Probably one of the best practical and least pc ways would be to get kids out exercising instead of sitting in front of computers. The exercise would cause them to need a bit more sleep instead of sitting on a computer half the night. Education Departments could insist assignments are done by hand. You could also limit OLO posts to 2 a day. Reduce the porn and you will not only reduce computer usage but also child sexual abuse meaning less counselors (less computer use). The list could go on and on and on!

Forrest Gumpp wrote 24 September 2008 6:31:19 AM:

"... I visited tomw's website using the OLO icon below his post. I was immediately perplexed when I saw his experience and qualifications in IT...."

I will take that as a complement. ;-)

"... underestimated the technical literacy, with respect to computer hardware, of the average OLO user?..."

Sorry, I hoped the executive summary of my report was reasonably understandable for people without a technical background: http://www.tomw.net.au/technology/it/pcmees/pc-report-02.html#0.1.Executive%20Summary|outline

Basically I was suggesting the government should buy energy efficient computers, using the same standards and procedures the US government uses. There should be a standard easy to read format for the environmental data about the products. Progress with energy efficiency should be monitored annually and computer people should be trained on environmental sustainability.

"To my way of thinking, mandating hardware compatibility with Linux would be an important strategy to pursue. ..."

I was aiming for some easy and non-controversial proposals which government and industry were likely to accept. Mention of Lunux, or any other operating system, would be a distraction.

But on the subject of Linux and application bloat, I had a message from someone the other day saying an Indian company was going to offer low power Linux based "Cloud Computers" in Australia: <http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2008/09/cloud-computers-for-australia.html>.

"I worry because I sense in setting a strategy related solely to hardware standards an attempt may be being made to lock open source out of government procurement."

It was not my intention to lock out open source.

"Please write an OLO article as Bronwyn suggested"

Would be happy to write an article.

Ludwig,

I'm not trying to undermine your concerns with respect to unrestrained population growth. I share them. Perhaps I have a more optimistic view as to the self-correction that is already occurring in that area. Take away the masking, and indeed reversing, effect of migration with respect to Australia, and it will be seen that net population growth has been arrested here already.

Japan and, I think, China, also may have, or be close to having, achieved this status.

This proposal to reduce notional GHG emissions of personal computers by 50% in absolute terms by 2020, although perhaps well-intended by some, I see as a direct threat aimed at our (potentially worldwide) relative freedom to communicate via the internet.

Bazz has warned in this thread against the 'cloud computing' concept for reasons associated with 'energy descent'. Whilst if we go on as we presently are such energy descent may well occur, I am by no means so pessimistic that it need happen. I see dangers in the 'cloud computing' or thin client area arising from the business model that would seem to be a likely corollary of that concept. As a concept it seems tailor-made to enhance the dominance of major service providers and proprietary software marketers, and to facilitate internet censorship.

The population-related pressure for many more computers is already here. A very large part of that demand has a prospect of being at least partly satisfied by the one laptop per child (OLPC) program, a program that has recently been subject to some disruption arising out of what appear to be spoiling tactics designed to displace the free Linux operating system that was designed to be pre-loaded on the OLPC hand cranked laptops. HAND CRANKED: no GHG emissions there. LINUX OS: no ongoing licence fees either.

Should grid-distributed electricity supply become unreliable, the very first things that will attract renewable energy sources for the small scale power requirement will be personal computers and related peripherals. Again, the power source will be non-GHG emitting.

This energy efficiency strategy appears largely redundant.

Re-reading my earlier posts, I realize I may have left the impression that I was calling tomw's work into question.

That is not so.

tomw is of course responding to the Environment Department's request that he develop strategies for reducing personal computer energy usage. It is the likely relevance, by the target date of 2020, of the Environment Department's request that I am challenging.

Now for sure reducing the power requirement for computers and peripherals is a commendable aim in itself, but effectively forcing obsolescence of existing hardware to achieve it, via government procurement specifications, is, I suggest, self-defeating.

Would not a better strategy be to assist the development and marketing of small, simple, robust, relatively portable, stand-alone renewable energy power packs specifically designed to provide power for PCs and related equipment? Something like a UPS, but providing continuity of power supply from renewable energy sources. In this circumstance, whatever the power demand, be it in aggregate significant or not, within the capacity of such portable power supply, that demand would be being met from non-GHG emitting sources.

The natural market preference move toward laptops and away from desktops is dramatically reducing power demand anyway. Further strengthening the endurance and operability of such hardware remote from grid supplies by development of such portable renewable energy based power supplies will be of great relevance in the area of greatest foreseeable expansion in computer usage: the less developed part of the world.

An example has already been set here in Australia around 80 or more years ago. Pedal radio.

Pedal computing. Fat busting work stations, indoor or out, static or mobile.

Fitted with small (< 50cc) IC engines fueled by wood gas, such bikes would become small portable renewable energy generating sets. Designed to be reconfigurable (like transformer toys), the bikes could be capable of being set up as wind turbine generators where winds blow. Or positioned in streams or tidal races like anchored tow generators.

Small-scale distributed generation from renewables: it computes.

Just be sure to mandate Linux compatibility.

On yer bike, tomw.

"Ludwig, I'm not trying to undermine your concerns with respect to unrestrained population growth. I share them. Perhaps I have a more optimistic view as to the self-correction that is already occurring in that area."

I'm not sure how you figure that Forrest. Even without immigration we would still have considerable population growth for a long time to come, with our current birthrate. But the biggest component is indeed immigration, especially with Rudd's increase on top of Howard's already record high rates.

We are an awful long way from dealing with this issue. It does indeed make a complete mockery of any attempts to reach overall and long-lasting reductions in just about any areas of energy or resource consumption in this country.

It is not just a matter of people like Tomw just passing over this issue, it is a matter of them actually helping continuous-growth grossly-antisustainability-oriented big-business and big-business-pandering-governments. As I said previously; by striving to reduce the per-capita footprint, we are just making room for more and more 'capitas'...for as long as the continuous growth mindset remains entrenched.

This is serious stuff of the highest order. But alas, so very few people are really interested in it.

Fractelle,

I was beginning to think you had attempted to install Ubuntu and had inadvertently blown your Windows ME away in the process, but I see that you have recently been posting. That's a relief.

Partitioning and installations do not always go the way one thinks they should.

A strategy that may be helpful if you want to adopt a 'suck it and see approach' could be to purchase a second-hand hard drive at a computer fair, if you are comfortable with opening your computer case and swapping over hard drives, and physically remove your existing Windows ME system drive from the computer while you experiment with installing Linux. That way, if you strike problems, you can always swap drives again and pick up where you left off with your Windows ME.

Second-hand IDE HDDs of around 10 to 40 GB capacity can generally be purchased for between $20-$40. Try and get one of the same capacity as you already have, rather than a larger one, as with older computers (as I infer yours may be) there is sometimes a motherboard limitation to the size of HDD you can use.

If, as I suspect, your computer is a little under-specced for the latest release of Ubuntu, there is a version known as Xubuntu which requires only 128MB RAM to run the Xubuntu Live CD version for just a look at the OS, and 192MB RAM if you wish to actually install it to your HDD. You will need at least 1.5 GB of free space on the HDD, which of course you will have.

You get your Xubuntu by downloading it free from: http://www.xubuntu.org/get . (I am assuming you have a broadband internet connection.) The download is around 700MB, so you will need at least this much space on your existing HDD to get hold of it. You then have to burn this ISO file to a CD, which then becomes the installation medium for your newly acquired HDD.

Shut down, switch off, swap HDDs, and good luck!