Our editors curate highly rated brands that are first assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Buying through our links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more. FARM Rio is a clothing and lifestyle brand best known for vibrant prints inspired by the culture, plants, and wildlife of its native Brazil. But […]
The post Is FARM Rio a Sustainable Brand? appeared first on Good On You.
As global cities embrace the potential of ‘smart’ technology, from optimised traffic management to advanced energy grids, the allure of a more efficient, sustainable and digitally connected urban landscape is becoming a reality.
However, with these advancements come significant cybersecurity challenges that cities must address to ensure the promise of innovation is not overshadowed by the risk of threats. To build the resilient, sustainable cities of tomorrow, cybersecurity must be integrated as a core principle in every step of development.
The evolution of smart cities
Smart cities represent a groundbreaking shift in urban planning and management. These cities integrate advanced technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), and 5G networks to improve city services such as traffic management, waste collection, energy distribution and emergency response.
Countries like Singapore, South Korea and Germany are leading the way, investing billions in smart city technologies. China, as part of its ‘Made in China 2025’ initiative, has outlined an ambitious Smart Cities Development Plan to modernise its urban infrastructure.
Yet, as investment increases, so does the risk. The interconnected nature of smart cities presents an attractive target for cybercriminals, with critical infrastructure systems — such as energy, health care and transportation — vulnerable to cyber attacks that could ripple across the urban landscape.
Key cyberthreats facing smart cities
The list of cybersecurity threats faced by smart cities is diverse. Some have the potential to cause significant disruption to services and cause damage and loss for residents. Some of the most significant include:
Ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure:
Ransomware attacks on city systems are escalating as cybercriminals capitalise on the growing digital footprint of urban infrastructure. Municipalities worldwide have experienced system lockdowns, where attackers demand ransom payments to restore access to critical services.
Public safety system attacks:
Emergency systems, video surveillance and gunshot detection technologies are indispensable for public safety in smart cities. Unfortunately, these systems are prime targets for cyber attacks.
A survey conducted by UC Berkeley’s Centre for Long-Term Cybersecurity1 highlighted emergency alert systems as particularly vulnerable within smart city infrastructure. An attack on these systems could result in widespread panic or delayed response to genuine emergencies.
Data breaches and privacy concerns:
Smart cities collect vast amounts of data on their citizens, from travel patterns to health details. The widespread use of sensors and IoT devices makes these data pools tempting targets for hackers. A successful breach could lead to identity theft, financial fraud and diminished trust in public institutions.
Water supply and sanitation threats:
Attacks targeting water supply systems are a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities within smart city infrastructure. In 2021, hackers attempted to poison the water supply in Oldsmar, Florida, by altering chemical treatment levels. Although thwarted, the incident underscored the dangers posed to critical infrastructure by cyberthreats.
Cyberthreats transcend borders
The interconnected nature of smart cities amplifies the potential impact of cyber attacks, extending beyond individual municipalities. A breach in one city could have cascading effects on neighbouring regions and even disrupt international systems.
For example, a successful attack on a city’s energy grid could affect hospitals, schools and essential services over a wide area. A breach in transportation infrastructure could delay shipments, disrupting global supply chains.
Beyond financial losses, a successful cyber attack can also erode public trust in digital infrastructure, potentially slowing the adoption of smart city technologies that are essential for achieving sustainability goals.
Preparing for tomorrow’s cybersecurity threats
Building resilient smart cities requires comprehensive cybersecurity measures that address vulnerabilities across infrastructure, data and citizen engagement. Key strategies include:
1. Adopting a ‘secure-by-design’ approach:
Cities should embrace a secure-by-design strategy, ensuring cybersecurity is integrated from the earliest stages of technology deployment. This involves rigorous risk assessments and the use of encryption, multi-factor authentication and regular software updates.
2. Cross-sector collaboration:
Protecting smart cities from cyberthreats requires collaboration between government, private sector and technology providers. By sharing threat intelligence and co-ordinating on cybersecurity protocols, public and private entities can respond swiftly to cyber incidents.
3. Investing in cybersecurity talent:
As demand for cybersecurity experts rises, cities must invest in developing a skilled workforce. Governments, educational institutions and businesses should collaborate to create training programs that equip professionals with the skills needed to protect smart city infrastructures.
4. Citizen awareness and cyber hygiene:
Engaging citizens in cybersecurity efforts is crucial for creating a safe digital environment. Public awareness campaigns can teach residents about recognising phishing attempts, securing their devices and reporting suspicious activities. Empowering citizens to practice good cyber hygiene strengthens a city’s overall security.
Building resilient smart cities
The potential of smart cities is vast, offering enhanced quality of life, greater efficiency and sustainable urban living. However, without addressing cybersecurity risks, these benefits could be undermined by significant threats.
By prioritising cybersecurity as a fundamental component of smart city development, cities worldwide can build resilient infrastructures that protect citizens, sustain public trust, and lay the groundwork for a safer, more connected future.
Les Williamson is Regional Director Australia and New Zealand at Check Point Software Technologies, a cybersecurity platform provider of AI-powered, cloud delivered solutions. He has more than three decades of sales and leadership experience in the IT industry, having previously been Head of the AWS Telecommunications Business Unit for Asia Pacific and Japan as well as Vice President for ANZ at Citrix. In addition, he worked for Cisco Systems for more than 10 years in a variety of roles, including as Vice President Asia Pacific.
1. https://cltc.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Smart_City_Cybersecurity.pdf
Top image credit: iStock.com/gremlin
Striking black-and-white northern landscapes are pared to their essential shapes, lines, and tones.
Do stories and artists like this matter to you? Become a Colossal Member today and support independent arts publishing for as little as $7 per month. The article Gary Wagner’s Photos Illuminate Rugged Icelandic Fjords and Shorelines appeared first on Colossal.
With more data centres transitioning to renewable energy sources, Scope 3 emissions become a data centre’s largest contributor to its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This category of emissions is also the least reported and understood.
The focus on quantifying Scope 3 emissions in the value chain is part of a broader effort by organisations to assess and manage their environmental impact comprehensively. However, it requires a data-driven approach to helping data centre operators identify and categorise emissions from operations and the supply chain, then prioritise efforts to make impactful carbon reductions. This includes outsourced IT services from cloud and colocation service providers.
Undertaking this process allows for more informed decision-making and targeted efforts to reduce carbon emissions throughout the value chain. Developing a strategy that identifies the biggest source of carbon emissions in the value chain is quickly becoming a data centre industry priority, alongside the urgency to establish easy-to-use frameworks.
Data collection practices for a reporting framework
The effort to quantify and manage Scope 3 emissions aligns with broader trends in sustainability and corporate responsibility. Many organisations are recognising the importance of transparently addressing their environmental impact as part of their commitment to sustainable practices, but they don’t know where to start, which reporting framework to use, or how often they should be collecting and reporting data.
However, quantifying and reporting on Scope 3 presents a significant challenge for data centre operators. This is mainly due to a lack of three resources: reliable supplier data, quantitative tools, and an accounting and reporting methodology.
Establishing and implementing a framework that incorporates accurate carbon counting and target setting, while systematically reviewing company data and emission sources, is the foundation to creating an achievable reduction plan.
Electricity generation, GHG emissions and water consumption determine the carbon and water footprint of data centres, including that of its suppliers. To be successful, suppliers must provide data centre operators with their own Scope 3 emissions data, related to the products used in their data centres.
These emissions vary significantly depending on many factors including data centre size, redundancy level, location, electricity emission factor, core and shell construction, IT equipment configuration, energy efficiency, equipment lifespan and replacement frequency, and value chain activities.
Sustainability reporting can provide a competitive advantage
The proactive stance of data centre operators towards achieving net-zero climate goals reflects a broader shift in business attitudes toward sustainability. As environmental concerns become more prominent, companies are recognising the need to align their operations across the value chain with climate goals to meet the expectations of a diverse range of stakeholders including customers, investors and vendors, and contribute to a more sustainable future.
Aside from being a compliance necessity, GHG reporting encompassing Scope 3 emissions is increasingly being recognised as a strategic and beneficial practice for the data centre industry. It aligns with the growing emphasis on sustainability, helps manage risks, and positions companies as responsible and forward-thinking entities in an environmentally conscious market.
Robust emissions reporting can enhance investor confidence and attract investment from those seeking sustainable and responsible opportunities. Data centres that prioritise emissions reduction and extend their sustainability efforts to their supply chains can provide a competitive edge. A resilient and sustainable supply chain can contribute to business continuity and enhance the overall reputation of a company.
Vendor commitment to reducing embodied carbon
Scope 3 emissions are by far the most challenging to report for data centre operators who should integrate sustainability into their evaluation criteria when selecting data centre equipment suppliers and service providers to minimise Scope 3 value chain carbon footprint.
Vendors need to commit to reducing the embodied carbon of their product portfolio. Finally, data centre equipment suppliers must make environmental product disclosure documents freely available and easily understandable for their products.
By actively seeking equipment suppliers and service providers committed to reducing their environmental impact, data centre operators can play a crucial role in mitigating the overall carbon footprint associated with their operations related to Scope 3 emissions. The call for transparency and the availability of environmental product information further enhances the ability to make sustainable choices in the selection of data centre equipment.
Many organisations have focused on measuring and reporting Scope 1 and 2 emissions associated with their IT resources and implementing strategies to reduce them. Knowing where to start on your Scope 3 emissions metrics journey can be daunting. By quantifying Scope 3 emissions from their value chain, organisations can measure their total carbon footprint, including outsourced IT services from cloud and colocation service providers. Organisations can then prioritise their efforts to make impactful carbon reductions.
Schneider Electric offers many resources and tools to help organisations define Scope 3 emissions, including an inventory of nine emissions source categories and their data centre-specific subcategories for accounting and reporting purposes. This includes a modelling tool to simulate and model energy consumption within data centres that can help to estimate associated CO2 emissions. It also considers other factors such as power consumption, cooling systems, and overall data centre efficiency.
Its supply chain decarbonisation services help users leverage technology to measure and model resource use in the supply chain, educate and engage supplier partners, and support actions to decarbonise supplier operations.
By following these initial steps, data centres can expand their understanding of Scope 3 emissions and implement the right tools and measurement practices to work towards reducing their overall environmental impact and meeting reporting requirements with improving results.
Joe Craparotta
Top image credit: iStock.com/kohei_hara
Investing in Resilience: Blue Carbon Ecosystems, Communities, and Finance for the Indo-Pacific
Teaser Text
USAID’s “Investing in Resilience” report brings together the evidence and analyses that can help guide USAID Mission staff, partners, host country governments, and communities to advance blue carbon initiatives in the Indo-Pacific region.
jschoshinski
Tue, 11/12/2024 – 21:43
Publication Date
11/12/2024
Sectors
Natural Climate Solutions
Climate Finance
Country
Fiji
Kiribati
Republic of the Marshall Islands
Federated States of Micronesia
Nauru
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
Solomon Islands
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu
Micronesia
Region
Asia
Hide Sidebar
Off
