Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-mpd!Chuck.Phillips From: Chuck.Phillips@FtCollins.NCR.COM (Chuck.Phillips) Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Leaving computer equip. on (was: Monitor reliabilty) Message-ID: Date: 17 Sep 90 02:40:18 GMT References: <1081@beguine.UUCP> Sender: uucp@ncr-mpd.FtCollins Followup-To: comp.misc Organization: NCR Microelectronics, Ft. Collins, CO Lines: 37 In-reply-to: Jeff.Miller@samba.acs.unc.edu's message of 15 Sep 90 10:04:05 GMT >>>>> On 15 Sep 90 10:04:05 GMT, Jeff.Miller@samba.acs.unc.edu (BBS Account) said: Jeff> But think about this: you say you left 65 monitors on all the time Jeff> for four years? And had only 11 failures? I would consider that Jeff> excesiive, but is beside the point. Jeff> Assuming each draws 50 watts (resonable for 19" monitors) and that Jeff> you pay about as much for your power as I pay for min (not so Jeff> reasonable: as part of an institution you may pay less, but not less Jeff> than half I am sure), you paid US $13,000 (about 7,200 pounds, I Jeff> think) for power for these monitors for that time period. If you kept Jeff> them turned off 12 hours a day, you would have saved $6,500, enough Jeff> to pay to have all of them fixed and perhaps quite a bit more. Jeff> (Assuming you had them fixed by an independent :-) Last we had to pay for a monitor, it ran about $2000. If he had four less failures by keeping the monitors on, he came out ahead in $s and downtime. Jeff> If there are 1 million machines out there, and each draws on average Jeff> 200 watts, that is 200 megawatts. To say nothing of the air Jeff> conditioning. Leaving them off for 12 hours a day would spare a 100 Jeff> megwatt plant. ...unless the energy required to replace the monitors is more than the extra energy required to keep them from failing (with screenblank running, of course). There is also the matter of extra garbage, if switching monitors off daily causes failures. This isn't a flame; you may be quite correct that turning monitors off _is_ the best thing to do economically and ecologically. Unfortunately, we're missing some data needed to determine the _total_ relative costs. Any takers? -- Chuck Phillips MS440 NCR Microelectronics Chuck.Phillips%FtCollins.NCR.com 2001 Danfield Ct. Ft. Collins, CO. 80525 uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-mpd!bach!chuckp