A more efficient computer?

[Heavencloud]

Hi BG! A friend of mine & myself are entered into a competition for Washington State University called "Imagine tomorrow." Imagine Tomorrow | Washington State University We entered the competition through our physics class at high school (we're seniors), on the premise of answering the question of how to make a computer more efficient. So far, all we've come up with is to:
1. Use movement of keys in keyboard to create energy with copper & magnet
2. Use movement of mouse through a ball bearing to power a small motor.
We were also going to try and use the fans which are already running in a computer to possible transfer energy using copper and the fan movement, but we then realized that it would just make it less efficient because of the load on the system (can't go past 100% efficiency).

Obviously, we don't have enough to create enough energy OR save enough energy to get far in the competition, which has rewards of

Grand Prize

* $5,000 for each team member
* $5,000 for the school*

Awards for each of the four challenges
1st Place.

* $5,000 to be split by the team
* $5,000 for the school*

2nd Place.

* $3,000 to be split by the team
* $3,000 for the school*

3rd Place.

* $1,500 to be split by the team
* $1,500 for the school*

For those who know more about how computers work, what are the least efficient parts of a PC? What might be ways to save energy on a computer?

We don't actually have to create the computer, we just have to draw out & have a effective plan that's reasonable for actual use. We entered under the "Collaboration" challenge, which is described at Topic and Challenge | How to Compete | Imagine Tomorrow | Washington State University
If anyone has good ideas that might work for this it'd be greatly appreciated, if someone helps us out alot and we win anything we're more than willing to give a couple hundred bucks to that person :D

[Kohan]

How do you judge the greenness of a computer? The two most important factors are power consumption, and the elimination of hazardous components inside the machine. Other factors such as the efficiency of the power supply, packaging and the manufacturer’s support for recycling programs are also important. Overall, there are a huge number of factors to assess, but thankfully there are now some eco-certifications that make it easier. The most important certifications are EPEAT (Electronic Products Environmental Assessment Tool), RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) and Energy Star 4.0.

Source: The Greenest Desktop Computers Of 2008 »» MetaEfficient Reviews

Certain components are major power hogs in a modern computer and can be made more efficient, while others consume relatively little power. It's difficult to achieve practical gains with other components.

Source: Ars System Guide special: it's easy being green - Ars Technica

Shouldn't need much more reading than that.

[Fooobos]

1. Use movement of keys in keyboard to create energy with copper & magnet
2. Use movement of mouse through a ball bearing to power a small motor.

Care to explain with more detail these 2 ideas? It seems you are trying to generate electricity from electromagnetic induction. At least that's what I can understand, or what seems plausible, yet minimally efficient as the implementation of this would be rather complex. I know you just have to draw out a plan; I'm just pointing out that taking it to the actual "building" stage wouldn't be efficient in itself.

For those who know more about how computers work, what are the least efficient parts of a PC? What might be ways to save energy on a computer?

It seems you are trying to focus on the energetic aspect of computers, rather than the actual efficiency of a computer (software-wise, processor speeds, RAM speeds, etc).
So in that case, all that which refers to the cooling of computers is where efficiency is needed.

If we are talking about the most common ways to cool computers, aka heat sinks and fans, you could probably go with using bigger fans (bigger fans and bigger fins move a greater amount of air, making cooling more efficient).

Maybe also consider the air-intake of a computer, drawing in "cool" air from outside the PC, from the lowest point in the case, and drive the airflow to the top and out; this just has to do with the idea that as air gets warmer, it climbs. Several PC cases are built with this in mind.

Using more efficient heat sinks might be a good idea too, preferably all-copper since its the best and cheapest metal to use for this purpose (of course gold and silver have a higher thermal conductivity but... yea... not really cost-friendly). The bigger the heat sinks, the better, due to greater heat dissipation from the increased surface-area.

Watercooling also might be a good idea, although you'd have to make a comparison vs. conventional air-cooling in terms of energy consumption. Without a doubt, watercooling blows air-cooling out of the water in terms of cooling efficiency, but cost-wise I'm not so sure, it would depend on how power-demanding the PC is, how many components are you trying to cool (processor, videocard, northbridge, etc).

Seems like an interesting competition. By the way, most of these ideas are quite common when it comes to extreme PC enthusiasts, those who enjoy taking their rigs to the next level with overclocking, alternate methods of cooling, etc, which is what I sometimes do as a hobby :D.
So might be a good idea to stroll around those type of "overclocking forums" or "extreme-cooling forums", maybe you can find some more interesting ideas there.

[Heavencloud]

Thanks for the input!
We have been researching using the water cooling system, but yeah came into the problem with cost efficiency. Though, if it ends up costing less in the long run we may be able to incorporate it in that way. I really like the idea of air-intake, that could be something we run with.
Yeah the movement with keyboard/mouse idea is really preliminary, like you said it would be hard to implement. We came up with it on the premise that it's something that you're already using that COULD be used to create some energy
We will definitely look into how those "green" computers work as well... converting computers at schools to green computers would save tons of $$ in the long run.

[Kohan]

We will definitely look into how those "green" computers work as well... converting computers at schools to green computers would save tons of $$ in the long run.

I would honestly recommend pursuing this. What would impress a school more than a way to save schools cash?

I personally disagree with the water cooling route, just because it's currently much too difficult for normal users to work with. On top of that, there isn't simply the initial cost, but also the expenses paid after the fact to keep it up. And in addition to that, using a water cooling system ordinarily requires fans regardless, even if not as many. It really isn't all that "efficient," it's just a superior high-end option if you're concerned with temperatures (and since it's normally used for overclocking, which shortens the lifespan of components, it's not very beneficial when it comes to longevity, either).

[Xiona]

convert an exercise bike to handle some of the PC power load.

[mootsfox]

Use a more efficient power supply.

Use more efficient parts (this is of course always true, less in, less lost).

Use waste heat motors such as the sterling engine to power fans (this one is great because a sterling operates on temp differences so the hotter a chip gets, the faster the fan spins and vise versa.

Use power saving HDDs that spin down when not in use.

Use less RAM. Or rather, fewer RAM chips/higher densities.

There's a lot of things, this is just scratching the surface.

[guartz]

install windows on a solar powered calculator?

Just throwing out ideas.

[Darus Grey]

One way to significantly reduce the energy consumption of a computer by 1/3-2/3 is to not even use a power supply.

You lose *a lot* of energy on AC -> DC, but all electronics only use DC...so why bother with the switch if you're going for efficiency(many large businesses run on DC generators for this reason, it's a huge money saver long-term.)

So you can either use a DC power supply with current parts(just cause the boards and stuff aren't built for being directly plugged in, it's not much more than a line condition), or build new motherboards from the bottom up that can just plug directly into a DC outlet.

[mootsfox]

One way to significantly reduce the energy consumption of a computer by 1/3-2/3 is to not even use a power supply.

You lose *a lot* of energy on AC -> DC, but all electronics only use DC...so why bother with the switch if you're going for efficiency(many large businesses run on DC generators for this reason, it's a huge money saver long-term.)

So you can either use a DC power supply with current parts(just cause the boards and stuff aren't built for being directly plugged in, it's not much more than a line condition), or build new motherboards from the bottom up that can just plug directly into a DC outlet.

Where are you going to find a DC outlet in 2009? Aside from industrial solutions, you can't. There are power supplies that when run in the correct range will do 90+ efficiency. Even the Delta supplies in Dell's are 80 Plus.

[Darus Grey]

Where are you going to find a DC outlet in 2009? Aside from industrial solutions, you can't. There are power supplies that when run in the correct range will do 90+ efficiency. Even the Delta supplies in Dell's are 80 Plus.

I'm pretty sure I answered your first question in the text you quoted(note: I have DC outlets in my house)., also "industrial solutions"? if you wanted to, modding your house for DC outlets is easy...practical is a different matter, though hell, practically everything we use modern days is DC, why we continue on with AC when HVDC is better in every-way(including transmission distance) is beyond my understanding, we're just throwing energy away for no reason.

Also, 80%+ does NOT mean you only lose 20% efficiency(which...again...is large regardless, even 10 is), it means the AC-DC conversion is 80% efficient(it's a marketing gimmick...), you're still throwing energy away on the alternation, plus the AC power supply still works in a load-bearing manner, meaning you're using a large portion of energy just being "on" regardless if it's being used or not(like 30% of your electric bill is due to this "passive" power usage). Realistically DC saves 1-2/3 in energy over AC power supplies because with DC you can use on-demand power much easier instead of load-bearing, so you're operating at 100% efficiency from source by only drawing exactly the amount of power you need.

My point being, if you want an easy way to realistically double the electrical efficiency of a computer, just switching away from AC accomplishes that task before you even have to look at anything else, and is more practical then building hilariously inefficient power generating keyboards(good idea, but the energy/money spent creating the KB will *never* be reclaimed by it's use) and such.

[Kaali]

why we continue on with AC when HVDC is better in every-way(including transmission distance) is beyond my understanding, we're just throwing energy away for no reason.

HVDC isn't even close as efficient as AC when it comes to transmission. If we still used Edison's DC power methods over Tesla's AC then there would be more power stations than banks, churches, and starbucks combined to make it work.

[mootsfox]

I'm pretty sure I answered your first question in the text you quoted(note: I have DC outlets in my house)., also "industrial solutions"? if you wanted to, modding your house for DC outlets is easy...practical is a different matter, though hell, practically everything we use modern days is DC, why we continue on with AC when HVDC is better in every-way(including transmission distance) is beyond my understanding, we're just throwing energy away for no reason.

Also, 80%+ does NOT mean you only lose 20% efficiency(which...again...is large regardless, even 10 is), it means the AC-DC conversion is 80% efficient(it's a marketing gimmick...), you're still throwing energy away on the alternation, plus the AC power supply still works in a load-bearing manner, meaning you're using a large portion of energy just being "on" regardless if it's being used or not(like 30% of your electric bill is due to this "passive" power usage). Realistically DC saves 1-2/3 in energy over AC power supplies because with DC you can use on-demand power much easier instead of load-bearing, so you're operating at 100% efficiency from source by only drawing exactly the amount of power you need.

My point being, if you want an easy way to realistically double the electrical efficiency of a computer, just switching away from AC accomplishes that task before you even have to look at anything else, and is more practical then building hilariously inefficient power generating keyboards(good idea, but the energy/money spent creating the KB will *never* be reclaimed by it's use) and such.

A PSU only uses what is requested plus what the AC-DC conversion uses. A 800watt power supply doesn't draw 800w when internally the computer draws 250w.


http://energyzarr.typepad.com/energy...continues.html

[Darus Grey]

A PSU only uses what is requested plus what the AC-DC conversion uses. A 800watt power supply doesn't draw 800w when internally the computer draws 250w.


The Energy Zarr Blog: AC vs. DC – The Westinghouse / Edison War Continues...

I don't get your link...the guy is arguing in favor of switching to DC(which is what I said and you contested). But well what you said is true, it's misleading...just having an AC device plugged into your wall and not on draws current, and having a device on uses a certain portion of it's power. Just turning it on draws a fairly high *minimum* amount of power...you could for instance turn on your 800watt PSU, not plugged into any parts...and notice it's still drawing 80 watts meaning even in sleep/idle modes your computer is drawing quite a lot. Direct DC does not have that issue...which is *why* they're so common in business and industrial settings.

If you add up all the money you waste over your life paying for electricity you're not using...it's way more than the cost of switching. Which...back to my original point...if your goal is to save money on computer energy costs...it should be the first point looked at, since it'll have the most effect for the least work.

[Heavencloud]

I need to figure out if my school/schools in the state already use DC current, it seems it would save a large amount of energy if do not.

I guess the best focus would be:
Encourage switch to green computer technology for schools & colleges
Switch to DC current(?)
Some sort of "sleep" mode for computers to save energy when not in use.

[mootsfox]

I don't get your link...the guy is arguing in favor of switching to DC(which is what I said and you contested). But well what you said is true, it's misleading...just having an AC device plugged into your wall and not on draws current, and having a device on uses a certain portion of it's power. Just turning it on draws a fairly high *minimum* amount of power...you could for instance turn on your 800watt PSU, not plugged into any parts...and notice it's still drawing 80 watts meaning even in sleep/idle modes your computer is drawing quite a lot. Direct DC does not have that issue...which is *why* they're so common in business and industrial settings.

If you add up all the money you waste over your life paying for electricity you're not using...it's way more than the cost of switching. Which...back to my original point...if your goal is to save money on computer energy costs...it should be the first point looked at, since it'll have the most effect for the least work.

He's just discussing it, and says DC isn't a good idea for long range power transmission...

When you say so common in business and industrial settings, what exactly do you mean? I've never seen anything that uses them. Google for example, does not use DC-DC powersupplies, and they have thousands upon thousands of computers, often in one location, a perfect place for DC-DC conversion, right?

I need to figure out if my school/schools in the state already use DC current, it seems it would save a large amount of energy if do not.

I guess the best focus would be:
Encourage switch to green computer technology for schools & colleges
Switch to DC current(?)
Some sort of "sleep" mode for computers to save energy when not in use.

[Obev]

Piezoelectric wristbands, to gather energy from masturbation and offset the energy cost of displaying titties on the screen.

No, seriously. If you're going to go with generators on trackballs, you may as well go the whole hog.

[Senoska]

How much energy do you think you're going to make? Honestly, terrible idea. Not to mention everything here has pretty much been done. If you wanna do something that has been done but never properly, make a liquid nitrogen cooling system. You could overclock a card 100x fold with that shit :3

These guys took their card from 3.3GHz to 6.15GHz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN6IVCv83oM

That pretty much solves it. Making a processor run stable at an 85% overclock... pretty sure that wins.

[Cochise]

Turn then top of the PC into a terrarium.

Hook up a sealed hydroponic system to your heat sink and run it up through the soil in the terrarium to germinate tree seedlings faster.

Sell your new baby trees online for to benefit other green projects.

Print up some t-shirts with the slogan "I'm a PC and I grow wood!"

[Darus Grey]

He's just discussing it, and says DC isn't a good idea for long range power transmission...

When you say so common in business and industrial settings, what exactly do you mean? I've never seen anything that uses them. Google for example, does not use DC-DC powersupplies, and they have thousands upon thousands of computers, often in one location, a perfect place for DC-DC conversion, right?

Google's Power Proposal | Nemertes Research

That's old...but today, google does infact use DC-DC PSUs, and are in-fact the major force pushing behind standardizing them in the US(it mentions an AC conversion but now they convert DC from 48v to 12v, mainly once they started doing much more on-site power generation). If you go into any industrial plant in the US(or most the world) you'll find a DC generator operating equipment as well, many other businesses(my own included) are taking the inititive to switch to on-site DC to save cost.

Edit: Bonus source, straight from google http://www.techworld.com/green-it/fe...featureid=3494

Bill Weihl:

Our servers are among the most efficient in the industry, using high-efficiency power supplies, high-efficiency DC-DC converters

Most computers waste a third to one half of the power they consume

Sounds familiar...

Also, "transmission" is not a valid reason...HVDC out-performs AC transmission, it was an issue 100 years ago...we've made some progress, we've already "tapped out" AC progress and found DC has much higher potential. Even though I'm a Tesla fan, even he knew that DC was better, AC was an invention for a time when DC wasn't practical, now it is, the longer the distance the *better* HVDC becomes compared to AC, and is pretty much exclusively used for any transmission longer than a few miles and especially long-distance cables.

Picture from the wiki article of all the long-distance HVDC lines in Europe.
File:HVDC Europe annotated.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In-fact...since most power is generated using DC turbines/generators it is typically sent *AS HVDC* to your local power station, where it is converted to AC to send to your home...where it is converted to DC for your devices...losing 10-40% each step...talk about inefficient.