Green Desktops
Mobile PCs get all of the press and all of the attention. Desktop PCs are like a middle child — mostly ignored. I suspect many of the readers of this blog have mostly given up their desktops, but I could be very wrong. I still use one at home, but have long since given up using one at work.
The one at home has multiple duties, but I use it mainly for photo editing and some peripheral and file sharing. It’s loaded up with dual HDDs (one acting as an online hot backup – no RAID though), dual core processor, 4GB of RAM and XP Pro. I also have a TV tuner card in there for recording programs to watch when I’m travelling.
I could probably manage with a notebook, but for sheer ease, you can’t beat a desktop. It is just too convenient. There are no cables to fuss with on a regular basis as everything is already connected. The screen is bigger, the sound is far superior, and the processing power is, in my opinion, 4x that of a notebook – mostly due to real hard disk drives and not the toy ones that notebook PCs use.
Power management settings on my PC are pretty basic. The display turns off after 15 minutes of non-use, and the entire PC goes into standby after 1 hour. That way it can wake up when it needs to record something. Often in the summer, I’ll turn it off completely because there is nothing on TV, and because running the machine heats up the room considerably. I guess you could call this method quasi-green.
The debate over green electronics continues to rage, and I’m always curious as to how much consideration people give to “green” when they’re making their purchase decisions. Lately I’ve paid a lot more attention to things like Energy Star and EPEAT rankings. On my own PC, I’d be willing to spend another $20 or so for green status, but I’d largely base this on electricity consumption. I think that people would like to do the right thing, but since they live in areas where they don’t see the direct effects of waste, they aren’t compelled to act – especially if acting hits their wallets.
Despite all of the press releases to the contrary, I have yet to see much difference between electronics companies who claim to be environmentally friendly. I don’t care if someone in your company plants a tree for me. I DO care if your company policy is to make sure that all desk lights are turned off at night.
Many consumers are savvy enough to notice when a company is doing something to make a difference and not just for window dressing on a press release. I actively avoid companies who appear to be doing the right thing but are really covering up something more nefarious. In other words, don’t plant that tree on top of the landfill you’ve been filling with mercury.
What do you look for in a “green” PC manufacturer? Are you more likely to buy from a vendor with a reputation for being green? Are we wasting our time developing and promoting our environmentally friendly status?
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:03 pm
What I look for in “green” PC manufacturer:
1. Sustainable supply chain (labour, materials, transportation)
2. Energy efficiency
3. Product take-back / recycling at end of life cycle.
Am I more likely to buy from a vendor with a green reputation?
> You bet – for me it’s a proxy for good management, good systems, good design, and good engineering. All these things are required for building a great computer. All these things are required to have a justifiably green reputation.
Are you wasting your time?
> No chance — you’re right on — consumers are becoming more demanding of green credentials — and less accepting of greenwash.
The real shift will come when institutional and government procurement policies start requiring that their electronics meet one (or many) of the standards you mention, and the standards themselves become more stringent.
In fact, the EU has recently done so: Infoworld: Europeans mandate public-sector Energy Star purchases.
Best to be ahead of this curve. Keep it up — and keep communicating what you’re doing.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 pm
There’s nothing environmentally friendly about any of the locations where Lenovo has plants in Asia, *snort*
Economics says most people will not pay to buy green. Economists know that green is a luxury. Thus, for the average middle income of America, going green is too expensive. Now, if the government required green status, then you’d definitely need to be ready for that.
And of course, the only thing that matters is, how about we worry about cutting down less trees and singing kumbaya AFTER all those T61P’s that have been locked up in China due to some silly website error gets out to their respective owners. We’re talking ordered 7/11, promised 7/31, and not shipping til 8/31.
Let’s get some corporate responsibility to the customer before going green for credibility. No one will buy your green laptop if you get it to them 2 months after the fact.
Here’s something else green, get your plants to update in real time where all the parts and all the manufacturing processes are. Dell plants do that, HP plants do that, Lenovo plants probably do that too. The just-in-time supply chain knows where all parts at all times, maybe that’s why Dell gets their laptops out in 5 business days and Lenovo gets them out in 10 weeks. supply chain.
If you would like less peeved customer, at least get them real time information access. aka….
all parts are ready except for screen missing, sitting in bangalore. or, keyboard coming in from japan this date, lcd coming in from malaysia this date, assembly at this time on this date, ram installed on this date.
you will have much less pissed customers!!!!!!!!
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 pm
It might be unfortunate, but I think that a ‘green PC’ is only an additional benefit – I don’t think that alone would make me choose a Lenovo PC. It might be the clincher between two similar PCs though.
As for Desktops, I just got a new one to accompany my X61 – it’s the perfect combination really.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:53 am
You can’t beat the price/performance of a desktop. Although I have not used or purchased a consumer grade PC in at least 10 years, I could not get by without the workstation class “desktop” computers I use at work and home. They are usually a couple of years ahead of the mainstream in terms of I/O bandwidth, and the reliability is not comparable. I suspect many professional users are in the same boat as I am, and use their Thinkpads as portable business machines and light mobile workstations. But when I need to compile and debug a large project, I’ll take the workstation and its fast disks any day.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:29 am
Green does matter to me. And I think it is a win-win for Lenovo, for business buyers and for consumers. There are clearly many aspects to green, and you don’t have to lump them all together:
- Internal waste of energy / materials (design, manufacture, supply chain, all employee behavior)
- Production of toxic materials (design and manufacture)
- Product power consumption (active / inactive)
- Product recyclability
Any company can work on the first two and there is a lot done here from simple self-interest and efficiency. Consider the future cost of energy and carbon (yes, I expect there will be a global cost of CO2 within 5 years that no large organization will be able to opt out of) and then the notion of introducing measures, methods and efficiencies makes even more sense – both commercially and as PR for future employees as well as customers (I ain’t gonna leave college and go work for some backwards dirty company).
Product power consumption – I think Lenovo leave too much up to Microsoft and Intel on this. Those two might be interested in reducing processor heat, and reducing battery life under ideal conditions but the total package power consumption of a computer as it is actually used is a big deal – and again future consumers are going to care even more about their electricity consumption and greenhouse emissions than they do today. What’s happening on desktop power consumption is a nightmare – it’s just insane, and consumers are beginning to work out what it costs them – especially for consumption when the computer isn’t being used.
Corporately this is huge – large offices full of unused computers consuming electricity and belching heat overnight, and air conditioners burning electricity to take that heat out again – it’s a travesty. Just make it easier for an admin to set power consumption / standby behavior for a network full of computers and you will make them and yourselves a hero.
I think the products should be recyclable free of charge – and I think this could do a lot for Lenovo. You could refurb and donate them (big PR), you could strip them for parts, you could learn through sampling the returns what failed / why people upgraded / how long your products stay in use, and you can of course recycle the raw materials.
Green is the future and those buying their first computer today are already there.
Quentin
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:41 am
Yes, nothing Green about the Chinese factories and pollution that comes from the region you do business. Not only does it destroy the health of Chinese, the pollution blows into Korea and Japan.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:47 am
kebs,
I understand your frustration and rest assured we are working on the problems you describe. However please keep the discussion on topic. Thanks
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:33 pm
I will definitely choose an green PC Manufacturer’s products ofver competitors, given that they are done, within reason, with decent performance and minimal sacrifice to the full potential of the system.
As such, if Lenovo were to consider to become a green manufacturer, it would have to be focussed and clear that they should first of all apply the rules across the board and not to selective lines of products.
The equations are simple, a greener PC / Notebook generally translates to more efficient energy use. That directly leads to reduced power consumption and heat generation, which leads to reduced costs for powering the devices. With greater efficiency comes longer battery life for notebooks, and minimal heat applied on those who work on their laps most of the time. Massive heat dissipation devices will become unnecessary and therefore the reduced need for the precious metals to make them (e.g. gold, copper, etc…).
I think in general it would be great, but the company achieving it must be dedicated and have great engineering to become one, and I think, Lenovo is well positioned to make it happen.
August 4th, 2007 at 10:45 am
@Tim Supples
Re: kebs response
Tim you say to “keep the discussion on topic”. That’s just the thing! Poor customer service and shipment delays should be the forefront of discussion!!! You discussed this back in June but the same problem still exists today. The ability to build a quality product and ship it out in a reasonable period of time should be priority #1. Customer service vs. “green”!!! Come on. Where are your priorities?
When you have so many angry customers it is just salt on a wound when you post things like riding a motorcycle over a laptop and dunking a laptop in a pool. Instead of destroying laptops you can ship those out and make some customers very happy. Is “green” important. Sure! But not right now. Get the basics down first!!!
August 4th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Another not so happy T61p potential owner here. Waiting….
When we call Lenovo for information we get so much conflicting information it’s quite clear that the people answering the phone have no clue and are just making up answers as they go along.
OH, FYI, You know Sony’s newly announced SZ6 series? Yea, I ordered one and much to my happy surprise the machine announced on 8-2 was shipped 8-3 and I’ll have it Tuesday.
When(if) the T61P ever shows up I’ll have to decide if I’m going to keep it or return it or if you are still having such severe production delays flip it on ebay and make a couple bucks from someone who doesn’t want to wait.
I’ve lost my confidence in Lenovo. Not to mention the number of people griping about T61 BSODs and poor fit and finish on the net. I will examine the P when it arrives and if it’s at all sub par I’ll dump it.
I’ll tell you this much, with this kind of delay Lenovo had better get it right.
August 4th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
@ Tim Supples
Re: Kebs, Stallen
Tim,
Kebs and Stallen have excellent points, points that are not being addressed by anyone at Lenovo. Lenovo should quit fooling around with issues that don’t have anything to do with getting ordered machines in customer’s hands. Maybe read what they’re saying on thinkpads.com and notebookreview.com fora too.
Buy the parts and the labor, put the things together, ship them out, and make sure they don’t get stuck in Kentucky for a week. Then you can greenwash all you want.
In the meantime, when I buy new parts or a new machine, I look for transparency in the manufacturing and testing process. Are my parts being assembled in sweatshops under hazardous conditions? Or are we talking about union workers being paid living wages and enjoying health and educational benefits?
I’m more inclined to do business with a company and supply chain that takes social responsibility seriously. Plant trees, build LEED-certified buildings, and be progressive and proactive in your local communities all you want. But take care of your people and your customers will know about it.
Neglect your people or your customers, and everyone will know about it.
Cheers,
Greenguy.
August 4th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
I have long thought that everything – from food to laptops to cars – should be labeled with the amount of energy used to produce the product and the amount it is expected to consume over its lifetime and perhaps per hour of use. Without this sort of information, it’s impossible (or at best prohibitively onerous) to make an informed decision about what to buy.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:53 am
I agree with stallen and kebs. Who cares about green when its taking upwards of one month to ship out orders? That is ridiculous. I assure you, the only reason I haven’t canceled my order is the fact that I have family that works at IBM and was able to use the EPP.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:06 am
whatever you do, do not make green thinkpads. you’ll have to pry my black thinkpad from my cold, dead fingers!
August 5th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
As far as Desktop vs Notebooks go, completely agreed – the bigger faster disks, always-on capability and expandability are relative plus points. I’ve always thought though, that to some extent you could still use the notebook in desktop mode (for example a T61p with SSD system disk docked with a fast firewire data disc + 24″ LCD) and get similar results and greater flexibility.
Are the thinkcentres still under the control of the Thinkpad team? It’s strange how little press or mention those get compared with the Thinkpads. iirc those are designed and priced similarly relative to competitors though. Perhaps the desktop market is more commodity driven than the notebook market.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
I would like to see manufacturers of products use materials that
A) are not difficult to obtain from the environment
B) need not be shipped halfway around the world at great expense
C) are recyclable/are not environmentally detrimental if discarded
To illustrate my point, I read that a Hummer SUV is more of a “green” vehicle than a Toyota Prius when you consider the total environmental impact of manufacturing the car. So much energy is used to produce the battery materials and ships that parts all over the world for various stages of assembly that calling it a “green” car is a joke.
Furthermore, all of the above would probably reduce costs for the manufacturer in the long run, as A) rare earth metals and such are expensive to extract, B) using local resources is almost always cheaper than shipping things thousands of miles, and C) recyclable materials and computers may be subsidized by governments in the future if the current trend of environmental awareness continues.
Also, the 45 watts of power my X60 power adapter draws to charge my battery for about 2 hours every day is so minimal that I don’t even give it a second thought. When I look at hot water heaters, dryers, and refrigerators, I pay more attention to power consumption, as these devices require kilowatts of electricity 24/7.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
@Brian
August 5th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
“To illustrate my point, I read that a Hummer SUV is more of a “green” vehicle than a Toyota Prius when you consider the total environmental impact of manufacturing the car. So much energy is used to produce the battery materials and ships that parts all over the world for various stages of assembly that calling it a “green” car is a joke.”
——————–
http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9750840-1.html
“Now the study has been well discredited in a paper titled “Hummer versus Prius: ‘Dust to Dust’ Report Misleads the Media and Public with Bad Science” (PDF) by Dr. Peter H. Gleick of the Pacific Institute. Dr. Gleick’s paper pokes holes in the original study, pointing out its poor assumptions such as the usable life of a Hummer H1 (35 years) versus the life of a Prius (11) years. The original study also based its conclusions on the lifetime miles of a Prius versus a Hummer H1, where it assumed 109,000 miles versus 379,000 miles, respectively. The 109,000 mile figure for the Prius is truly bizarre, as many people have documented their Priuses getting well over this number.
So the next time someone says, “You know what, a Prius uses more energy than a Hummer,” you’ve got plenty of fuel to tell them they’re completely wrong.”
Just FYI.
August 6th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
— What do you look for in a “green” PC manufacturer? —
I would tend to look for a product that’s not likely to break, that can be easily fixed and upgraded to lengthen its usable lifespan, and low power usage. If it doesn’t have lead or other toxic materials in it, that’s a nice benefit. But I won’t buy another LCD monitor until it has LED backlighting because I know it will last longer.
— Are you more likely to buy from a vendor with a reputation for being green? —
Absolutely.
— Are we wasting our time developing and promoting our environmentally friendly status? —
No. The potential exists to reduce the costs of the inputs (raw materials, energy) and the outputs (waste stream, packaging). Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute ( http://www.rmi.org/ ) has argued for years that green production can save money. Read Green Capitalism by Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins and Hunter Lovins.
August 6th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
It seems petty to buy a “green” pc. But it all adds up. I believe it’s our responsibility to go green whether or not it’s really efficient or not. We can only hope that the companies marketing products as “green” are being honest. All we can is do our do part and that is to go green.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
I think there is no need for cheap 500 W power supplies with less than 80% efficiency
August 7th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Those who were commenting about delayed orders: please visit this post for more information.
http://www.lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=84
August 8th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
to go green it would be interesting for lenovo to create machines with Via processors, the most environment-friendly processor.. while waiting for my x61s, i considered an everex with a C7-M processor.
i’m interested in the low power consumption and the on-die encryption acceleration. i spend lots of processing power on encrypting communication channels using OpenSSH and OpenSSL for my work, web programming. i would love an x series laptop with a via processor.
i’m also interested in a Via desktop/workstation. if Via releases a multi-core or multi-processor X86-64 machine, keep or improve the on-die encryption, and improve the chipset’s features (e.g. SATA 3Gb/s support) i’m going to buy a web development and file backup server with those specs. if available, i’d be interested in a lenovo configuration.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Just what is the definition of a “green computer”?
How can I tell if the advertising hype is accurate and true?
Why should I pay extra for the privilege of owning a “green computer?
August 10th, 2007 at 11:47 am
For me “green” is a “tie-breaker” for which I am willing to pay a little more but only if the other features match up. It is not at the top of the list.
“Green” should be a standard characteristic of all products, much like a tire on a car.