Green Is In At CES, But Is It Real? 165
OTL writes "You've heard the talk of 'Green' throughout the whole of 2008, but the way a product affects the environment will be a huge consideration in consumer buying habits, at least when it comes to gadgets.
But, the CEA report also said that consumers are very skeptical about the green claims made by high-tech firms for their products. More than 38 percent of those interviewed by the CEA said they were confused by green product claims and 58 percent wanted to know the specific attributes that prompted hi-tech firms to label their products green."
Re:Next thing you know... (Score:3, Interesting)
Uh... would that be a bad thing or a good thing? Since this would presumably be specific to advertising, it's not exactly doublespeak.
Lead Free Solder, for example? (Score:5, Interesting)
Simple. green == energy (Score:1, Interesting)
'green' means energy, does it not?
Its usefullness anyways..
For portable devices that means battery life improvement by a factor of 10. From the 4-8 hrs for mp3 players/notebooks, etc.. to 4-8 days on a single charge.
For static equipment, server rooms, desktops, its the opposite. Squeezing more computational power at fewer watts, and less heat generated from less power being consumed.
Re:Really? (Score:2, Interesting)
Honestly, I don't know anyone that takes into consideration how 'green' something is before they purchase it...especially gadgets.
Hi! Now you know me.
I know there is a sizable minority growing that is concerned about everything 'green', but, really...in the general public, while they may even be vocally in favor of 'green' things...does it really affect their everyday life and their purchases?
While it's not my #1 consideration for gadgets -- semiconductor manufacturing is extremely ungreen -- I do take things like the use of recycled materials, power consumption, emissions (both factory and from the product itself), recyclability, re-use potential, environmental track record of the company, etc. into account when I make any purchase decision.
Sadly, in purchasing gadgets, most of the time all of the choices are equally bad. :(
Re:What's the definition of green? (Score:4, Interesting)
Environmentalism has always been about balance. You can't survive and have 0 environmental impact. However it is about making the right trade offs and getting a balance where the earth can heal from our pollutant, but it doesn't hinder progress.
One can say Visualizing is Green because you can take 3 or 4 servers and run it on 1. However if you just visualized one server your not being green as the extra processing uses more energy.
You can say don't use computers but to get the work done we will need that much paper. There is even energy wasted in recycling the paper, as well all the driving to move the information on paper to the correct location.
Even calculating a carbon footprint is rather complex much like processing a Bill of Materials. And finding the most green choice will need an A* algorithm to process it.
Re:Demand proper documentation (Score:3, Interesting)
The big problem for consumers is that when buying an assembled product such as a computer, there's really no way to determine whether or not it's actually "green" other than by taking their word for it. There's just too many pieces from too many sources for a consumer to realistically track it all down. What needs to happen is the industry needs to rally around a third party grading system that tries to objectively measure and then certify finished products.
The example that comes to mind is the LEED system that is used for buildings. The architecture/construction world has the green building council, and through all that there's some standardized education systems for helping people learn how to do sustainable design, and there's a point system that is used to basically grade buildings on the basis of green/sustainable design/construction/etc. This system allows a building owner/tenants/etc to be confident that their building is actually sustainable, and not just take the architect/contractor's word for it. But it also has other positive side effects, because it gives the architects/contractor's some solid goals to shoot for if they're attempting to design sustainably, and it also gives building component/materials manufacturers good benchmarks to shoot for when designing their individual products.
There are a number of competing systems to LEED, but at least in the US, LEED is the main game in town.
Re:What the hell is green anyway? (Score:3, Interesting)
There's also an an aftermarket for replacement batteries from wrecked Priuses so clearly someone needs them.
Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
I buy things because they're useful. I consider energy usage as measured in efficiency when purchasing a vehicle or even a PSU - because it costs me less money to operate the device.
I heard a PSA on the radio a couple of days ago about unplugging your cellphone charger when you're not using it - the implication being that it uses just as much electricity when you're not charging your phone as when you are. I just checked real quick. Two cell phone chargers (Motorola usb wall charger and iPhone USB wall adapter) - both use 0 when plugged in with no phone attached. The motorola charger is using 3 watts to charge the phone.
I call bullshit, and this is exactly why I'm so tired of "green" this or "eco-friendly" that - because I don't believe any of it. The hyperbole drowns out any meaningful facts. We're being asked to do stupid, completely inconsequential things that have zero or near zero measurable impact. My full-size tower / gaming rig uses a little under 200W powered up (idle), and 4 whole watts when on standby - not hibernating - standby. Obviously 4 > 0, but give me a break with the malarky about how the little LED is killing the planet.
Obviously, we don't want to let facts get in the way of our millions of green (dollars) of marketing "green" products. (I won't even get into the really interesting link between "Green Week" on TV and the owner/parent company of said TV channels who just happens to produce and sell "green" products...)
Conservation is great, I have no problem with taking good care of the planet. But enough with the BS marketing, and the BS from the gov't -- including what kind of lightbulbs [worldnetdaily.com] I'm allowed to buy. Oh, you didn't realize that Congress has outlawed most incandescent lightbulbs? Yeah, it seemed to kind of be one of those things they just did because they can. I'm stocking up. Instead of any meaningful changes to our energy policy, like more nuclear power, this is the kind of BS the "green" movement decides we should have.
Sorry, /rant.
Re:What the hell is green anyway? (Score:1, Interesting)
The "Green" movement is not engineer driven, it is marketing driven. It allows you to feel good about your purchase. Hate to say it, but most customers (over 90%) would consider the "greeniness" to be very low concern when they buy any product. It is a much great concern after the find out it is leaking into their water supply.
But fear not, as an engineer I and my brethren, do try to design in greeniness into our product. It is done somewhere after, cost, performance, reliability, ease of development, projected lifespan, but it is considered (ever hear of RoHS). Sometimes it moves up if the product is to be sold to environmentalists.
If you want it to become more of a factor, you have to get the general consumer to tell our marketing people that it is more important, or get legislation passed, where we require it,but I warn you if you force legislation, I will pass the cost on to you, and any small companies who can't afford the testing is going to be unable to create new products (Say goodbye to numerous small innovative companies).