••• DATACENTREWORLD ••• All of this is framed by regulatory requirements.


CPR classifications define fire performance characteristics; RoHS, REACH, and PFAS restrictions influence material choice; and wider sustainability reporting frameworks, including CBAM and conflict minerals legislation, increase demands for transparency throughout supply chains. These overlapping expectations mean documentation and verification are as important as the materials themselves.


Understanding the hidden impacts: logistics, lifespan


and data quality Some of the most influential factors in sustainable cable specification sit outside the product entirely. Logistics is one. Transport methods, routes and fuel types meaningfully affect the embodied carbon of cable systems. Road journeys across Europe can be more carbon-intensive than a single container-ship trip. Delivery reliability also has consequences. Missed or fragmented deliveries mean repeated site attendances and additional plant use, increasing emissions and slowing progress. Lifespan, too, plays a role. Although an average


design life of 25 years is often quoted, correctly specified and installed cables regularly exceed 40 years of service. When failures occur early, they are typically traced back to specification compromises, non-compliant manufacture, or insufficient environmental protection. Rectifying


such failures involves replacement materials and additional labour, equipment and the operational and carbon cost from disruption. Independent testing, including accelerated ageing and weathering, therefore, offers long-term value by verifying durability rather than relying on assumptions. Carbon reporting has brought new scrutiny to


data quality. Organisations are under pressure to account for Scope 3 emissions, yet supplier data varies in completeness and methodology. The reality is that comparing like-for-like can be challenging for anyone not specialised in carbon accounting. Ensuring data is reliable and comparable requires early engagement with suppliers and, increasingly, third-party assurance. There are also structural constraints to recognise. Higher CPR classifications may be achievable but not necessarily commercially available and require bespoke manufacturer and specific testing. Non-standard constructions can introduce longer lead times and minimum order quantities. Geo-specific standards can narrow supply-chain options at the point a project most needs flexibility. These realities are not barriers, but parameters to be integrated into decisions.


Towards a more resilient,


lower-carbon future Despite the challenges, momentum for sustainable cable specification is strengthening. Advances in next-generation compounds are opening new


pathways for circularity. Improvements in copper and aluminium production are gradually reducing carbon intensity as smelters adopt renewable power. Data transparency is improving as organisations see value in sharing verified baseline information. And perhaps most importantly, project teams are involving cable specialists earlier in the design process, ensuring sustainability sits alongside electrical performance, not competing with it. In a sector where every incremental improvement contributes to long-term impact, these shifts matter. Cable specification doesn’t require radical change, but consistent, decisions supported by clear data and practical collaboration. When performance, durability and environmental considerations are aligned from the outset, cables can deliver far more than reliable power: they become a contributor to resilient, efficient and lower-carbon digital infrastructure. As the industry moves toward 2030 andthe


next phase of its Net Zero transition, these early choices will play an increasingly important role in shaping data centres that are prepared for demand and designed with long-term responsibility in mind. Don’t miss Deborah’s talk ‘Cable Specification:


Making Decisions for Sustainable, Resilient Operations’ from 10:05 to 10:30 on 5 March 2026.


www.elandcables.com


electricalengineeringmagazine.co.uk


ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING • FEBRUARY2026 41


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48