> And what happens to that water? Is it disintegrated into its compoent subatomic particles and beamed into outer space, never to be heard from again?
no.
> Is it sealed into a vault with the radioactive waste and buried for geologic time?
no.
> Or is it cleaned up back to super-purity and reused to make ANOTHER chip, and ANOTHER ad-infinitim, until it finally evaporates and comes back as rain?
and, surprisingly enough, no. it'd be much less of an issue if it worked that way. one of the important uses of water in chip manufacture is as a coolant.
the water is often taken from really cold, fast-running streams. when returned to the river or stream, the cumulative effect of many industries has raised water temperatures to almost fatal levels for fish species such as salmon, many of which are endangered.
>> 1.6 kg of fossil fuels,
> You probably burned more gas per chip just to GO PICK 'EM UP the last time you upgraded your RAM.
and how do you propose people get these chips without this additional waste? that probably would make a much more solid study- a study of the energy costs of shipping around computer equipment.
> Of course that's assuming all the energy came from fossil fuels
> the hydroelectric dams were still generating, etc.
hydroelectric dams have had a devastating effect on fish populations and native ecosystems. 80% of the nitrogen found in forest of the Pacific Northwest comes from oceanic sources, largely dead salmon post-spawning. with the extinction of the salmon comes the extinction of the forest.
> Of course if some cheapscate wants to dump used solvent, that's what the threat of the EPA is for: to make it more expensive to dump it than to deal with it properly.
and they fail miserably. any idea how many lawsuits against the EPA there are yearly to address these scenarios?
there are many countries which have even fewer restrictions than the U.S., how much of your computer equipment is manufactured in a country with minimal if any environmental regulations?
Slashdot Mirror
>> requires 32 kg of water,
> And what happens to that water? Is it disintegrated into its compoent subatomic particles and beamed into outer space, never to be heard from again?
no.
> Is it sealed into a vault with the radioactive waste and buried for geologic time?
no.
> Or is it cleaned up back to super-purity and reused to make ANOTHER chip, and ANOTHER ad-infinitim, until it finally evaporates and comes back as rain?
and, surprisingly enough, no. it'd be much less of an issue if it worked that way. one of the important uses of water in chip manufacture is as a coolant.
the water is often taken from really cold, fast-running streams. when returned to the river or stream, the cumulative effect of many industries has raised water temperatures to almost fatal levels for fish species such as salmon, many of which are endangered.
>> 1.6 kg of fossil fuels,
> You probably burned more gas per chip just to GO PICK 'EM UP the last time you upgraded your RAM.
and how do you propose people get these chips without this additional waste? that probably would make a much more solid study- a study of the energy costs of shipping around computer equipment.
> Of course that's assuming all the energy came from fossil fuels
> the hydroelectric dams were still generating, etc.
hydroelectric dams have had a devastating effect on fish populations and native ecosystems. 80% of the nitrogen found in forest of the Pacific Northwest comes from oceanic sources, largely dead salmon post-spawning. with the extinction of the salmon comes the extinction of the forest.
> Of course if some cheapscate wants to dump used solvent, that's what the threat of the EPA is for: to make it more expensive to dump it than to deal with it properly.
and they fail miserably. any idea how many lawsuits against the EPA there are yearly to address these scenarios?
there are many countries which have even fewer restrictions than the U.S., how much of your computer equipment is manufactured in a country with minimal if any environmental regulations?