If you've put all that work into having an off-the-grid solar panel, then you could power your more-efficient computer using only half of the panel's output, and using the other half for something else. That is, the "eventually converted to heat whether my computer is there or not" argument would similarly conclude that there is no cost to just making lots of solar panels and then not attaching them to anything at all :-). --Michael On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Mike Speciner <ms@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
But suppose you replace your solar panel by a mirror.
On 15-Sep-16 11:19, Henry Baker wrote:
[This is a thermo question, not a climate troll.]
California just passed energy efficiency requirements for computers.
1. If I have an inefficient computer that requires twice as much power to run a particular computation as another, "efficient" computer, then almost certainly my inefficient computer is "worse for the environment" than an efficient computer.
2. What if, on the other hand, I power my "inefficient" computer using solar power ? To avoid grid issues, I'll power my inefficient computer directly from a solar panel so that it isn't connected to the grid at all.
The sunlight is going to be eventually converted to heat whether my computer is there or not; so what difference does it make?
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
-- Forewarned is worth an octopus in the bush.