Advancing Energy System Research with the FAIR+S Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52825/ocp.v9i.3278Keywords:
FAIR, FAIR4RS, NFDI4Energy, Energy System Research, Sustainability, Green SoftwareAbstract
The FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) have transformed research data management. Yet, they overlook sustainability aspects such as energy consumption, carbon footprint, and life cycle impact made be creating and using research software and data - critical factors for energy-intensive disciplines. This work reframes FAIR+S, an extension of FAIR and FAIR4RS, as a cornerstone for advancing Energy System Research and the NFDI4Energy initiative.
Downloads
References
[1] M. D. Wilkinson et al., “The fair guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship”, Scientific Data, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 160 018, 2016. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18.
[2] M. Barker et al., “Introducing the fair principles for research software”, Scientific Data, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 622, 2022. DOI: 10.1038/s41597-022-01710-x.
[3] E. Strubell, A. Ganesh, and A. McCallum, Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in nlp, 2019. arXiv: 1906.02243 [cs.CL].
[4] D. Patterson et al., Carbon emissions and large neural network training, 2021. arXiv: 2104.10350 [cs.LG].
[5] Information technology — software carbon intensity (SCI) specification, International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission, Mar. 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.iso.org/standard/86612.html.
[6] B. Courty et al., Mlco2/codecarbon: V3.0.3, version v3.0.3, Jul. 2025. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15870443.
[7] Green Software Foundation, Decarbonize software 2023 – redefining the future of software, URL: https://greensoftware.foundation/articles/decarbonize-software-2023-redefining-the-future-of-software, [Accessed: 2025-09-17], Nov. 2023.
[8] C. Goebel et al., “Energy informatics”, Business & Information Systems Engineering, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 25–31, 2014, ISSN: 1867-0202. DOI: 10.1007/s12599-013-0304-2.
[9] A. Nieße et al., Nfdi4energy – national research data infrastructure for the interdisciplinary energy system research, version 1.0, Jul. 2022. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6772013.
[10] NFDI4Energy Consortium, Nfdi4energy – national research data infrastructure for interdisciplinary energy system research, https://www.nfdi4energy.uol.de, Accessed: 2025-10-18, 2025.
[11] D. Valko, When fair isn’t enough: Towards sustainable research data and software, SSRN, Sep. 2025. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.5546379.
[12] V. H. Volodymyr Kasianenko Volodymyr Fedotov, “Digitalisation and sustainable energy sector transformation: Analysis of key trends”, Economic Sustainability and Business Practices, vol. 1, pp. 48–55, 2024. DOI: 10.21272/esbp.2024.3-06.
[13] Z. Pan, G. G ¨urses-Tran, C. Speck, P. Jaquart, M. Niebisch, and A. Monti, “Transparency and involvement of the energy-related industry in a data sharing platform”, Proceedings of the Conference on Research Data Infrastructure, vol. 1, Sep. 2023. DOI: 10.52825/cordi.v1i.270.
[14] L. Anthony, B. Kanding, and R. Selvan, Carbontracker: Tracking and predicting the carbon footprint of training deep learning models, 2021. arXiv: 2007.03051 [cs.CY].
[15] A. Lacoste et al., Quantifying the carbon emissions of machine learning, 2019. arXiv: 1910.09700 [cs.CY].
[16] R. Schwartz, J. Dodge, N. A. Smith, and O. Etzioni, “Green ai”, Communications of the ACM, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 54–63, Nov. 2020, ISSN: 0001-0782. DOI: 10.1145/3381831.
[17] S. Rekker et al., “Balancing simplicity and complexity through corporate emissions benchmarking”, Nature Climate Change, Oct. 2025, ISSN: 1758-6798. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-025-02467-y.
[18] V. J. Reddi et al., Mlperf inference benchmark, 2019. arXiv: 1911.02549 [cs.LG].
[19] K. Huppler, K. -D. Lange, and J. Beckett, “Spec: Enabling efficiency measurement”, in Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering, ser. ICPE ’12, Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2012, pp. 257–258, ISBN: 9781450312028. DOI: 10.1145/2188286.2188331.
[20] J. Ranganathan, “A commentary comparing the ghg protocol and e-liability approaches to corporate ghg accounting and reporting”, Carbon Management, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 2 397 498, 2024. DOI: 10.1080/17583004.2024.2397498.
[21] M.- F. K ¨orner, C. Leinauer, T. Str ¨oher, and J. Str ¨uker, “Digital measuring, reporting, and verification (dmrv) for decarbonization”, Business & Information Systems Engineering, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 753–765, 2025, ISSN: 1867-0202. DOI: 10.1007/s12599-025-00953-3.
[22] S. Falk et al., More than carbon: Cradle-to-grave environmental impacts of genai training on the nvidia a100 gpu, 2025. arXiv: 2509.00093 [cs.CY].
[23] R. R. Nair, K. M. Chougule, J. C. Gomez, and U. Brand-Daniels, “A generalized schema to publish and share life cycle inventories (lci): Exemplary case of an aviation fuel supply chain”, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 520, p. 146 120, 2025, ISSN: 0959-6526. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146120.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Danila Valko, Jan Sören Schwarz, Ralf Isenmann, Jorge Marx G´omez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.