alt.energy.homepower

On Sep 14, 11:32 am, drydem wrote:
> On Sep 13, 4:18 pm, beal...@ wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 14, 1:46 am, drydem wrote:
>
> > > Solar PC: Turning Sunlight into Computing Power
> > > Frank Volkel. September 6, 2007
> > > (1st in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)http=
:// /2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...
>
> > > an overview of solar panel technology and industry
>
> > > Do-It-Yourself Solar-Powered PC
> > > By Bert T=F6pelt ... September 13, 2007 10:36
> > > ( 2nd in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)htt=
p:// /2007/09/13/hardware_components/
>
> > > Using readily available components an AMD
> > > Athlon 64 X2 BE-2350 motherboard
> > > desktop using 61w on idle and 115W on
> > > full duty cycle/load.
>
> > > The final article will cover a step-by-step
> > > description of a solar-powered energy
> > > collection and storage system.
>
> > Is this supposed to impress people. I and many others have been
> > running our computers off solar power for years.
>
> > I think you may have missed the boat.-
>
> Tom's Hardware normally focuses on computer performance. They opted
> out of using a notebook which are designed from the top down to be
> more
> energy efficient because it was less of a challenge and they wanted
> to make something with more computing power. This is the first time
> I can recall them addressing computing energy efficiency.

Seems to me to be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has
bolted.

I have run all my computers off solar for as long as I have had
computers.

Despite poor wayes assertions my latest iMac uses 59 watts while being
used for simple word processing and can use as much as 150 watts when
pushed to more demanding work. It was a choice between that and and
eMac that had a higher energy requirement.
>
> My gut reaction was that the full electrical load
> of 115w is a tad excessive but Tom's Hardware Group
> wants a very fast workstation and they're willing to
> build a bigger solar array system to accomodate it.

115 watts sounds high, yes. But then equipment uses what it uses for
the application it is used for. Best to design for the possible load
rather than have not enough energy when you need it. Especially if you
are making money from the computer.
>
> Yet ISTM if I'm out in the middle of nowhere with
> a computer running on batteries and a few
> solar panels - I would be thinking more than twice
> about wasting any of precious battery power
> on anything more than the basics like
> internet, email, word processing, and a
> power grid monitor. I'm expecting that the cost
> the electrical storage system is about half the
> cost of a solar panel system.

Well now, consider this.

A printing company at the end of the grid. Presses being run and an
office full of computers.

Now the owner did not care if the presses ran a bit slow from time to
time due to grid not being up to his demands.

But he put the office on solar. No computer problems, no down time, no
lost data.

So if it comes down to a) being out in the middle of nowhere and you
are making money from your computer and need it to its fullest
capabilities or b) just checking your email. You have to decide how
much you are going to limit your ability to use your computer.