On Mon, 3 Dec 2018 16:37:22 +0100 <to...@tuxteam.de> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 09:35:28AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > "Energy"? Or "environmental externalities confounded?" > > > > I remember it talking specifically about energy. > > Interesting.
This "gray" or "emobodied" energy is usually being grotesquely underestimated. According to https://www.dw.com/en/ecological-footprint-how-gray-energy-is-totally-underestimated/a-43261811 : "The production of a laptop's hardware amounts to 1,000 kWh of grey energy. That's equivalent to 40 days of continuous vacuuming." and "For the manufacture, transport, storing, selling and discarding of a smart phone, 220 kWh of gray energy is needed. With that same energy, you could charge your phone for 50 years." :) Also interesting in this context may be this quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy#In_transportation : "it is striking to note that we consume more embodied energy in our transportation expenditures than direct energy [...]. Put in other words, we consume less energy to move around in our personal vehicles than we consume the energy we need to produce, sell and transport the cars, trains or buses we use " Regards Michael .-.. .. ...- . .-.. --- -. --. .- -. -.. .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-. No problem is insoluble. -- Dr. Janet Wallace, "The Deadly Years", stardate 3479.4
