It is more than obvious, but maybe it is not so someone must raise this issue.

We have millions computers in Australia. At least there is one and often 3 computers in each home and in business lots more.
Each computer draws on average some 200-300W power, for an average 2-3 hours a day at home and in business much longer. Sure, some computer tasks like gaming draws much more power.

Honestly most of the time we spend on internet or typing text. It is not demanding but nevertheless consumes lots of power.

I happen to have a dedicated laptop for my internet needs. It draws 10-20 times less power than desktop doing this same task.

No, I do not suggest that similarly to rule outlawing the incandescent globe, and to introduce that everyone must use laptop.

My suggestion is that if we demand manufacturers to use same cmos technology as in laptop to common desktop computers, the energy use would drop quite a lot without much notice is slower performance. Additionally, our rooms would require less air conditioning due to less heat dissipation.

It is not a new technology to be invented, it is just demanding to apply existing technology. Price would come down with mass use of it.

Honestly, it is very unwise to continue to use energy wasting technology when much better exists.

there are various ways to organize a human society. oz is like many western societies in using a mix of commercial and political methods.

this mix is commonly called 'capitalism': a loose frame of laws backed by force, with room in between for commerce to guide decisions with money as the measure. this kind of society has been very successful when conducted in a world where natural resources are plentiful, effectively endless. it is not an efficient society, just effective, in the way that bandits are effective: looting gets maximum return from effort.

increasing numbers of humans, and decreasing natural resources are causing this primitive type of society to be visibly dysfunctional. humanity must manage resources in future, not loot them. a managed society could be democratic, but humanity has shown little aptitude for democracy. oligarchy is our natural state, and western societies will continue toward some combination of 'brave new world', and '1984'.

the managers of this bee-hive society will enforce spartan living conditions for most, although one must presume that the managerial class will continue to enjoy the perks of supremacy.

so choices about which computer to sell will be made by political means, not commercial. don't fuss about your low power laptop, mate, your grandchildren will be lucky if they can turn on lights after dark. probably they will be switched off (the grandkids) when not working. the technology is already available.

Mmistrz, we do indeed have some glaring examples of energy inefficiency, many of which could be greatly improved if we put our minds to it.

But the thing that really outrages me is the constantly increasing use of energy, and all manner of other resources, due to an ever-increasing population.

Our absurd acceptance of constant high population growth just completely overwhelms any efforts to improve technological efficiency in energy usage.

Not only that, but with this constant growth mindset so profoundly entrenched, any significant improvements in energy efficiency will in effect serve to facilitate population growth, and thus not do what they are supposed to do; lighten our impact of the environment, resource base, climate change, etc. .

So, I implore everyone who like you is concerned with improving energy and all sorts of resource-use efficiency (and there are many who partake in this forum), to very strongly advocate an end to the absurdity of continuous population growth.

just a thought, ludwig, maybe we're going at this from the wrong angle.

let's concentrate on reducing sexual activity. if we can just convince 16 year olds that it's not fun, or too dangerous, they won't be inclined to make babies,later on. got any ideas on how to do that?

Okaaay DEMOS. Well may you make light of the issue. But I know your heart is in the right place (:>)

Population stabilisation in Australia is actually incredibly easy. All we need to do (and here I go again, repeating myself for the fifty millionth time on this forum) is reduce immigration to net zero or less, which would still allow us to have an immigration program in the order of 25 – 30 000 per annum, and abolish the totally absurd and disgusting baby bonus.

If we really wanted to reach a stable population as quickly as possible, we could put a moratorium on immigration and implement some financial disincentives to lower the birthrate, sort of like a negative baby bonus.

Easy stuff! Vastly easier in Australia than in many other countries, where you’d have to tackle high birthrates, education for women, widespread access to contraceptives, entrenched social and religious beliefs and practices, etc.

And vastly easier than significantly improving our energy efficiency.

The Australian public is rapidly cottoning on to the imperative of sustainability. See this recent poll http://www.getup.org.au/blogs/view.php?id=754. The next step, which is surely imminent, is the widespread realisation that continuous population growth is by far the most significant factor that is at stark odds with sustainability.

So why am I going on about population on this thread? Because we need holistic approach to reaching the essential balance between our life-support systems and the demand we place on them. And because it really grates with me that so many people can express good ideas about small aspects of this momentum while apparently being totally accepting of much larger issues that are taking us in the wrong direction.

I’ve seen this hundreds of times, not only general threads, but in articles written by apparent experts.

.
Improved energy efficiency in our many and varied appliances is highly desirable. But it is pretty useless if the number of appliances keeps increasing to the point where the total energy consumption continues to rise.

I bet you are much older than myself mindwise.

I bet you have not read properly or not allow time to think about the title of my tread. Have you noticed that this is about energy mismanagement so some general issues on this could be mentioned, but also Have you noticed that this is specific issue of energy waste by the wrong choice of computers?

Please acknowledge that you have absolutely nothing to say and instead go to your own obsession or hobby. It is not nice at all. This thread was not intended to discuss sexual life of grass hoppers, nor human population issues, just computers.

If you have nothing to say on the issue just acknowledge that my proposition is an easy fix with benefits to everyone.

Actually I intend to appeal to younger people, to designers, to decision makers (politicians), to economists, to environmentalists, to media.

Have you got anything constructive (support or criticism) you are welcommed, not an abstract issues hardly connected to tread.

Don't be upset, just learn to be constructive.

I'd like to add to my initial explanation, that it is quite unwise to continue not to adopt energy efficient cmos technology on our desktop computers.

In honesty, there is not really debate if this is right idea or not. It is right, but it would be nice if many forum users simply acknowledge it. Maybe some sort of poll is available on this forum to count support.