Check what colocation PUE can and cannot add to an IT electricity record

Anil Khatwani

Oct 14

3 min read

A fictional provider supplies 1.4 as its facility PUE. Customer A’s IT meter records 100 MWh. Is 140 MWh therefore a measured customer total?

This guide is for IT-services infrastructure, procurement and reporting teams reviewing a colocation electricity statement. It helps them distinguish a calculation assumption from information supplied by the provider.

Read the ratio at its stated level

Power usage effectiveness (PUE) divides total data-centre energy by IT-equipment energy, as defined by The Green Grid. The customer-allocation limitation below is an algebraic inference.

Test two possible customer schedules

All records and quantities in this example are invented. Assume an all-electric facility, complete annual records, consistent measurement boundaries and no unrecorded loads. The provider supplies these four values:

Facility electricity: 1,400 MWh.
All customer IT equipment: 1,000 MWh.
Customer A IT equipment: 100 MWh, already included in the 1,000 MWh.
Other customers’ IT equipment: 900 MWh.

The reported ratio is 1,400 ÷ 1,000 = 1.4. The difference between the two totals is 400 MWh.

For the purpose of this logical test, consider two alternative assignments of that same 400 MWh. Neither is asserted to describe the facility’s physical system or an approved billing method.

Schedule A assigns 40 MWh to Customer A and 360 MWh to the others. Customer A’s combined figure becomes 100 + 40 = 140 MWh. The other customers’ figure is 900 + 360 = 1,260 MWh. Together they equal 1,400 MWh.

Schedule B assigns 70 MWh to Customer A and 330 MWh to the others. Customer A’s combined figure becomes 100 + 70 = 170 MWh. The other customers’ figure is 900 + 330 = 1,230 MWh. Together they also equal 1,400 MWh.

The same facility PUE permits different customer figures. The supplied totals alone do not identify Customer A’s allocation.

Fictional schedules: 40 plus 360 and 70 plus 330 both allocate 400 MWh, but Customer A receives a different share. — Fictional allocation test. Both schedules distribute the same 400 MWh difference. Customer A receives 40 MWh in Schedule A and 70 MWh in Schedule B; neither assignment is verified by the supplied totals alone.

Identify the assumption in the multiplier

Multiplying 100 by 1.4 chooses Schedule A and proportional allocation of supporting energy. The resulting customer total is an estimate requiring evidence, not a separate measurement.

Keep the 100 MWh reading and any supporting-energy allocation separately labelled. Schedule B is a logical alternative, not a recommendation.

Ask for the missing provider explanation

The DOE and ORNL metering protocol distinguishes broad site and building readings from system and component readings. Its data-centre discussion includes IT equipment as well as cooling and power-delivery infrastructure. Use that distinction to ask where each supplied quantity was measured.

Request the customer meter identifier, the equipment and supporting loads included at that point, and a diagram or explanation linking it to the facility totals. Ask which part of the proposed customer total is directly measured and which part is allocated. A supplier’s explanatory note is useful evidence; it does not itself validate the meters.

Check the ratio’s time basis. The 2011 taskforce recommendations distinguish annual energy measurements from peak-demand readings. A headline ratio, design value or instantaneous power reading should not silently become a measured annual electricity quantity. Ask for the relevant dates, actual energy records and measurement basis.

Keep the provider’s reply with the calculation. Record who reviewed it, which question it resolved and what is still awaiting evidence.

Keep the office handover connected

Maintain a separate entry for office electricity and any server-room reading already included within it. Link the colocation statement to its actual facility and contract rather than placing it under the office meter. If cloud-service emissions are also supplied, retain the service and coverage description before combining anything. This is a request map, not a rule assigning emissions scopes.

A satisfactory electricity reconciliation still leaves the corporate inventory method owner to determine the relevant boundary, emissions treatment and evidence requirements. This guide does not verify a provider’s performance, prescribe a contractual allocation or establish a renewable-electricity claim.

Sources checked 14 October 2026. The numerical example is original and fictional. No customer, supplier or Nitium engagement is described.