Slashdot Mirror
Control-Alt-Recycle
klevin writes "Grist magazine's running an article on what to look for when the old PC's running out of gas and you want to avoid trashing the environment even further. Their suggestions include: upgrade instead of replacing, go for LCD monitors instead of CRTs and, if replacing, reuse the old one as an MP3 server on your home network."
Not only is it better for the enviroment to upgrade, it also saves you money :)
(hey, I can still use this case, etc etc)
This is the sig that says NI (again)
Donate them to a charity. An MP3 server is really a waste of energy. I mean, come on... why not simply donate the pc to some charity that can give them to those less fortunate folks who could use them, and who don't need a P4 3.4ghz system to use email, do homework, and balance their checkbook...
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
I have one, its called a stereo. Really, for the 99.99% of the population that doesn't read Slashdot, who is going to actually do this? Nobody in the iPod generation for sure.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
i wonder. what is the environmental impact of throwing out a PC, versus the envrionmental impact of keeping an extra PC around and having it consume power all day and night? i'm not sure it is more environmentally friendly to keep an old PC around instead of throwing it out.
I certainly don't have a better solution admitedly, but I'm pretty sure this needs some work.
Paul Lenhart writes words!
So, instead of tossing that old computer, I should set it up as an mp3 | print | file | firewall | game | whatever server. That way instead of poluting the environment I can waste more electricity!
reuse the old one as an MP3 server on your home network
If your network is then compromised and your MP3 server becomes visible to the outside, even in a limited capacity, do you then get zapped for sharing your MP3s? That would suck if you didn't even know it was happening and suddenly you get a summons.
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
FWIW
...to someone who won't know the difference. (i.e. that little old lady down the street that just needs to check her email, or... you know... MOM n' DAD, punkass little brother, etc)
:-)
All of this is, of course, in theory... not that I've really done that yet. All my 'preciouses' are with me still...
only 750Mhz
What world are you living in? 750Mhz is quite significant in my mind. Other than my Desktop machine (1.67GHz), I have no other PCs that are more than 233Mhz.
I'd also like to know how upgrading an old machine is more environmentally friendly. For one, it's not practical as core components can only be upgraded so far before you reach the point of diminishing returns. Also, most of the problem is in the materials used in CRTs, so "upgrading" them means replacment anyway.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
to someone else who will use it...
and use the identical amount of energy...
--- Ban humanity.
First: I agree with you. LCD screens are getting to the point where they're almost OK for games, and they're better for text. However, two things come to mind that you really want a CRT monitor for. One is Graphics design. You can fine tune the color pallate on a CRT. But, no big deal, we could get over that.
The other is TV's.
That's the big hurdle here.
~Will
sig?
Eh, considering every generation of PC's uses up more and more power (and converting more and more of it into heat), their statement probably stands. Maybe older gear isn't as efficient, but it draws considerably less power to begin with so it balances.
if replacing, reuse the old one as an MP3 server on your home network
You're just postponing the eventual landfill anyway, and in the meantime, consuming 200W or so of electricity 24/7. Where I live, electricity comes from coal, which among other things, causes acid rain.
A much better idea would be to donate the PC to a school or a nonprofit charity.
One issue I see with choosing LCD panels over CRT displays is that of lifespan. It's not uncommon for a CRT to outlive it's "useful" lifespan. I've acquired several older CRTs this way from my previous employer.
15" CRTs that were deemed too small for desktop use, old-skool 21" CRTs that had too much screen curvature and were simply too big compared to newer 19" and 21" CRTs (that were also a fraction of the cost). All of these CRTs are four to eight years old and still functioning.
Comparing this with what my experience has been with LCD panels is that they have failure rates higher than that of CRTs. I've seen this mostly with notebook screens. This comparision isn't entirely fair, as notebooks receive considerablly more abuse than a desktop+CRT. However, LCD panels have backlights (usually a miniature florescent bulb) that will burn out eventually. On notebooks, these backlights are integrated into the panel itself and are not replaceable parts by themselves. I don't know if this is the case with desktop LCD panels, but I suspect it is.
So the question is, how does using LCD panels vs. CRTs really impact the environment considering failure rates and manufacturing defects?
I wasn't one of those people, but I'll try to explain it anyway.
You have a few scenarios:
1. You set up a new machine and trash the old one. You use one PC's worth of power, and it's more than enough to handle serving your mp3s while you do other things. Downside, you trashed the old one and released the toxic badness.
2. You set up a new machine and keep the old one for mp3s. Same as #1, but uses twice the power.
3. You set up a new machine and donate the old one to someone else who will use it. Same as #2, except twice the number of people are using PCs at the same energy use.
So, which is more efficient in your mind? One person using two PCs, or two people using two PCs? Seems like twice the use is being obtained with no net energy increase. So, yes, the same amount of energy is being used, but that doesn't seem to be the point.
And these LCDs aren't exactly Llyama or Sony displays either - try cheap Acer/BenQ/LGe.
Then again, I'm not on the sales/warranty returns and LCD sales have only picked up in the last 18 months in my area so I may have yet to see all the caveats.
As far as developing faults are concerned, LCDs seem to either work fine or not work at all.
Cheap CRTs, on the other hand, especially large ones, love to get cracked PCBs or imploded tubes when moving house. Also, they run hotter with higher voltages, and the repairs seem to be more involved; HV circuitry collapses, power supplies die, OSDs go crazy, HO transistor dies, caps dry up, diodes go open circuit, dry joints cause intermittent faults, temperature related problems, picture becomes distorted/washed out/unfocused...
Cheap LCDs are a lot nicer to pack up and send back for repair. Packing up a cheap 19" CRT is quite costly compared to sending back a LCD, or motherboard or HDD...
As far as useability is concerned, it seems most offices we're fitting out would disagree with you. A cheap LCD is much better on the eyes IMHO than a cheap CRT. Cheap, nasty, half-working CRTs that some employess put up with are particulary worse than any LCD.
- Paul
much of the "upgrade" cycle is driven by silly reasons...
80% of home users can do just fine with that horribly old pentium III-800 (hell a 500 is just fine) running windows 98 or another efficient OS (no W2K and XP are NOT efficient in any way) running Office 97 (when OO.o is as fast as office 97 I'll reccomend it) and basic internet.
they are not using 60% of their computer.. Gamers? they think they need more.. where I found they need the video card (Ut2004 runs absolutely great with a new modern video card on a P-III-866 with all the goodies turned on) and rarely need the 4.6Ghz P4Extreme and the 2000Mhz FSB and quad DDR with load balancing and go fast fins as well a SATA 20,000rpm drives with 64meg cache and Ultra 900 bus....
most upgrades at home are in vain or for vanity reasons. you dont need a 2ghz machine to surf the web, write and read email and do taxes + the little bit of wordprocessing...
that said, I do enjoy all the 500mhz -> 1ghz machines I have been given as they were "throwing them out" after they got their new computer.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Yea. Lets all reuse our old slow computers and waste more electricity. The problem is when people set up "MP3 Servers" and what not they leave the machine running 24/7. That wastes a lot of electricity. Do you leave the lights on in your home all the time?
There are places that you can take equipment to be disassembled and the metals, glass and plastics be extracted.
Donatations to Computer Recycling Center is one example of getting rid of an old PC. But if the parts are too old they will want money for disposal. There are many places like this. It is a far better solution than using old PCs as "servers".
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
running windows 98 or another efficient OS (no W2K and XP are NOT efficient in any way)
They don't crash, they have greater security than 98.
If a computer has enough RAM to run either without swapping, and it's going to be connected to the net at all, it should use 2k or XP. Or Linux.
Yeah!
You could take that old P75 with it's 300MB hard drive and... well... you could put like 5 or 6 CDs on it.
Ok, so you buy a new hard drive and video card to replace the ones you gutted out of it for your new PC, a network card since the old PC only had a modem, and by the time you've spent all that money your neighbor has an iPod one tenth the size that does the job way better!
I've got a PILE of old computer stuff I'd love to do something with, but it's so obsolete it's not worth it.
I just don't have the heart to throw away that old 300 baud modem!
That was my thought exactally...
Why hasn't this post been modded up?
Just because you have a computer laying around doesn't mean it is more eco-friendly to use it than to send it to the dump... Eventually it will die (No component will last forever), and will end up in the dump any way. Why waste all of that extra electricity (which probably came from burning some fossil fuel) to prolong the enevitable?
Unless you are planning on upgrading your old POS with some new hard drives it hardly seems like it would be worth using as a file server anyway. At that point why not just pop the new hard drives in your replacement pc? You waste a lot less electricty that way. Admitedly this is a lot less fun... It is just cool to have home "servers" laying around. You can play sysadmin at home, but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are helping the environment by doing so.
The best way to help the environment would be to buy fewer computers in general... I for one would have a hard time with this choice. Well actually I haven't bought a computer in 5 years, but it has nothing to do with the enviornment... I admit it, I'm poor.
Would anyone like to donate their old (2-3 years old) computer to a poor computer science graduate student? I promise to only use it when I really need it, so you need not worry about excessive electricty usage.
Did taking the useful parts make the safe disposal of the rest of these computers my responsibility?
By taking the memory and hard drives I turned two of those computers to something that someone else could get working with the addition of no further parts to complete junk.
I said they had not erased the hard drives? Well whoever was responsible for the disposal of these computers had sprayed them with fluorescent orange paint.
So, does putting the computer to the curb relieve you of the responsibility of disposing of the toxic waste, if someone takes them away? It might merely mean that a cheapskate has grabbed them, put them in their car, taken them somewhere, to examine them, and determine if they held anything of value. And then put them right back on the curb when they determined there wasn't anything they wanted...