BETTER VIDEO?: Dedicated videoconferencing technology has come down in price and up in quality thanks to the use of the Internet, but it remains to be seen whether it can truly replace travel.
Image: COURTESY OF LIFESIZE
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
When President Obama wants to talk with his military commanders in Iraq, he doesn't just pick up the phone. There is dedicated videoconferencing technology in the White House that enables him to speak with experts around the globe. And although the technology the administration uses is classified—the White House declined to identify the system—it is clear that it is a lot more environmentally friendly than firing up Air Force One.
According to Saul Griffith, a wind power kite scientist at Makani Power, Inc., in Alameda, Calif., and co-founder of the Web site Wattzon.com (an online energy-consumption calculator), air travel is the biggest impediment today to living on less energy. In a quest to reduce his own annual power use from some 18,000 watts to just 2,291 watts (the amount that he calculates uses up his yearly quota of greenhouse gas emissions), he says he now can only take one round-trip flight from San Francisco to New York City a year and one to his birthplace in Sydney, Australia, every three years.
"Someone has to make absolutely ever-present video conferencing—it's possibly the most important technology anybody can be working on," he said at the Greener Gadgets conference in New York City in late February.
Several companies, including Cisco Systems, LifeSize, Polycom and Siemens, among others, have been working on such technology for years—and the cost-cutting reality of the present economic crisis is helping to speed its adoption. It is unlikely that videoconferencing can replace all travel, but organizations are turning to it more and more as the technology's downside—shaky connections, dropped calls and disorienting lags—largely has been eliminated.
The Philadelphia-based national law firm Cozen O'Connor, for instance, which unsuccessfully experimented with videoconferencing in the late 1990s, recently installed LifeSize Express and Room systems at seven of its 23 branches. "It didn't work too well back then," says Joe D'Urso, the firm's telecommunications manager, who estimates the firm uses the videoconferencing technology about 100 hours a month. "The equipment has gotten better."
One of the main advances has been shifting from dedicated lines to sending video over the existing network that carries the Internet, using standard internet protocols, or IP. That has allowed the kinds of delays once common in such videoconferencing to be minimized without any impact on the company's internal network. "You can actually have a real conversation," says Joan Vandermate, vice president of marketing at Polycom, which provides dedicated, high-definition videoconferencing via packets sent over the Internet. "It's as close to really being in the same room as you can get."
That has also helped bring down the cost from as much as $250,000 to just $5,000 for the Express system at Austin, Tex.–based LifeSize. Frost & Sullivan, a technology consulting firm, estimates that the videoconferencing business is growing by some 20 percent a year, reaching $1.5 billion in scale in 2007.
More rudimentary video conferencing can be accomplished via Skype, iChat on Apple computers, or Adobe Acrobat Connect Pro software (the latter of which is used by the U.S. Department of Defense, according to Adobe). "It is an adequate experience," acknowledges LifeSize's senior vice president Colin Buechler, but "you're not going to avoid a business trip with a desktop call."
Such cheap, reliable videoconferencing also opens up the possibility of remote applications for expertise, such as in medicine or law. "You used to bring people to experts, now you can bring experts to the people," says LifeSize chief technology officer Casey King, noting that Adena Health System in southern Ohio has already used the technology to help its regional centers care for premature babies rather than transporting them to a specialized center.
Virginia's Supreme Court now uses Polycom video systems at 300 facilities across the state to issue some 820 warrants a day. The city of Richmond alone estimates the system saved it $1.2 million in overtime pay for court personnel in its first year and paid for itself in three months. Similar efforts are underway in Michigan for processing inmates and in Texas for delivering medical services to inmates; the latter has saved the state an estimated $215 million over the last six years, according to its own estimates.
But, ultimately, the case for videoconferencing is a case against travel, whether carbon dioxide (CO2) spewing from a car's tailpipe on the ground or a jet engine in the stratosphere. At least that's what Atlanta-based Vanguard Truck Centers, which sells and services trucks, has found.
Since installing seven LifeSize systems (at a total cost of $62,000), the company estimates it has saved $85,000 a year in travel expenses and, more importantly for the climate, 135,000 pounds (61,200 kilograms) of CO2. "We're in the transportation industry and have definitely saved on travel," says Vanguard's director of IT and targeted marketing Greg Baxter. "It doesn't take the place of all travel but it definitely takes the place of 40 to 50 percent of it."
See what we're tweeting about
11 Comments
Add CommentI think videoconferencing is a great idea for our federal government. Why should we pay for congressmen to maintain offices in their home district and in DC and for the flights back and forth? Just put a videoconferencing system in place in all of their offices and let them meet that way. It would keep our representatives closer to their constituents, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and still make their business a matter of public record.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe statement "In a quest to reduce his own annual power use from some 18,000 watts to just 2,291 watts" has a units problem. Power is Energy/Time. You probably mean "reduce average power consumption from 18kW to 2.23kW". Or (since 1 Watt = 1J/sec, and there are 31.6x10^6 seconds in a year), "reduce annual energy use from 568 GJ to 72 GJ".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVideo over IP is great, and Apples iChat is an absolutely awesome implementation of it. We use it constantly here at work. Our engineers use it to interface with our production floor, etc... it's absolutely saved us a ton of time and travel.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI like it, because it keeps travel in the realm of pleasure, and the best methods of travel are bicycle, sailboat, and two feet.
Can the internet backbone supply enough bandwidth to make videoconferencing available for everyone?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVideoconferencing will become mainstream as soon as somebody writes software that uses an open standard so it interoperates with other systems, that is cheap or free, and that runs on standard systems with standard video cameras and webcams. The hardware and network bandwidth is available; it's just proprietary, sucky software (mostly due to patent encumbered video codecs) that's holding everybody up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is so intersting airticle!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've been linking your one!
Would you link to this site?
I'm looking forward to sharing the pleasures with you!
You can see that it's TANDBERG video conferencing in the White House by watching the recent NBC Nightly News Special: "Inside the Real West Wing." If the President and his staff are using TANDBERG products, they must be pretty good, right? The clip can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#31073805
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes of course it will replace.It will also save a lots of time which previously was needed for traveling.Thanks for sharing information so nicely.Thanks!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.travelcostarica360.com/mal-pais-costa-rica-its-magnificence.html
Yes. Of course, video conferencing has already replaced travel. Many companies are nowadays, using combined web-video conferencing services offered by various providers such as WebEx, gomeetnow, gotomeeting etc. Alternatively, companies can even consider deploying on premise web-video conferencing appliance such as RHUB appliances in order to reduce travel costs, increase business efficiency, conduct webinars, web meetings etc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI recommend you check out BlueJeans.com, which is a cloud-based service that bridges proprietary-based hardware (such as Polycom, Cisco, Lifesize, etc) with anyone on their Browser, Skype, Microsoft Lync, Jabber, iPhone/iPads, and more, in HD. You can even content share to these disparate endpoints, which makes for MUCH less travel because you can connect to literally anyone. Great point you raise about everyone being stuck on a video island!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisApparently similar to skype, Vidyo gives a high quality optimizing bandwith. Vidyo uses SVC (scalable compression) giving the best quality for each one depending of its bandwith.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this