Tech
IT Sustainability Think Tank: How IT sustainability entered the mandate era during 2025 | Computer Weekly
As the calendar turns the final pages on 2025, the information technology sector stands at a critical juncture regarding its environmental commitments. This year was not marked by technological breakthroughs solving decarbonisation, but by the decisive maturation of sustainability from a strategic differentiator into an operational and regulatory imperative.
This transition involved a painful reckoning with data complexity, supply chain reality, and the sheer energy appetite of modern computing, driven primarily by the rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI).
We entered 2025 with goals framed by aspiration; we exit under the binding mandate of actuality. The central shift is profound: IT sustainability is no longer a parallel environmental, social and governance (ESG) initiative.
It has become deeply intertwined with core business continuity, geopolitical supply chain risk, and mandatory financial disclosure. While this shift signals progress, momentum is driven more by necessity and the threat of liability than by shared ethical commitment.
The conversation evolves from aspirational to accountable
The most profound shift over the past year has been the forced elevation of the sustainability dialogue directly onto the executive committee’s core risk portfolio. This movement is not voluntary; it is driven by impending regulation and the sobering realisation that environmental failure now carries direct, auditable financial penalties and board-level liability.
Only a year ago, discussions circled around unquantifiable reputational benefits. Today, the lexicon is dominated by acronyms signalling mandatory compliance: CSDDD, CSRD, and the tightening of the SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2. These frameworks compel executives to move past narratives and confront the granular, auditable data attached to every asset, vendor, and cloud usage.
For the CIO, this manifests in two critical areas. First, energy efficiency is decisively reframed as a cost of doing business, crucial for operational expenditure control amid volatile global energy markets. Second, the sudden energy demand of generative AI has triggered a rapid, internal debate on responsible compute architecture.
Leaders are increasingly compelled to justify AI investment not solely on traditional ROI, but via a nascent “return on compute” model that necessarily integrates and accounts for carbon expenditure. This makes the environmental cost of IT an integrated input in the total cost of ownership calculation, rather than a polite footnote.
Despite this high-level engagement, progress remains complicated. The IT function often lacks the authority to enforce change across complex internal silos, and the necessary budget and risk tolerance for truly transformative shifts remain stubbornly limited.
Genuine progress where the green shoots are taking hold
Despite systemic inertia, 2025 delivered solid, tangible progress in certain operational domains, offering a partial blueprint for future net-zero efforts. Our confidence is bolstered by three examples, though it is crucial to understand that wide-scale adoption across the average enterprise remains nascent and often confined to pilot programs:
1. Decoupling cloud growth from carbon: Hyperscale cloud providers have largely won the battle for renewable energy procurement. The next frontier — optimising physical operations — has seen enterprise engagement. We saw accelerated adoption of advanced liquid cooling technologies (still primarily concentrated in hyperscale environments, but critical for future AI scaling). Enterprises optimising workloads for low-carbon regions and utilising serverless architectures successfully decoupled rapid cloud expansion from a proportional rise in emissions. This success belongs predominantly to the hyperscalers, and enterprise optimisation remains an ongoing campaign.
2. Maturing the circular IT model (As-a-Service): The year 2025 saw the Managed Device-as-a-Service (MDaaS) model transition into a critical environmental enabler. By outsourcing the entire device lifecycle, enterprises commit practically to refurbishment and robust reverse logistics. Successful enterprises leverage these contracts to guarantee asset re-entry into the value chain via certified refurbishment, drastically reducing e-waste. The caveats are two-fold: MDaaS adoption is far from universal, and the verification of these circular chains still lacks necessary, robust third-party scrutiny.
3. The nascent rise of green software engineering: The formal emergence of green software engineering (GSE) is perhaps the most encouraging development. For too long, the environmental focus was only on hardware. This year, organisations began measuring code energy consumption — optimising algorithms and refactoring applications to reduce reliance on resource-intensive computing.
An important development this year was the publication of the W3C Web Sustainability Guidelines (WSG) Draft Note. Developed through a global, collaborative effort — in which I was pleased to participate — the guidelines offer a structured and internationally relevant set of best practices for reducing the environmental footprint of web products and services. While the scope focuses specifically on the web rather than the full breadth of enterprise IT, the Draft Note nonetheless represents a significant step forward for the industry.
The persistent gaps undermining net-zero momentum
For all the genuine acceleration, 2025 was equally defined by two persistent, critical gaps that threaten to derail net-zero pathways and demand urgent attention.
1. The Scope 3 emissions chasm: The most pervasive and frustrating gap remains the measurement and meaningful reduction of Scope 3 emissions, particularly from purchased goods and downstream asset end-of-life.
Despite regulatory urgency, the vast majority of enterprises still rely on highly aggregated, industry-average supplier data (spend-based or activity-based), which is neither auditable nor sufficient for mandatory disclosure. The necessary mechanism — detailed, granular product carbon footprints (PCF) provided by every vendor — is simply not available at scale or with sufficient fidelity.
The problem persists because it requires collaboration across complex, often proprietary global supply chains. Suppliers are reticent to disclose granular data, citing competitive concerns, while buyers lack the leverage to mandate it. The result is a ‘Scope 3 plateau’: targets are set, but underlying emissions remain stubbornly high, creating a significant credibility risk. We are still largely measuring a reflection, not the reality.
2. The generative AI energy debt: While AI is a powerful tool for sustainability optimisation, the immediate, unmanaged energy demand of Large Language Models (LLMs) represents a profound and growing gap. The speed of AI adoption, combined with the inherently expensive High-Performance Computing (HPC) required, creates an “energy debt” that offsets hard-won gains elsewhere.
The challenge is governance. Enterprises are deploying AI solutions without robust, mandatory policies on model selection, inference efficiency, or resource decommissioning. Crucially, most organisations remain focused on achieving initial ROI metrics, relegating energy efficiency to an optional performance tweak. Failure to enforce a framework for ‘responsible compute’ risks the transformative power of AI being negated by its own expanding environmental impact. This is the single greatest risk to the IT sector’s net-zero journey.
Strategic priorities for 2026 and beyond
As the IT Sustainability Think Tank looks towards 2026, the focus must shift from identifying the problem to systematically closing the remaining gaps with institutional discipline. We must treat these priorities as non-negotiable elements of future business resilience:
- Mandate data granularity for Scope 3: Leverage procurement influence to force supplier compliance on verifiable Product Carbon Footprints (PCF). The mandate must be non-negotiable, enforced with clear vendor scorecards and contractual requirements.
- Institutionalise green software engineering: Invest heavily in training and tooling to embed energy efficiency into the software development lifecycle (SDLC). Software architecture must be treated with the same environmental scrutiny as data centre cooling, making efficiency an audited requirement.
- Govern the AI energy cost: Implement a Responsible AI framework that includes mandatory energy consumption metrics and resource allocation policies for all Generative AI deployments.
The year 2025 was when IT sustainability moved into the board’s audit file. Next year must be the year we finally gather the granular data, enforce the necessary discipline, and manage the rapidly growing energy appetite of our own invention. The time for aspirational statements is definitively over; the urgent task now is to move these nascent efforts into full, verifiable accountability.
Tech
How Trump’s Plot to Grab Iran’s Nuclear Fuel Would Actually Work
President Donald Trump and top defense officials are reportedly weighing whether to send ground troops to Iran in order to retrieve the country’s highly enriched uranium. However, the administration has shared little information about which troops would be deployed, how they would retrieve the nuclear material, or where the material would go next.
“People are going to have to go and get it,” secretary of state Marco Rubio said at a congressional briefing earlier this month, referring to the possible operation.
There are some indications that an operation is close on the horizon. On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon has imminent plans to deploy 3,000 brigade combat troops to the Middle East. (At the time of writing, the order has not been made.) The troops would come from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, which specializes in “joint forcible entry operations.” On Wednesday, Iran’s government rejected Trump’s 15-point plan to end the war, and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the president “is prepared to unleash hell” in Iran if a peace deal is not reached—a plan some lawmakers have reportedly expressed concern about.
Drawing from publicly available intelligence and their own experience, two experts outlined the likely contours of a ground operation targeting nuclear sites. They tell WIRED that any version of a ground operation would be incredibly complicated and pose a huge risk to the lives of American troops.
“I personally think a ground operation using special forces supported by a larger force is extremely, extremely risky and ultimately infeasible,” Spencer Faragasso, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Science and International Security, tells WIRED.
Nuclear Ambitions
Any version of the operation would likely take several weeks and involve simultaneous actions at multiple target locations that aren’t in close proximity to each other, the experts say. Jonathan Hackett, a former operations specialist for the Marines and the Defense Intelligence Agency, tells WIRED that as many as 10 locations could be targeted: the Isfahan, Arak, and Darkhovin research reactors; the Natanz, Fordow, and Parchin enrichment facilities; the Saghand, Chine, and Yazd mines; and the Bushehr power plant.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Isfahan likely has the majority of the country’s 60 percent highly enriched uranium, which may be able to support a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction, though weapon-grade material generally consists of 90 percent enriched uranium. Hackett says that the other two enrichment facilities may also have 60 percent highly enriched uranium, and that the power plant and all three research reactors may have 20 percent enriched uranium. Faragasso emphasizes that any such supplies deserve careful attention.
Hackett says that eight of the 10 sites—with the exception of Isfahan, which is likely intact underground, and “Pickaxe Mountain,” a relatively new enrichment facility near Natanz—were mostly or partially buried after last June’s air raids. Just before the war, Faragasso says, Iran backfilled the tunnel entrances to the Isfahan facility with dirt.
The riskiest version of a ground operation would involve American troops physically retrieving nuclear material. Hackett says that this material would be stored in the form of uranium hexafluoride gas inside “large cement vats.” Faragasso adds that it’s unclear how many of these vats may have been broken or damaged. At damaged sites, troops would have to bring excavators and heavy equipment capable of moving immense amounts of dirt to retrieve them
A comparatively less risky version of the operation would still necessitate ground troops, according to Hackett. However, it would primarily use air strikes to entomb nuclear material inside of their facilities. Ensuring that nuclear material is inaccessible in the short to medium term, Faragasso says, would entail destroying the entrances to underground facilities and ideally collapsing the facilities’ underground roofs.
Softening the Area
Hackett tells WIRED that based on his experience and all publicly available information, Trump’s negotiations with Iran are “probably a ruse” that buys time to move troops into place.
Hackett says that an operation would most likely begin with aerial bombardments in the areas surrounding the target sites. These bombers, he says, would likely be from the 82nd Airborne Division or the 11th or 31st Marine Expeditionary Units (MEU). The 11th MEU, a “rapid-response” force, and the 31st MEU, the only Marine unit continuously deployed abroad in strategic areas, have reportedly both been deployed to the Middle East.
Tech
Amazon’s Spring Sale Is So-So, but Cadence Capsules Are a Bright Spot
The WIRED Reviews Team has been covering Amazon’s Big Spring Sale since it began at on Wednesday, and the overall deals have been … not great, honestly. So far, we’ve found decent markdowns on vacuums, smart bird feeders, and even an air fryer we love, but I just saw that Cadence Capsules, those colorful magnetic containers you may have seen on your social media pages, are 20 percent off. (For reference, the last time I saw them on sale, they were a measly 9 percent off.)
If you’re not familiar, they allow you to decant your full-sized personal care products you use at home—from shampoo and sunscreen to serums and pills—into a labeled, modular system of hexagonal containers that are leak-proof, dishwasher safe, and stick together magnetically in your bag or on a countertop. No more jumbled, travel-sized toiletries and leaky, mismatched bottles and tubes.
Cadence Capsules have garnered some grumbling online for being overly heavy or leaking, but I’ve been using them regularly for about a year—I discuss decanting your daily-use products in my guide to How to Pack Your Beauty Routine for Travel—and haven’t experienced any leaks. They do add weight if you’re trying to travel super-light, and because they’re magnetic, they will also stick to other metal items in your toiletry bag, like bobby pins or other hair accessories. This can be annoying, especially if you’re already feeling chaotic or in a hurry.
Otherwise, Capsules are modular, convenient, and make you feel supremely organized—magnetic, interchangeable inserts for the lids come with permanent labels like “shampoo,” “conditioner,” “cleanser,” and “moisturizer.” Maybe you love this; maybe you don’t. But at least if you buy on Amazon, you can choose which label genre you get (Haircare, Bodycare, Skincare, Daily Routine). If this just isn’t your jam, the Cadence website offers a set of seven that allows you to customize the color and lid label of each Capsule, but that set is not currently on sale.
Tech
Fellow Readers, Don’t Miss These E-Reader Sales
This is the older Kindle Scribe, but the price and features are the best you’ll get, especially when it’s on sale like this. I still reach for this model even though I have the newer third generation, and keep in mind the second generation will also get some of the newer software and experiences over time. With the sale, it’s half the price of the newer model.
If you’re already a Kindle reader and looking to upgrade, it’s likely because you want a new feature like a color screen. While the Kobo above is the better buy, if you want to stay in the Kindle ecosystem but add some color to your books, both the Colorsoft and Colorsoft Signature are on sale.
If you’re looking to spend as little as possible, the basic Kindle (11th generation) is still a great e-reader and is currently under $100. It can do almost everything the other Kindles can (except the Scribe) on a snappy black-and-white screen. It doesn’t have a warm front light either, but it’s still a great purchase for the price.
Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.
-
Fashion1 week agoSales at US apparel, clothing accessories stores up 4% YoY in Jan 2026
-
Tech1 week agoJustice Department Says Anthropic Can’t Be Trusted With Warfighting Systems
-
Fashion1 week agoSpain’s Inditex FY25 sales rise 3.2% to $46.28 bn amid strong demand
-
Politics1 week agoIran strikes Tel Aviv with cluster-warhead missiles in retaliation of Larijani’s martyrdom
-
Sports1 week agoMarch Madness 2026 – How to watch in SA, start time, schedule, TV channel for NCAA championship basketball tournament
-
Entertainment1 week agoVal Kilmer revived 1 year after death through AI
-
Entertainment1 week agoWith few new leads 45 days after Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, investigation “becomes much harder,” expert says
-
Business1 week agoBrits cashing in jewellery as gold price hits record high


