Page 1 of 1
Are we still beta? EDIT: ecopcreview.com is coming
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:59 am
by padmewan
Site admins : How is the "experiment" going for this forum?
MikeC: I'll move the question from the other thread to here: What's the chances of you adding GreenPCReview.com to your empire? I think the question I posted about comparing Cade to EarthPC could be one of the first articles if someone with the ability to conduct the research/comparison can undertake the work! (I'm just one of those demanding consumers who always wants more!)
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:18 am
by MikeC
For the last 3-4 months, I've been working towards the launch of
www.ecopcreview.com. It's a challenge. There are many complex issues, much to study, people to network.... but I'm getting there. The site will probably be quietly launched by the end of the month.
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:11 am
by padmewan
uber cool! It's so important to have a consumer reports type accountability system to check more egregious efforts at greenwashing, esp. when the issues we're talking about are so important!
Is there any way any of us can help?
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:22 am
by MikeC
There's always stuff to do around any informational web site. If anyone would like to volunteer, I'd be happy to see emails with your qualifications....
1) writing skills
2) organizational skills
3) hardware / environmental knowledge
4) real interest / drive.... even though it will begin as bits and pieces or limited projects
...it may eventually turn into paying work, but that depends more on funding and maybe site traffic.
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:38 am
by McBanjo
Will SPCR and EPCR work togheter in anyway or be totaly independent of eachother?
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:45 pm
by padmewan
If getting together enough content is an issue, maybe it can start out as just a blog and expand? I think there's plenty of demand for this topic Out There.
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 2:02 pm
by padmewan
NYTimes on "Green Lite" publishing:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/23/techn ... 3ecom.html
[quote]“We’re targeting this to the 95 percent of people who want to be 5 percent green,â€
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:09 am
by halcyon
MikeC,
I'm also interested in contributing, although at the moment I'm a little pressed for time.
Some initial ideas:
- emergy vs in-use energy consumption (when does it make worth to upgrade, LCA point-of-view)
- high level tips for a low-power consumption PC (not manufacturer specific)
I might have some ideas to contribute on review criteria as well, although some of the stuff is truly difficult to measure.
www.ecopcreview.com is here.
Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 9:59 pm
by MikeC
Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 10:49 pm
by regal196
Just Joined! 
I am looking forward to a great source of information!
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:54 am
by MikeC
There was a little glitch that prevented images in the EPCR articles from being shown, but it's been corrected.
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:27 am
by Bigg
YEAH! I would love to see an article on energy to make vs. to use. I have seen numbers from 66% in use to 20% in use.
EDIT: I just skimmed the article there about lifecycle emissions. And its another number!!! 25/75, I have not heard that one before. So whats the story with this statistic that seems to change from site to site?
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:40 am
by MikeC
Bigg wrote:YEAH! I would love to see an article on energy to make vs. to use. I have seen numbers from 66% in use to 20% in use.
The second page of this article,
Life Cycle Analysis and Eco PC Review, cites a major study that appeared in the first serious book on the environmental impact of computers.
Here, also, is an abstract of the piece:
The total energy and fossil fuels used in producing a desktop computer with 17-inch CRT monitor are estimated at 6,400 megajoules (MJ) or 260 kg respectively. This indicates that computer manufacturing is energy intensive: the ratio of fossil fuel use to product weight is 11, an order of magnitude larger than the factor of 1-2 for many other manufactured goods. This high energy intensity of manufacturing, combined with rapid turnover in computers, results in an annual life cycle energy burden that is surprisingly high: about 2,600 MJ per year, 1.3 times that of a refrigerator. In contrast with many home appliances, life cycle energy use of a computer is dominated by production (81%) as opposed to operation (19%). Extension of usable lifespan (e.g. by reselling or upgrading) is thus a promising approach to mitigating energy impacts, as well as other environmental burdens associated with manufacturing and disposal.
This is all based on the assumption of a 3-yr usable life, which is typical. Lengthen the life, and the percentages obviously change.
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:34 am
by Bigg
What about just the computer, or a computer with an LCD?
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:38 am
by MikeC
I discussed CRT vs LCD monitors with Eric Williams at the Orlando summit, and he said the energy cost in mfg was not significantly different. That's actually in his article/book as well.
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:00 am
by drees
MikeC wrote:This is all based on the assumption of a 3-yr usable life, which is typical. Lengthen the life, and the percentages obviously change.
Good point, I have some computers which have been in service since 1996!
My Linux firewall/fileserver/proxy/etc (AMD K6-2 450) at home started life as my primary desktop and was repurposed about 7 years ago and still happily chugs along today. It still has plenty of power for what it does and is a fairly low power system for todays standards drawing about 50w with 2 7200 RPM drives in it.