Black Google would save $300k a year.

hungryduck

hungryduck

Tank
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
2,267
Reaction score
1
http://ecoiron.blogspot.com/2007/01/black-google-would-save-3000-megawatts.html#links

As noted, an all white web page uses about 74 watts to display, while an all black page uses only 59 watts. I thought I would do a little math and see what could be saved by moving a high volume site to the black format.

Take at look at Google, who gets about 200 million queries a day. Let's assume each query is displayed for about 10 seconds; that means Google is running for about 550,000 hours every day on some desktop. Assuming that users run Google in full screen mode, the shift to a black background will save a total of 15 (74-59) watts. That turns into a global savings of 8.3 Megawatt-hours per day, or about 3000 Megawatt-hours a year. And at 10 cents a kilowatt-hour, that's $300,000, a goodly amount of energy and dollars for changing a few color codes.
Click to expand...

interesting....
 
I remember somebody writing a news report about how if we turned off daytime running lights it would save like 8 billion in gas money per year.


of course that's all theory.
 
Simply shut down the computer if you really want to save that bit.
 
I think rather than suggesting that a company changes its bright and welcoming white theme to a strange and disturbing black, perhaps we should just shut off the computer at night more often to conserve energy.

Still interesting to know, though... puts things into perspective on a global scale...
 
but to save the 15 watts the intire page has to be black. how would you see the results. all black page does not equal all black background.
 
xcellerate said:
I remember somebody writing a news report about how if we turned off daytime running lights it would save like 8 billion in gas money per year.


of course that's all theory.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about daytime lights in cars?

Just wondering because over here in the UK not many cars have 'em. I can only remember Volvo's having them.
 
xcellerate said:
I remember somebody writing a news report about how if we turned off daytime running lights it would save like 8 billion in gas money per year.


of course that's all theory.
Click to expand...

That has to be wrong.

Note how lights work without the car running (not using any gas). The only thing the engine does to the battery is charge it using the alternator, but as far as I know, the alternator doesn't work any harder dependending on how many accessories are running, it just does its job while the car is running and does it to the best of its ability.

The only thing it could possibly do is lengthen the life of a car's battery.

Air Conditioning however, may save a lot of gas.
 
they should have an option were u can change to black if you want to, like these forums.
 
Baal said:
Note how lights work without the car running (not using any gas). The only thing the engine does to the battery is charge it using the alternator, but as far as I know, the alternator doesn't work any harder dependending on how many accessories are running, it just does its job while the car is running and does it to the best of its ability.

The only thing it could possibly do is lengthen the life of a car's battery.

Air Conditioning however, may save a lot of gas.
Click to expand...

Turning alternators gets harder when there's a load on the circuit - take it from me, we did it in science back in secondary school :)
 
Couldn't you just go to your own browser color options and change your background/font color settings yourself? (Although, that would change the color scheme on every website which could get annoying). Besides, it should be up to the user to switch to a black background, not Google... they're not the ones paying your electricity bill.

Also, according to an environmental life cycle assessment, the monitor does use the most energy compared to other computer parts. So like people said before, just turn off your monitor or computer when you're not using it.
 
black google??

blackgoogle1nv.jpg


:|
 
What a load of rubbish. They negate the warming effect that a monitor has when consuming more power, on the room in which the monitor is placed.

In other words, use more electricity in your home, and your home gets warmer. Which means your central heating isn't working as hard. Which means that the energy saving is practically nothing.
 
The only part of my LCD that gets warm is the very, very top.
 
I'd post something really offensive right now if I wasn't 13/15 infractions.
 
I keep my brightness turned down and use dark skins for this very reason. (That and this is a laptop..)

You should too :D
 
xcellerate said:
I remember somebody writing a news report about how if we turned off daytime running lights it would save like 8 billion in gas money per year.


of course that's all theory.
Click to expand...
Who cares? Global warming's not real anyway and besides, the end times are approaching as the second coming draws nearer.
 
Stigmata said:
My LCD provides next to no warming whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Whatever your monitor is consuming in watts eventually heats your home.

If you have a 100W monitor, then virtually all of those 100W will be transformed into heat. The only exception is the percentage of light directly emitted from the screen which escapes through the glass of your windows.

Put 10 100W monitors in a room, the heating effect will be almost exactly the same as a 1KW heater.

Laws of physics, quite simple.
 
Parrot of doom said:
Put 10 100W monitors in a room, the heating effect will be almost exactly the same as a 1KW heater.

Laws of physics, quite simple.
Click to expand...

The heat would be similar, and your electricity bill would skyrocket because the heater is far more efficient.

Real homeowners use natural gas, anyhow.
 
The heater is no more efficient than a computer monitor except that it may direct its heat in a particular direction depending on the design.

The fact remains that a 100W monitor and a 100W heater will both cost the same to run, and both emit the same amount of heat, and both produce the same room heating effect.
 
You are wrong because the monitor emits a lot of energy in the form of visual light.
Heaters emit purely heat, and are designed to get hot.
 
Parrot of doom said:
The heater is no more efficient than a computer monitor except that it may direct its heat in a particular direction depending on the design.

The fact remains that a 100W monitor and a 100W heater will both cost the same to run, and both emit the same amount of heat, and both produce the same room heating effect.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is a load of crap.

Grade 9 science class will tell you that, surely.

Something that is designed to produce heat is going to be a hell of a lot more efficient than something that produces heat as a by-product of what it its actual intended purpose is.
 
Is a Nuclear Weapon designed to destroy targets or to heat up an area?
 
Jintor said:
Is a Nuclear Weapon designed to destroy targets or to heat up an area?
Click to expand...
Actually, it's a highly kinetic cancer-killing radiology treatment. The side-effect, however, is painful death, and the cause of cancer years after the fact.
 
Uh, I guess a better question would've been "Is a Nuclear Weapon more effective than a Heater at heating up a small area?"

Mmmm, cancer.
 
I like how we went from Google to nuclear bombs.
 
We're not that off topic yet.
 
_Z_Ryuken said:
You are wrong because the monitor emits a lot of energy in the form of visual light.
Heaters emit purely heat, and are designed to get hot.
Click to expand...

The visual light strikes the walls of the room and is absorbed as heat.

Heaters also emit light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Destructo-Bot
Just got a dash-cam
Replies
0
Views
2K
Destructo-Bot
Destructo-Bot
S
Black mesa source is coming to steam as a retail product(will cost money)
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
ILOVEPIE
ILOVEPIE
-=Plzwork1122=- Sloth
Chell's age in relation to the Portal storyline
2
Replies
40
Views
13K
Mididda
Mididda
Back
Top