwide-Data-Center-Construction-Market-Report-2023-A-73.43-Billion-Market-by-2028—Market-Growth-Enablers-Restraints-and-Trends—ResearchAndMarkets.com

6 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-e³ciency/energy-efficiency-targets-directive-and-rules/energy-effciency-directive_en

7 https://watershed.com/blog/california-sb-253-and-sb-261-a-guide-for-companies

8 https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-05-18-gartner-survey-reveals-signifcant-shifts-in-ceo-thinking-on-sustainability-workforce-issues-and-infation-in-2022

9 ZincFive Climate Impact Profile

10 https://uptimeinstitute.com/resources/research-and-reports/annual-outage-analysis-202

Executive Summary

Advanced energy storage solutions are increasingly needed to transition the electricity grid, transportation, building and industrial sectors towards renewable energy sources. ZincFive’s nickel-zinc battery is a high-capacity battery with environmental and safety advantages. The materials comprising ZincFive’s battery are non-flammable and environmentally benign compared to lithium-ion and lead acid batteries. ZincFive’s ecological advantages and performance specifications drive its demand in a wide range of high-growth applications, such as data centers, intelligent (communicating) transportation, motive and start-stop applications.

Alignment with SDGs

Affordable and Clean Energy

Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure

Responsible Consumption and Production

Climate Action

Climate Impact Score: 9.4/10

Boundless performed an environmental assessment of ZincFive’s nickel-zinc battery, to quantitatively measure environmental outcomes and illustrate the relative benefits of its technology compared to traditional battery chemistries such as lithium-ion, lead-acid and sodium sulfur. Using its customized life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, Boundless measured the impact and retained an independent battery industry expert to review the findings.

The assessment identified and analyzed the Carbon Return on Purchase (CROP), GHG Footprint, Energy Footprint, Water Footprint, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Footprint, Carbon Payback Time (CPT) and the Levelized Cost of Storage (LCOS) of ZincFive’s battery. The life-cycle inputs and impacts were evaluated considering raw material production, procurement and battery cell fabrication. Results were normalized relative to one kWh of stored energy and compared against lead-acid variants including pure lead (PbA Pure Lead), absorbent glass mat (PbA AGM), and acid–gel (PbA Gel), and lithium-ion variants including nickel-manganese-cobalt (Li-Ion NMC), nickel-cobalt-aluminum (Li-Ion NCA), and iron-phosphate (Li-Ion LFP), as well as sodium sulfur (NaS).

Using a formulaic comparison to measure relative performance across all metrics, ZincFive’s technology scored a 9.4 out of 10 impact score on its overall performance. This Boundless Climate Impact Score is based on per kWh impact for above mentioned performance indicators and shows that ZincFive has significant environmental advantages over its competitors. The Climate Impact Score includes an analysis of the Levelized Cost of Storage of ZincFive’s nickel-zinc battery. however this metric is excluded from this report for confidentiality reasons. Details to the score rationale can be found in appendix F.

Boundless assessed the Carbon Return on Purchase (CROP) metric using technology specific assumptions for energy storage and standardized depth of discharge rates to compare alternatives on an energy basis. The CROP metric measures the greenhouse gases avoided by ZincFive’s customers per kWh of customer energy storage. Analysis showed that ZincFive’s customers can realize significant GHG savings by investing in ZincFive’s nickel-zinc battery, compared to lithium-ion, lead-acid and sodium sulfur batteries. Customers purchasing ZincFive’s battery can save up to six times more GHG emissions compared to lithium-ion NMC and NCA batteries, and even higher compared to lithium-ion LFP batteries due to their relatively high GHG footprint. Analysis showed that up to four times more GHG emissions can be saved compared to lead-acid AGM and gel batteries. Per one-million dollar ZincFive batteries purchased, 148,255 tonnes of CO2e savings can be realized by enabling renewable energy to enter the grid. This can be compared against 23,243 tonnes of CO2e savings per one-million dollar lithium-ion batteries purchased (averaged of all lithium-ion chemistries in this analysis), and 8,251 tonnes per one-million dollar lead-acid batteries purchases (averages of all lead-acid chemistries in this analysis). The results of the complete analysis have been summarized in the spider-chart on the next page.

The ZincFive battery GHG Footprint was estimated to be 59 kgCO2e per kWh of stored energy, which is significantly lower than the GHG Footprint of lithium-ion (Li-Ion), lead-acid (PbA), and sodium sulfur (NaS) batteries. 38% of the GHG Footprint for the ZincFive battery is derived from the two main materials that compose the battery, zinc oxide (13%) and nickel(II) hydroxide (15%). ZincFive batteries only use safe and abundant materials that mitigate battery hazards, health risks and scarcity concerns. ZincFive’s battery uses only a small amount of cobalt compared to lithium-ion batteries, so the sustainability concerns around this material are minimized. Both zinc and nickel are relatively abundant materials, four-times and five-times more abundant than lithium in the earth’s crust, respectively.

In addition to the CROP and the GHG Footprint of ZincFive’s battery, Boundless also analyzed the Carbon Payback Time (CPT), which measures the time it takes for a battery to offset its GHG Footprint by supporting more renewable resources to supply the electricity grid. The CPT was estimated to be between 0.16 and 0.21 years, four times faster than lithium-ion and lead-acid batteries and up to six times faster than sodium sulfur batteries. All other batteries reported a potential CPT exceeding one year.

The Energy, Water and VOC Footprint of ZincFive’s battery were also analyzed. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are emitted as gases from solids and are known for creating short- and long-term adverse health effects. Unlike lithium-ion and lead-acid batteries, the ZincFive battery does not use VOCs in production. The Water Footprint of the ZincFive battery, including water requirements for raw material extraction, was estimated to be 96% lower than the average Water Footprint of lithium-ion batteries. For comparison, the Water Footprint of lead-acid batteries is 99% lower than the average lithium-ion battery, and roughly three times lower than ZincFive’s battery. Lastly, the Energy Footprint of ZincFive’s battery was estimated to be between 20 and 35 percent less than lithium-ion batteries, sodium sulfur batteries and lead-acid pure lead batteries. It was found to be slightly higher than lead-acid AGM and lead-acid gel batteries, mainly because these batteries are highly recyclable, and a strong recycling infrastructure is in place. 

Boundless engaged Dr. Kent. J. Griffith, a battery chemistry expert and postdoctoral researcher at Northwestern University, to review the ZincFive assessment and validate the assumptions made in calculating the environmental metrics. Dr. Griffith concluded that the inputs to the study are detailed and correct, and that the ZincFive battery was compared to a diverse range of relevant energy storage technologies. A summary of Dr. Griffith’s review is included in Appendix D.

Environmental Key Performance Indicators (EKPIs)

We evaluated the life-cycle inputs and impacts per kWh for the ZincFive battery, considering raw material production, procurement and battery cell fabrication. Results are normalized relative to one kWh of stored energy and compared against lithium-ion, lead-acid, and sodium sulfur technologies, more specifically for: lead-acid variants including pure lead (PbA Pure Lead), absorbent glass mat (PbA AGM), and acid–gel (PbA Gel), and lithium-ion variants including nickel-manganese-cobalt (Li-Ion NMC), nickel-cobalt-aluminum (Li-Ion NCA), and iron-phosphate (Li-Ion LFP), and sodium sulfur (NaS).

Calculations of environmental metrics used to determine climate impact benefit.

NOTES: Consistent with conventions within the financial sector, we use the Roman numeral “M” to denote “thousand” and “MM” for “millions.”

Carbon Return on Customer Purchase

Measures the greenhouse gases avoided by ZincFive’s customers per kWh of customer energy storage.

• The Carbon Return on Purchase (CROP) shows that ZincFive’s customers can realize significant GHG savings by investing in ZincFive’s nickel-zinc battery, compared to lithium-ion, lead-acid and sodium sulfur batteries.
• ZincFive’s CROP ranges from 21 to 26 kgCO2e per kWh energy storage. Customers purchasing ZincFive’s nickel-zinc batteries can save up to 6 times more GHG emissions compared to lithium-ion NMC and NCA batteries, and higher compared to lithium-ion LFP batteries. Up to 4 times more GHG emissions can be saved compared to lead-acid AGM and Gel batteries.
• Technology specific assumptions for energy storage and depth of discharge were used to compare alternatives on an energy basis, each with standardized 500 cycles per year for every year of operating life.
• Each kWh of stored energy (and associated losses) are assumed to be supplied by non-emitting electricity and displaces marginal U.S. grid electricity.

Carbon Payback Time

Time required for emissions savings from the product’s use to offset the GHG of its production. All scenarios assume 500 cycles per year for every year of operating life and that each kWh of stored energy (and associated losses) are supplied by non-emitting electricity and displace marginal U.S. grid electricity.

• The ZincFive battery takes between 0.16 and 0.21 years to offset the embedded carbon due to its production, which is significantly lower than the lithium-ion, lead-acid and sodium sulfur batteries.
• The Carbon Payback Time of lithium-ion batteries is on average 4.1 times longer than the Carbon Payback Time of the ZincFive battery. The carbon payback time for lead-acid and sodium sulfur batteries is on average 3.9 and 6.2 times longer.
• All other batteries report a potential Carbon Payback Time exceeding one year.

Product GHG Intensity

GHG emissions were measured as CO2 equivalent per kWh of stored energy.

• GHG emissions for the ZincFive battery ranged from 51.0 to 66.5 kgCO2e/kWh
• The GHG Footprint for PbA Gel and Pba Pure Lead was calculated starting with the GHG intensity of PbA AGM and replacing glass by fumed silica and recycled lead by virgin lead respectively.
• ZincFive’s estimated GHG Footprint is roughly half of its competitors. The GHG Footprint of ZincFive’s battery is 63% lower compared to lithium-ion batteries, 37% lower than lead-acid batteries and 54% lower than sodium sulfur batteries.

Energy Footprint

A measure of the energy input per kWh of stored energy.

• The estimated Energy Footprint of the ZincFive battery ranged from 581 MJ to 872 MJ per kWh.
• The Energy Footprint for PbA Gel and PbA Pure Lead was calculated starting with the energy intensity of PbA AGM and replacing glass by fumed silica and recycled lead by virgin lead, respectively.
• Energy Footprint estimates for the ZincFive battery were 33% less than lithium-ion batteries, 23% less than lead-acid Pure Lead batteries and 32% less than sodium-sulfur batteries.
• The Energy Footprint of PbA AGM and PbA Gel batteries is 12% lower than the ZincFive battery, this is mainly because these batteries can be efficiently recycled.

Solvent / VOC Footprint

Measures the Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) required for manufacturing per kWh of stored energy

• The ZincFive battery uses no solvents or toxic chemicals. This is also the case for sodium-sulfur batteries.
• Average VOC Footprint of lithium-ion batteries is 5.5 grams / kWh.
• Average VOC Footprint of lead-acid batteries is 12 grams / kWh.
• Our independent expert review suggests that the values reported appear low for lithium-ion battery cathodes deposited via NMP solvent, because the typical solvent volume fraction may be approximately 30% and the cathode comprises a significant fraction (>1/3) of the cell.¹

Water Footprint

Water use for raw material extraction and the manufacturing process per kWh of stored energy.

• The Water Footprint of the ZincFive battery ranges from 7.2 to 10.8 gallons per kWh, and averages 9.0 gallons per kWh.
• The ZincFive battery requires 96% less water for material extraction and production than the average lithium-ion battery, whereas the Water Footprint of lead-acid batteries is 99%  lower than the average lithium-ion battery.
• Lead-acid batteries have a low Water Footprint because of their high degree of recyclability and recycling infrastructure.

Environmental Highlights

Summarized below are most relevant impact categories and codes that refer to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The associated metrics highlight the most important factors that explain how this technology is impacting the environment.

Material Use

ZincFive batteries use safe and abundant materials that mitigate battery hazards, health risks and scarcity concerns. Nickel and zinc are four and five times more abundant in the earth’s crust, respectively, than lithium and lead.² They are also non-toxic substances that can be handled safely by production workers and customers alike. Whereas the ZincFive battery is nonflammable, lithium’s reactivity with air and water creates an inherent fire hazard. The ZincFive battery composition requires minimal cobalt usage, mitigating human rights concerns with the procurement of cobalt in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It also completely avoids the global health concerns of lead exposure. ZincFive battery manufacturing also requires no solvents, unlike lithium-ion and lead-acid battery manufacturing. Relevant code: SDG 12.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The production of the ZincFive battery has lower GHG emissions per kWh of stored energy, compared to lithium-ion, lead-acid and sodium sulfur storage technologies. The GHG emissions of the production of ZincFive cells are 58.8 kgCO2e per kWh, or 5.3 kgCO2e per cell kilogram. On average, with ZincFive storage technology ~112 kg of CO2e can be saved per kWh of energy storage capacity compared to lithium-ion batteries, ~36 kg of CO2e per kWh compared to lead-acid batteries, and ~70 kg of CO2e per kWh compared to sodium sulfur batteries (please refer to Appendix A). GHG savings per kWh compared to lithium-ion batteries are equivalent to 278 miles driven by an average passenger car, and 89 miles when compared to lead-acid batteries. Savings are primarily driven by the materials that make up the batteries. Note that this analysis uses the 100-year GWP (Global Warming Potential). Using an alternative 20-year GWP assumption shows 23.5% higher emissions (72.7 kgCO2e per kWh). Relevant Code: SDG 13.

Clean Energy

Advanced energy storage is increasingly needed to transition the electricity grid, transportation, building and industrial sectors toward renewable energy resources. To accommodate intermittent supply, renewable electricity integration requires utility-scale storage, as well as demand-side energy storage to better manage loads. Data centers are a prime example of large electricity consumers that can deploy energy storage backup for operations and grid reliability to aid renewable power integration through the addition of advanced storage technologies like ZincFive’s. A sustainable transportation sector also requires dramatic increases in battery use. As market share for electric vehicles increases, not only do tailpipe emissions decline, but grid-connected vehicles may further aid operational flexibility and renewable energy utilization. ZincFive’s technology can help automakers meet growing EV charging demand with more environmentally benign materials. Relevant code: SDG 7.

Resiliency

ZincFive’s systems are designed to provide reliable power to businesses and residences. The low maintenance, small footprint, and ability to operate at high temperatures enables ZincFive’s batteries to be used in environments where the market increasingly demands green, sustainable power. Relevant Code: SDG 9.

Appendix A: Methodology

Key Goals

Key goals of this analysis were to:

1. Examine environmental performance in conjunction with financial data to arrive at environmental and hybrid environmental-financial metrics for ZincFive’s storage technology versus existing technologies.
2. Provide equitable comparisons among relevant alternative technologies.
3. Incorporate a variety of methodological considerations that are relevant to the energy storage industry and which were expected to bear upon the results.

To ensure that these key goals were reached, an independent industry expert reviewed the study and assumptions to ensure that the methodology was coherent with industry standards. The expert review and commentary notes are provided in Appendix D.

Methodology 

To address the first goal, Boundless researched the material, energy, and performance characteristics for ZincFive’s energy storage technology, based on detailed information provided by ZincFive, describing the material components and energy inputs. At the core of the methodology is a life-cycle assessment (LCA) model for a kWh of stored energy on the ZincFive battery. The functional unit (FU) of this LCA was a kWh of stored energy, such that embodied energy and emissions are estimated for the battery production. We used SimaPro v9.0.0.41 and employed the IPCC 2013 methodology when calculating life-cycle impacts of material and energy systems not described elsewhere in the literature. The complete set of detailed calculations, impact assessment factors, assumptions, and references are available as Supporting Information (SI) upon request.

Each metric compares ZincFive’s technology against alternative technologies. Metric construction for industry alternatives relies on comparisons, for which we relied on scientific literature, industry reports, white papers, as well as assumptions provided by the industry expert. The impact metrics are reported graphically using bar charts to illustrate a baseline result value, along with sensitivity bars reflecting a range of possible result values around deployment scenarios and key variables.

Research Approach

• Followed a life-cycle analysis approach and leveraged professional LCA software/data and scientific literature.
• Investigated non-GHG metrics, including water footprint and minerals use.
• Accounted for emissions offsets occurring from hypothetical marginal electricity system impact assuming energy storage facilitated renewable generation on a 1:1 basis.
• Identified sources of uncertainty and quantified their impact on results.
• Included important financial and operational variables to estimate the cost of production.

Appendix B: List of Metrics

Appendix C: Summary of Life Cycle Product Inventory

Appendix D: Independent Expert Review

Independent Industry Expert

Kent J. Griffith holds a PhD in battery materials from the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. He has ten years of experience in electrochemical and battery research and development. Kent is also the founder and CTO of a start-up company commercializing efficient, fast charging and high-power lithium-ion batteries based on new, patent-protected electrode materials. His experience in technical subfields includes cathode and anode chemistry, solid electrolytes for all solid-state batteries, nickel-rich NMC degradation and protection, fast charging battery applications, high power chemistries and electrode formulation, characterization and specification of batteries for individual applications (e.g. energy density, safety, power, variable temperature operation), mineralogy, materials synthesis and recycling.

Summary of Expert Review

Boundless Impact Investing analyzed the environmental impacts of the ZincFive nickel–zinc battery technology. The comprehensive life cycle analysis explicitly considered factors including air, water, carbon, levelized cost, and energy. The outputs of the report – e.g. environmental footprints and carbon payback time – are the result of evaluating individual cell components with data-supported environmental impact measures. The inputs are detailed and thus the assumptions are minimal. A diverse range of relevant energy storage technologies are included for comparison, including sub-categories of the major competing technologies: lithium-ion and lead-acid.

New battery technologies are emerging on the market now and in the next five years, and the trend is toward environmentally-friendly products. The strong trend toward high energy-density batteries is dependent on nickel-rich cathode chemistries, which have the simultaneous benefit of eliminating toxic cobalt. This report accounts for the trend toward nickel-rich LIBs as well as the variability in the nickel content of cells on the market. Water-based processing of cathodes is targeted but challenging, particularly for nickel-rich materials. For non-NMC/NCA chemistries, LFP is making movement for EVs in China, and lithium–sulfur will be coming online ca. 2023 from a large plant in Brazil. Silicon is partially-replacing graphite for lithium-ion anodes but the cost, energy, and environmental impacts are minimal at the present levels. Several other technologies one hears about, such as solid-state batteries and lithium metal batteries, are not mature and thus appropriately left out of this report. Cost may be driving the move away from cobalt and organic solvent processing/waste, but the environmental advantages will be there too. The analysis here focuses on the present state-of-the-art technologies with realistic considerations of materials, cost, and energy density.

The cost of energy storage depends strongly on the application. ZincFive batteries are suited for large-scale applications requiring a high degree of safety and reliability with a long shelf-life. Their energy density is intermediate between lead-acid and lithium-ion energy cells. However, the ZincFive stated power density is higher than conventional lithium-ion batteries, even when the latter are optimized in power cells. Thus the ZincFive technology may be well-suited for certain high-power applications. The Boundless report accounts for the variation in application of lithium-ion batteries with a range of energy densities that covers energy and power cells. For completeness, the metrics are evaluated on both a mass and energy density basis.

Battery collection and recycling practices are mature for lead-acid batteries but at a juvenile stage for lithium-ion batteries. The variation in lithium-ion battery chemistry, the minor contribution of each of many components, and the low resale value of most materials hinder lithium-ion battery recycling. The recyclability of the nickel–zinc battery is likely to be considerably better than lithium-ion because the electrodes are simpler composites than lithium-ion, and closer in a recyclability-sense to lead-acid, which has an excellent recycling record.

Appendix E: Global Warming Potentials

How Global Warming Potential Scenarios highlight the importance of investing in Emission Reduction Technologies 

The methane impact from emissions depends on which Global Warming Potential (GWP) is used. GWP is a metric measuring how much heat a greenhouse gas traps in the atmosphere up to a specific time horizon, relative to carbon dioxide. The larger methane molecule provides a warming potential that is 28-36X that of CO2 in a 100-year timeframe. (That is, over 100 years, methane traps 28 times more heat per mass unit than carbon dioxide). The lifespan of methane in the atmosphere was estimated at 9.6 years, and CO2 is much longer (estimated from 20-200 years). In the shorter 20-year timeframe, methane’s impact would, therefore, be 84-87X that of CO2, and the GHG savings for all landfill technologies would be greater. Investment in methane reduction using this shorter timeframe increases the return for investment by a factor of 2.2-3X. The 20-year timeframe is especially important when considering critical climate change mitigation efforts needed over the next two decades.

Appendix F: Score Rationale

Climate Impact Score

The climate impact value is a number (1=worse to 10=best). This number represents an overall indicator of a company’s climate impact performance against its most relevant industry competitors. The value is obtained by comparing the average of each resulting EKPIs for the company against its competitors. The score for each metric can be read from the summary Spider Chart of the profile for each product. The EKPIs are developed and displayed in the detailed graphs for both the target company and the competing companies.

ZincFive has a generally advantageous, performance when compared to its competitors. For example, ZincFive’s technology has a lower GHG Footprint than its competitors, but a higher Energy Footprint than its lead-acid competitors. Using a formulaic comparison to measure relative performance across all EKPIs, ZincFive’s technology scored a 9.4 out of 10 on its climate performance.

Appendix G: Report Development Team

Paul Meier, Director of Climate Impact

Paul has worked with industry, government and public interest groups on energy and environmental issues since 1995. His efforts have focused extensively on the use of energy systems modeling to support decision-making. Paul has led multi-disciplinary research efforts to evaluate energy alternatives at the national, regional, and state levels and spanning electricity, transportation, and building energy sectors. From 2006–2016, Paul served as a Scientist and Energy Institute Director at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. From 2016–2018 he served as Director of Engineering for Blumont Engineering Solutions. Paul has environmental engineering degrees from Purdue University and Clemson University and earned his Doctorate from the Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies at the UW – Madison. He is a licensed professional engineer.

Fernanda Avila Swinburn, Research Analyst

Fernanda graduated from Columbia University in 2018 with a Master’s degree in Sustainability Management and a focus on renewable energy, sustainability strategies, data analysis, and life cycle assessment. Prior to Columbia, she graduated from Universidad de Chile with a master’s degree in Electrical Engineering. Fernanda has experience modeling demand side management systems for micro-grids and renewable resources forecasting. Her work on these topics was recognized with the first place of the Eco-Logicas Monograph competition, given by the “Instituto para o Desenvolvimento de Energias Alternativas na América Latina”. She has worked as a consultant performing energy price projection and the modeling of power purchase agreements for developers and financial institutions. She also has experience developing sustainability strategies and life cycle assessment for organizations in different sectors, such as a music festival, a foundry plant, and a coffee roasting company.

Andreas van Giezen, M.S., Research Analyst

Andreas graduated from Delft University of Technology (TU Delft) in The Netherlands in 2018 with a Master’s degree in Management of Technology, focusing on Infrastructure & Environmental Governance. He received a special annotation with his degree for his thesis work focusing on sustainable development of technologies. Prior to TU Delft, he graduated from Inholland University of Applied Sciences with a Bachelor’s degree in Aeronautical Engineering. Andreas interned for research & development projects at universities in both the Netherlands and China and won a nationwide contest for engineering students active in the energy industry in the Netherlands. He was previously employed at an international engineering consultancy firm, researching the social and technical impacts of ultra-deep geothermal energy projects. Andreas also has experience with academic research on ocean plastic collection logistics.

Michele Demers, Founder, CEO

Boundless Founder and CEO Michele Demers has 20 years of experience as a philanthropy executive, strategist, and social entrepreneur. She is Founder and CEO of Boundless Impact Investing, a market intelligence platform that provides high-quality, objective, and actionable research and tools to family offices and private investors interested in maximizing the social and environmental impact of their investments. From 2010–2013, she was Vice President at Foundation Source where she built a knowledge platform on best practices in philanthropy that was used by a network of 1200 family foundations. From 2007–2008, Michele was the Director of Communications for Humanity United. She has been involved in the successful development of more than two-dozen philanthropic and nonprofit start-ups, including her own, Tattersall Consulting, from 2002 to 2007. Michele is regularly called upon for her innovative thinking about impact investing and social enterprise. She is a graduate of Pennsylvania State University and has a Master’s in International Relations and Communications from Boston University.

Jack Cederroth, Director of Operations

Jack is an accomplished global operations and platform management leader with more than thirty years’ experience in the Financial Services and Financial Technology arena. During that time, he has worked extensively creating, implementing, and supporting enterprise-wide data and analytics platforms and services for the investment community. He is versed and trained in Lean Six Sigma techniques and principles. Prior to joining Boundless, he was the Global Head of Operations at S&P’s Securities Evaluation business unit where he established and led a twenty-four-by-seven follow the sun customer support model for their enterprise reference data and evaluation feed products. As a member of the leadership team, he helped define the strategy for the sale and subsequent integration of the entity to ICE Data Services. Jack believes that effectively creating strategic alliances with partners, leaders internally and at client organizations is the key to successful business initiatives. He is a graduate of Fordham University with a B.S. in Finance.

About Boundless Impact Investing

Driven by the latest research by independent industry and academic experts, Boundless Impact Investing offers analysis, market trends, and evidence of best practices in a growing number of emerging sectors that address major social and environmental challenges. We are an advanced consulting firm that enables investors to connect with industry leaders and peers for expert analysis, diverse perspectives, and real-time collaboration. Our investor education and expert advisory services offer proprietary access to both subject-matter experts and other impact investors.

The information provided in this report by Boundless Impact Investing and accompanying material is for informational purposes only. The information in this report should not be considered legal or financial advice, nor an offer to buy or sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any security, product, service, or investment. Boundless Impact Investing does not make any guarantee or other promise, representation, or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the statements of fact contained within, or any results that may be obtained from using our content. Neither this content, nor the investment examples cited, should be used to make any investment decision without first consulting one’s own financial advisor and conducting one’s own research and due diligence. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Boundless Impact Investing disclaims any and all liability in the event any information, commentary, analysis, opinions, advice, and/or recommendations prove to be inaccurate, incomplete, or unreliable, or result in any investment or other losses.

Contact Us

Boundless Impact Investing

www.boundlessimpact.net

Michele Demers, CEO and Founder

mdemers@boundlessimpact.net

Citations

¹ Zakeri B and Syri S (2014) Electrical energy storage systems: A comparative life cycle cost analysis. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews

² https://periodictable.com/Properties/A/CrustAbundance.v.html

Introduction

From process control to retail, businesses everywhere are using data-driven strategies to improve their product and service offerings. They are building Internet of Things (IoT) infrastructures that collect large volumes of data from edge devices for delivery to cloud-based servers for processing. However, with its population of 50 billion IoT edge devices,¹ the huge volumes of data the IoT generates creates considerable challenges as well as opportunities.

The most effective way of extracting actionable information from these high data volumes is to use data analytics technologies including Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and Deep Learning (DL). These are no longer futuristic concepts, but rather practices that are here today and being integrated with and deployed into a variety of business.

As a new generation of AI-driven compute intensity is accelerating rack-level power density, backup battery solutions must keep up with rack-level power density expectations.

Compute Density Drives Battery Backup Requirements

This rapid adoption of analytics has created an explosion in workloads which are both compute and power intensive. For example, OpenAI—an artificial intelligence research laboratory—has released an analysis showing that since 2012, the amount of compute used in the largest AI training runs has grown by more than 300,000 times.² In other words, the computer resources consumed by AI has doubled every 100 days.

This rise of AI/ML/DL is driving future rack power densities that will far exceed those of today. Rack-based servers already contain multiple CPUs/GPUs (with hundreds of cores) that will exceed 300W each in the near future.³ They are integrated with terabytes of memory and multiple high-speed communication channels. There will also be DDR5 RAM memory power and channel number increases, PCIe Gen4/5 bus power and lane increases, 100G+ Ethernet, and increasing NVMe protocol adoption, which will only be moderately offset by efficiency gains. All this will lead to accelerating rack power densities.

The appetite for compute solutions associated with the global digital transformation, coupled with the rise of AI/ML/DL, suggests that future rack densities will far exceed those of today.”

Dell 2020 Server Trends and Observations Brie

Together, this AI compute usage and compute density have created a turning point in power density requirements, which has implications for data centers, the server hardware within them, and, in turn, the batteries utilized for backup.

The massively increasing data center workload is gravitating to companies focused on vast cloud businesses, driven by industry leaders such as Amazon, Google and Microsoft. There are already over 500 hyperscale data centers operated by such firms.⁴ While this is a minority of the total data center population, hyperscale data centers consumed 47 percent of servers in 2020.

Some of these data centers’ operators are opting for power infrastructures with battery backup distributed out to individual racks, in architectures such as those defined by the Open Compute Project (OCP). However, within this scenario of sharply increasing rack power density, backup batteries must deliver more power while occupying less space; it’s the computer hardware rather than the battery that earns the revenue for the data center.

With twice the power density, NiZn batteries exhibit ½ the size and weight of comparable lead-acid batteries.

Battery Power Density is the Key Factor

With these continuing space constraints on in-rack power backup, battery power density will be the key competitive factor. While lead-acid battery technology has been the workhorse for decades, newer technologies are introducing fresh opportunities to meet the challenges of increasing power density in server racks. Nickel-zinc (NiZn) technology, in particular, has specific advantages over lead-acid solutions – and lithium-ion chemistry as well – in terms of performance, reliability, safety, cost, and eco-friendliness.

In particular, ZincFive NiZn battery backup solutions offer dramatically higher power density than lead-acid batteries when measured by either weight (Watt hours per kilogram) or by volume (Watt hours per liter). The size of the NiZn battery is reduced to half that of a comparable lead-acid type. This means that NiZn batteries have two times the power density and half the weight of lead-acid batteries.

NiZn batteries are also simpler to use in a rack format. They do not require trickle charging to maintain capacity performance, which simplifies system design and is more energy efficient. Additionally, unlike lead-acid batteries, NiZn’s alkaline chemistry does not sulfate over time and has a higher operating temperature range; another contributing factor to a significantly longer life with low maintenance. In fact, NiZn batteries have three times the product life compared to lead-acid batteries.

The Safer, More Sustainable Choice

Placing battery backup in the rack, instead of a separate UPS facility, heightens the need for entirely safe operation to protect employees and equipment. Data center operators concerned about the possibility of thermal runaway in lithium-ion batteries will be interested to note that NiZn batteries have been rigorously tested to the UL 9540A test method at cell level, and they did not exhibit thermal runaway in any of the five arduous and destructive test types in that test method.

Comparable lithium-ion battery systems require a Battery Management Systems (BMS) to manage safe battery operation during UL 9540A testing—a clear disadvantage.

NiZn batteries are also more reliable, in part due to their battery string behavior. When a lead-acid or lithium-ion battery cell fails, it creates a high impedance or an open circuit that halts string operation. By contrast, a weak or depleted cell in a NiZn battery remains conductive, allowing the string to continue operating. In addition, NiZn strings tolerate string imbalances to a greater degree than either lead-acid or lithium-ion systems. With rack-based battery storage being distributed by nature, this behavior serves to lessen maintenance activities and costs.

At the same time, increasing density and power levels of batteries in the data center can have implications for data center sustainability. In a recent Climate Impact Report, ZincFive’s NiZn batteries achieved the best overall score of all surveyed technologies.⁵

ZincFive NiZn batteries have been rigorously tested to the UL 9540A test method at cell level and they did not exhibit thermal runaway.

The High-density Batteries for High Density Compute

As rack-level compute density drives power density levels continuously upward, backup battery requirements rise accordingly. The high-power density of NiZn batteries makes them the ideal choice to keep up with the increased density requirements, with their smaller size and weight allowing easier integration into server racks. They also can reduce operating expenses by virtue of their superior safety, high reliability, wider operating temperature range, long life and simpler maintenance requirements. By simplifying the challenge of high density battery backup, NiZn batteries are the better choice for the data center operators chasing ever greater compute density.

Citations

¹ Dell EMC’s 2020 Server Trends and Observations – ‘Data is King’, p2

² Programmer Info – ‘An Exponential Law For AI Compute’

³ Dell EMC’s 2020 Server Trends and Observations – ‘Data is King’, p13

⁴ ZincFive White Paper – Optimizing Data Center Operations with NiZn Backup Technology

⁵ Boundless Climate Impact Profile August 2020

Data Center Sustainability

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are the primary contributor to climate change, and companies, governments and the general public have all taken an active interest in aggressively minimizing these emissions. Investors, consumers and other stakeholders are increasingly expecting companies to report their GHG emissions and reduction goals, in order to assess their performance compared to competitors, gauge their preparedness for existing and anticipated regulation and ensure that the company’s values are aligned with their own.

Accurate, transparent reporting of emissions data is becoming a standard expectation across industries, including data centers. In addition to a data center operator’s internal emissions tracking and reporting, customers and partners that rely on these data centers as part of their business operations require access to this GHG emission data as well, incorporating them into their own reporting. Data centers are feeling pressure to not only operate sustainably, but also conduct comprehensive reporting to relay this information to their stakeholders.

However, despite the increased demand for data center emissions data, many reports have gaps in their coverage. Among these gaps is the reporting of scope 3 emissions (as defined in the GHG Protocol), which are the emissions resulting from activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting data center company itself.¹ For data centers, scope 3 emissions can be tied to activities such as facility construction, energy sources, cooling services, and uninterruptible power supplies (UPS) including energy storage systems.²

As supply chain sustainability draws increased attention from stakeholders, scope 3 emissions data need to be included in carbon accounting to provide an accurate assessment of a data center’s climate impact. Once this data is widely available, companies can ensure actions to reduce these emissions, including improving the sustainability of their energy storage practices using battery chemistries with low climate impact such as nickel-zinc (NiZn) used in UPS Battery Cabinets.

The Importance of Scope 3 Emissions Reporting

Oftentimes, companies will focus their efforts on tracking and reporting emissions directly tied to their own operations and electricity consumption. These include scope 1 emissions, which are direct GHG emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organization, as well as scope 2 emissions, which are indirect GHG emissions associated with the purchase of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling.

Scope 1 and 2 emissions, however, fail to capture the emissions that a company is responsible for that occur away from its own facilities. Scope 3 emissions, which represent emissions associated with a company’s value chain, often represent the majority of an organization’s total GHG emissions.⁴

For most companies, 65-95% of their carbon emissions can be attributed to their supply chain and end use, but may ultimately not be reported if scope 3 emissions are excluded from carbon accounting.⁵

Scope 3 emissions often represent the majority of an organization’s total GHG emissions.

Thus, reporting and action focused solely on scope 1 and 2 emissions are incomplete, and don’t paint an accurate picture of a company’s carbon footprint.

Despite the significance of scope 3 emissions in relation to a company’s overall carbon footprint, scope 3 emissions quantification is currently not required by the GHG Corporate Protocol.⁶ Due in part to its optional nature and complexity, a low number of companies are reporting scope 3 emissions. According to MSCI, only 18% of the constituents of their investable market index were reporting scope 3 emissions in 2020, with even lower rates of reporting for the specific categories within the scope 3 accounting methodology.⁷ This lack of information on emissions associated with companies’ supply chains results in a significant gap in stakeholders’ ability to understand and compare carbon footprints.

Although the level of transparency is currently low, scope 3 emissions represent a significant opportunity for GHG emission reduction. Leaders are emerging, as over 3,000 companies have reported scope 3 emissions under the Carbon Disclosure Project, according to investor sustainability advocate Ceres.⁸ Companies that report on their scope 3 emissions stand out from their competitors who lag behind in their disclosure, and are able to identify and act upon areas of their supply chain that offer room for improvement. The measurement of these emissions is necessary for goal setting and action, and companies taking the lead can take advantage of the economic, reputational, and environmental benefits before others.

Leaders in reporting and acting on scope 3 emissions are also better equipped to manage their preparedness for existing or potential regulations. Starting in 2023, German companies will be responsible for social and environmental issues tied to their global supply chain networks.⁹ Investors and other stakeholders are paying attention to these global developments, and are seeking reassurance that companies are managing any risks they face should such regulations be enacted in the U.S. To improve performance and preparedness, the initial step that needs to be taken is to gather these data and improve transparency.

The Right Batteries Can Reduce Data Center Scope 3 Emissions

As data centers and their customers look to meet the growing expectation to disclose scope 3 emissions, they can turn to their energy storage systems that are part of the UPS as an opportunity to establish a lower carbon footprint compared to their competitors. Energy storage is an increasingly significant part of a data center’s business operations, and the battery chemistry tied to a data center’s UPS offers significant trade-offs in terms of the sustainability of their supply chain and environmental footprint. As data centers and their customers look to assess their scope 3 emissions, the battery chemistry used in their UPS systems should be measured, incorporated into goals and seen as an opportunity to stand out.

NiZn batteries used in the ZincFive BC 2 UPS Battery Cabinet represent a more sustainably sourced and environmentally friendly alternative to other batteries used in data centers such as lead-acid and lithium-ion. Boundless Impact Research and Analytics performed a life cycle analysis of lead-acid, lithium and nickel-zinc batteries to prepare a scope 3 emissions Climate Impact Profile of these battery types. For the first time, energy storage users can compare and utilize scope 3 level environmental data comparing lead-acid, lithium-ion and ZincFive’s NiZn batteries along key performance indicators including GHG emissions, water footprint, energy footprint, and hazardous material requirements.¹⁰ In multiple ways, ZincFive’s NiZn batteries proved a more climate-friendly option:

Material Use

Nickel and zinc are four and five times more abundant in the earth’s crust, respectively, than lithium and lead. In addition, while lead exposure is a global health concern and lithium’s reactivity to air and water makes it a fire hazard, nickel and zinc are safer and non-flammable.

Greenhouse Gas Intensity

Since nickel and zinc sourcing require fewer emissions, ZincFive’s estimated GHG Footprint is roughly half of its competitors. The GHG Footprint of ZincFive’s battery is 63% lower compared to lithium-ion batteries, 37% lower than lead-acid batteries.

Carbon Payback Time

Carbon Payback Time (CPT) measures the time it takes for a battery to offset its GHG Footprint by supporting more renewable resources to supply the electricity grid. NiZn chemistry’s CPT is between 0.16 and 0.21 years – four times faster than lithium-ion and lead-acid batteries.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

Emitted as gases from solids – including those used to produce lithium-ion and lead-acid batteries – VOCs are infamous for causing short-and long-term adverse health effects. A healthier alternative, the ZincFive battery does not use VOCs in production.

Water Footprint

Even including water requirements for raw material extraction, the ZincFive battery still demands 96% less water than the average lithium-ion battery.

Energy Footprint

The energy footprint for ZincFive’s battery is 23-33% less than lithium-ion and lead-acid pure lead batteries.

Boundless Impact’s assessment identified and analyzed the Carbon Return on Purchase (CROP), GHG Footprint, Energy Footprint, Water Footprint, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Footprint, Carbon Payback Time (CPT) and the Levelized Cost of Storage (LCOS) of ZincFive’s and other battery chemistries.

Source: Boundless Impact Research & Analytics

The results of a formulaic comparison measuring relative performance across all metrics showed that ZincFive’s technology scores a 9.4 out of 10 impact score on its overall performance, with higher scores representing higher positive environmental impact.

Conclusion

While not currently required, increased demands for scope 3 emissions transparency are gaining momentum, driven by pressure from investors, regulators and the general public. Data centers who stay ahead of the competition in reporting and addressing scope 3 emissions will attract customers and investors who are seeking comprehensive disclosure and commitments to sustainability. This not only applies to the sustainability of the data center companies themselves, but to the climate impact of the customers who utilize these data centers as part of their operations, such as with colocation facilities. Improvements to data center sustainability can have a chain reaction of benefactors.

As efforts continue to make scope 3 accounting more straightforward and widespread, recent research shows that a new opportunity for data centers to reduce their climate impact is through their UPS batteries. ZincFive’s NiZn batteries have shown advantages across a myriad of sustainability metrics, and offer users a method of minimizing their supply chain impacts. Moving forward, a set of sustainability criteria for battery sources can be established and adopted by the energy storage industry, assisting in the comparison of existing battery chemistries as well as potential ones still under development.

Already one of the largest industrial adopters of green energy, data center operators’ logical next step as energy sustainability leaders is to pioneer accounting and reduction of scope 3 emissions, setting an example for other industries worldwide. By helping quantifiably reduce scope 3 emissions, ZincFive’s NiZn batteries let early reporters showcase that advantage.

ZincFive BC 2 UPS Battery Cabinet

CLICK TO WATCH PRODUCT VIDEO

Citations

1 https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/scope-3-inventory-guidance/

2 https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/broadcasts/london/2020-virtual/case-study-scope-3-emissions-and-next-generation-sustainable-data-centers/

3 https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/scope-1-and-scope-2-inventory-guidance

4 https://www.msci.com/www/blog-posts/scope-3-carbon-emissions-seeing/02092372761

5 https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/18/apple-amazon-exxon-and-the-toughest-carbon-emissions-to-capture.html

6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0837-6#ref-CR14

7 https://www.msci.com/www/blog-posts/scope-3-carbon-emissions-seeing/02092372761

8 https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/18/apple-amazon-exxon-and-the-toughest-carbon-emissions-to-capture.html

9 https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/18/apple-amazon-exxon-and-the-toughest-carbon-emissions-to-capture.html

10 ZincFive Climate Impact Profile