Slashdot Mirror
Manufacturing 1 PC Takes 1.8 Tons Of Raw Material
remy writes "Although most of it (1.5 metric tons) is water, a study from the United Nations University details the raw materials used in the manufacture of a PC and 17" CRT. That's an incredible environmental cost per PC, and a very strong argument for trying to leverage older equipment, not to mention upgrading rather than replacing."
that I haven't bought a monitor in seven years and have fished several out of the garbage. Using a KVM switch is helpful too.
Wow, now I don't have to feel bad about running the tap for a couple seconds before filling my glass....
I have this odd feeling that they are neglecting how much it would cost to make the second PC and monitor; how much of the material cost is simply overhead?
1.5 tons of water. But all of that gets reused eventually. I mean, it's not like it gets jettisoned into space, or converted into energy.
I mean I suppose things like fossil fuels get converted into useless byproducts, but most of the stuff would not be. This is accounting is beyond a little suspicious. I mean, how many tons of stuff does a person eat and then shit out in their lifetime. Probably a lot more then 1.8 tons.
And would upgrading really make that much of a difference? You upgrade a couple of times, then you need a new mobo, and after a while you need a new case to fit your new motherboard, and you practically have a new PC anyway. Its more like a gradual change to a new computer (combined with enough spare parts to build old machines) rather then large, discrete steps.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Do not appeal to save energy or water. Promote the integration of the hidden environmental costs into the framework of market economics for finding appropiate prices for water and energy!
-- Contradictions only exist in thought - not in reality.
For anyone in the Bay Area you might want to the check out the Alameda Computer Resource Center (ACCRC). They recycle just about anything electronic, but they also load up Linux on old computers and give them to schools, non-profits, and developing nations. Very cool organization. Located in Berkeley. www.accrc.org
Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land
From the article: ...Williams suggests redesigning network cards to allow the PC to go to sleep and then wake it should there be any important network traffic."
"Too many computers at companies are prevented from entering their standby mode by LAN traffic, which keeps them awake and consuming power even while they are not in use, he said.
Hasn't that already been done in the form of Wake-on-LAN?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." -Albert Einstein
OK, so I opt to upgrade my computer instead of buying a new one (which is the only thing I've ever done in the last 20 years of PC use).
What parts shouldn't I upgrade in order to be "environmentally friendly"? I'm sure the case doesn't take a hellacious amout of natural resources. I mean, it's just bending metal. The power supply is relatively simple electronics.
So, my guess is that the biggest consumers of resources are going to be the hard drive, the memory, the processor, and the motherboard.
Which are things I upgrade. Regularly.
I think environmental conservation is an important idea, but it seems like "Upgrade! Don't replace!" just gives the manufacturers a good excuse to not explore less environmentally hostile manufacturing techniques.
Having said all that, the beauty of water is that when you use it, you get to use it again. Yay water cycle. Makes planet work good.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Sure they may use the same amount of resources to make, but seeing as they are typically used 2 - 3 times as long, wouldn't they be a net improvement on a pc ?
- Kaos games and encryption systems developer
So yeah, recycling really is a good idea.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
For me, it is a dilema. Between an upgrade, you get a more efficient hardware at similar price-energy ratio, thus more energy "friendly".
But with these, you get headache junking old hardware, and suffocate our habitat.
Consider this option, Computers for Africa
A similar report on BBC, Computers 'must become greener
Hey, that's my password you are typing
Donation of older systems
Businesses really do not need to upgrade as often as they do Is there really that much functionality to the officeworker of an athlon FX 64 bit machine compared to a P200? I mean Word perfect and Lotus 1,2,3 both worked great on mine under OS/2 2.1 Now I am talking for business purposes hear not gaming or rendering or scientific maches servers etc. Just your typical iffice users 8-5 kind of thing
Move more and more to clustered computing. Need a render farm after hours? Use the machines already in place. When I worked for a design firm we had a render farm but I would use the other network machines after hours to speed things up considerably and it meant I didn't have to upgrade so rapidly.
Boot diskless terminals (kind of like the reverse of the previous comment) another 10 users may equal a change in processor and memmory and the addition of a new drive no need to build an entire system for each one.
What other responsible actions can we think of to turn the tide? I know the computer manufacturers certainly dont want to see it happen but the whole situation has become quite silly.
BTW just because of this topic I am posting from my 7350 dual 180Mhz 604e server
Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
The BBC is running a report from one of the UKs regional recycling centers
"It says a PC uses more than ten times its weight in fossil fuels and chemicals to manufacture."
"One of the ways of extending the life of a computer is to make it more easy to upgrade, rather than the current trend constantly replacing them for a better model as soon new versions become available."
How many "tons" of water do I use to shower? And I do that everyday. I certainly don't buy a computer everyday, however. You may as well consider the air and food consumed by the factory workers if you are forced to follow the causal trail so far to get the desired dramatic number. How many fossil fuels are used to till the fields that grow the crops that feed the workers that make the computers? Clearly, this is an ecological disaster. Our only option is to start killing people, or at least keep them from being born. That is where this trail of logic will eventually lead you.
Making people pay to get rid of the hazardous waste is the wrong aproach, because guess what, lots of people will opt for the free aproach of dumping the stuff somewhere.
Much better is the model used for example in Scandinavia. If you sell a certain type of electric thingie, you have to be willing to take it back, at no cost, and dispose of it properly.
This means, if you've got an old computer you want to get rid of, you can deliver it, without paying, to any shop that sells computers. No it doesn't matter if they didn't sell *this*spesific* computer.
The practical offshot is offcourse that the sellers bake the cost of this into the cost of a new computer, I've seen calculations that say these rules makes new computers $5-$10 more expensive than they'd otherwise be. I think that's a acceptable trade-off.
I've not bought a PC from them yet, but I like the look of Hoojum. They certainly seem to be the most ethical manufacturer I've come across. Does anyone else know of any companies that do similar things?
And I'm sure you're familiar with all of the processes involved in turning the water back into its pristine state we began with.
Why, they could surely just pipe the water from the factory outlet back into the factory inlet, right?
I think you might be overlooking something, son. It isn't just shite & piss we're talking about here. Hundreds of different kinds of contaminations, many involving heavy metals.
Yes, I agree completely with you about numbers and statistics, but I don't think the impact of any amount of water contamination, or the effect if it being released unpurified, is seen by you here.
printf("%s@yahoo.co.uk\n", uid[569754].name);
Can't remember the brand of cigarette, but their ads always featured some long legged model with the tagline "We've come a long way baby"
Using SSH and console is ok, when I just have to pop in really quick to edit some conf file, or tail -f some log. %80 of the time i'm doing this, it's pertaining to some clients web site i'm working on.
Guess what though? Do I fire up lynx to view my changes? Hell no! I use mozilla or IE, or some other html renderer. Do I create graphics or video from the console too? Hell no, I use some graphic program, with some nice gui, and pretty little icons everywhere BECAUSE I LIKE IT!!!!
Not only do I like it for that kind of work, I like it FAST! The faster the better!
Does it look like I care about leveraging old hardware for modern content? (shameless plug)
What I do use old equipment for is an ipcop firewall. I also use it to frankenstien together stepper motor interfaces because it IS old and I don't give a crap if it catches on fire because I wired something the wrong way.
Here's the whole wrapup to my post, i.e. the point. I read slashdot everyday, I build mosix clusters using plumpOS (couldn't remember the link sorry) My garage is filled from top to bottom with old computer crap because I know i'm not average joe sixpack user, and I will find a purpose for it even if it's just for research or fun. Average joe sixpack doesn't care about these things, he just wants his little clickety click icons to open up faster, or his OS to load quicker, or his games to run better.
And I sympathize with him %100. Thanks Joe sixpack for not taking the time to learn what I do, because I'm that car that stops outside your house to load up that PC you put out with your trash.
You can also do a lot with a simple memory upgrade.
This is after all the business market. Not the home user market. For office use a dual P3 is even better (with the right modern OS) then a single P4. No more lag while your wordproccessor starts up.
With such an upgrade you just doubled the life of the Mobo, memory, cpu, HD, expansion cards, cables and monitor. 50% reduction in waste. Not bad eh?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Just making the metal for the case will use a *lot* of water, for coolant etc. You'd be amazed - in some countries, up to and beyond 100 tons of water can be used to make a ton of steel.
Most of the fossil fuels are probably mostly used in various refining materials process - the case, again, a lot of power needed for that. All the different materials in the PC and monitor adds up amazingly fast - remember that the actual raw materials are really cheap, so you don't see much cost due to this when you buy something in a high-street store.
-Chris
1.5 tons is 1.5 cubic meters of water, which is only about a bath tub full (or two, depending on the size).
No, I'm not a Luddite or environmental wacko. But the PC industry is pretty messed up right now and really needs to change. To wit:
1. CPU power consumption keeps increasing at a dramatic rate, even though the vast majority of PCs are underutilized by ~80%. That is, people buy a 2.8GHz P4 because it's the lowest end model sold by Dell in a desktop (seriously!), even though they just do web browsing, play simple Flash games, and use Word. Fortunately, LCD monitors have more than balanced this out, at least for now, but with 150W CPUs coming before year's end, I don't know how long it will last.
2. Games drive things far too much. Why does every PC made since 1997 include AGP hardware? Why do you get a heatsink and fan-laden nVidia 5200 with most all-but-bottom-end PCs? Why have power supplies jumped up to the 400-450W range? Because there's a very vocal gamer market that has been driving PC hardware development. In reality, high-end PCs games don't even sell all that well. The huge selling games are things like The Sims and Roller Coaster Tycoon and generally not cutting edge 3D games.
3. PCs are far too general purpose. They're designed to do everything, but nothing really well. It's still far too common to see Xbox games that utterly blow away PC games, even though the Xbox has 64MB *total* RAM and a PC game requires 128MB of *video* RAM. You have people buying the P4 Extreme Edition solely because they spend most of their time doing video compression. Really, wouldn't a video compression chip that outperforms the CPU by 10x be preferrable? (Note: This is coming in the next nVidia chipset this spring.) Wouldn't we be better off with CPUs designed more for languages like Python, ones that use 1/10 the power of existing processors? Ericsson prototyped a CPU for their concurrent functional language Erlang, and they got *massive* speedups and a power consumption in the range of 1 watt.
4. Processor speed, memory requirements, they've all gotten very soft and meaningless. You see tables in Dell catalogs saying that 2.8GHz is good for email and web browsing, but 3.0GHz is much better for games. Hello? That's only a 7% performance difference! Similarly, people blindly advocate 1GB over 512MB without any real reason.
1m^3 has a mass of exactly 1 Tonne (Metric) by definition
1m^3 = 1.102 Short (US) Tons
1m^3 = 0.984 Long (Old UK) Tons
I'm amazed to see ppl on /. surprised at the weight of water. Over here in Europe where we use the metric system it's common knowledge 1000Kg=1Tonne=1m^3 as it's so easy to remember.
My spelling isn't bad, I'm evolving the language