Who's Controlling the Power Supply Industry?
by Linnea Brush
June 25, 2007
Power supply makers aren’t usually in the enviable position of being the tail that wags the dog. Recent activities suggest, however, that they may have more clout than they think. Not that the evidence is obvious; in some cases, the activities are a (possible) reaction to what power supply companies are doing. Either way, the evidence points to two things: Original equipment manufacturers do not like government regulatory intervention; and as customers, the OEMs are attempting to “control the output” (so to speak) of power supply makers.
The path leading to this has been somewhat Byzantine. Let’s start with… the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Energy Star efficiency requirements for external ac-dc power supplies started a ball rolling that has been slowly encompassing additional products, such as embedded ac-dc power supplies. Not to be usurped by the government, an initiative was recently launched by (of all groups) the World Wildlife Fund, along with OEMs such as Google, Dell, HP, IBM and Lenovo. This is the Climate Savers Computing Initiative, which aims to “exceed the minimum requirements” set forth in the 2007 Energy Star specifications for desktop, laptop and workstation computers.
Of course, power suppliers have been busy, as well. PMBus™ was developed pretty much as a power supply industry-led initiative with relatively less involvement by the system makers, while the IPC9592 “standard” has been more of an OEM-led initiative with less input from the power supply makers. So, who’s leading whom?
Another piece of evidence that could be interpreted a couple of different ways is digital power product introductions. Since early 2004, when digital power first made commercial inroads, digital ac-dc power supplies have far outnumbered digital dc-dc converters. Between January 2003 and June 2007, 79% of 177 new “digital” product announcements from 14 power suppliers were ac-dc power supplies. Only 21% were dc-dc converters. The general consensus has been that this is due to the PMBus lawsuit, with companies reluctant to release digital point-of-load products until the lawsuit is resolved.
Another possibility is that system makers have felt shut out of the power supply standards development process and are focusing on their own standards, instead. The analysis of digital product introductions also revealed that the I²C bus has been dominant, used in 79% of the products introduced. It is protocol-neutral and widely used in ac-dc power supplies. PMBus has been implemented in just 10% of the new products announced.
Power supply makers aren’t usually in the enviable position of being the tail that wags the dog. Recent activities suggest, however, that they may have more clout than they think. Not that the evidence is obvious; in some cases, the activities are a (possible) reaction to what power supply companies are doing. Either way, the evidence points to two things: Original equipment manufacturers do not like government regulatory intervention; and as customers, the OEMs are attempting to “
One thing is happening: Power supply companies are becoming more activist. This has been a criticism of the industry for a long time. Caught between component suppliers and system makers, power supply manufacturers have tended to lay low and let the wind carry them in whatever direction the other two industries wished. That seems to be changing, and power supply standards are the controversial lightning rod.
The OEMs and power supply makers are still, ultimately, reacting to what they might perceive as “onerous government regulations.” EPA is a member of the Climate Savers Computing Initiative, but the latter appears to be usurping the role EPA has played in establishing energy efficiency requirements. Climate Savers says, “In terms of energy-efficient computing, the standards set by the U.S. government’s groundbreaking Energy Star program are a step in the right direction. But the Climate Savers Computing Initiative believes that, together, we can exceed these minimum requirements. We’re asking manufacturers, business and individuals to join us by committing to more aggressive standards for energy efficiency.”
Coincidentally, the Energy Star 4.0 power requirements go into effect July 20, 2007. These requirements are fairly stringent, and the EPA has set a target of only 25% industry compliance. Climate Savers says that their initiative “starts with the 2007 Energy Star requirements” and gradually increases the efficiency requirements over the next four years. This sounds like a cooperative pre-emptive strike. EPA might want the industry to take over their job eventually, and this is a way to jumpstart the process. Why introduce new energy efficiency requirements if you’ve got another group doing the exact same thing?
Once this is out of the hands of the government, however, the battle can get ugly. As customers, OEMs wield a lot of power. Energy efficiency is a “green,” agreed-upon feature that everyone can talk about calmly. Start getting into packaging, testing and communications buses, and now companies are being dictated to. Recently, the power supply community has been showing how militant it can be when defending its turf.
I don’t think these issues are clear-cut, and for any given situation, different leaders are appropriate. Government regulations may be onerous, but sometimes they are phased out as companies adopt the guidelines. As to which industry segments take the lead, that depends on resources, money, timing and – motivation. It’s looking as though the power supply industry is tougher than people have thought.
