No matter “how green” their techniques are, they are still saving a shit load of paper.

there are 500 sheets of paper in a ream. if they are presently going through 1500 reams a year posting schedules on conference rooms, they could “update the schedule” once every minute, 24 hours a day, for up to 520 conference rooms, and still have a few sheets left over.

seriously….if that is what is *really* transpiring over at google, then their rate of paper usage is the *least* of their problems.

most assuredly, every google employee already has a computer on his/her desktop. maybe he/she should make more effective use of his/her time by checking the conference room schedule for changes *before* walking over to where the room is. This would eliminate the schedule paper, the need for any electronic gizmo, and would reduce the man-hours otherwise wasted walking to and from conference rooms that are occupied.

The problem, then, is a procedural problem, not a technology issue.

GTMoole:

you are comparing apples to cinder blocks.

I doubt that the device described in the article will be “mounted on the south-facing roof of a school in Ferrara, northern Italy.”

the cells in the application will most certainly be mounted non-optimally and will be lit by crappy fluorescent lights in an office. They will *not* offset the energy used to manufacture them.

I already conceded that there are legitimate reasons for using little solar cells on certain pieces of electronics. I also conceded that the device was a clever contraption.

I merely proposed that we knock off the incessant green politics, and stop pretending we’re saving the planet with stuff like this.

I have a scientific calculator that runs off of solar cells. It’s portable, it works well, and I like the fact that I will never have to replace the batteries. It eliminates the paper that I would otherwise use to scribble my calculations on.

Should I be applauded for being so eco-friendly? I don’t think so. I have no delusions that my calculator somehow reduces my “carbon footprint,” saves trees, or that it might help save the planet.

The concept of remotely rewritable low impact displays will become a new categorical win. Kansas City MO has LED displays on it’s buses and bus stops. Displays that simply defy belief on how overdriven those LED’s must be for daylight visibility. Deploy these or some descendant of them and the solar Vs ac mains powering may pay for them in a short time.

Agreed 100%. We have 9 conference rooms in three floors and I think a printed schedule on the door would not help us at all. Maybe there is a reason for having this, but in my case choosing between looking at the calendar on my computer and going down two floors to check it on the door is a no brainer.

“In their assessment of the three different PV panel types on the south-facing roof of a school in Ferrara, northern Italy, the team found that the energy produced by the panels over their lifetimes considerably overcomes the energy needed during manufacture. In fact, energy costs are recovered within two years in this medium sunshine climate. The team also showed that carbon dioxide emissions are significantly lower over the PV panel lifetime from cradle-to-grave compared with conventional electricity generation. Economic costs, the team found, would only be recouped if the panels remained fully functional for more than twenty years”

Ok, sure solar cells for small electronics might not end up generating that much energy in return, but there, you’re talking about a different reason – portability. In google’s case it was more about not installing power and network jacks everywhere, which would also have been expensive and wasteful.

(Also, recycling paper is more resource intensive than paper from farm trees)

http://www.kentdisplays.com/products/glass/640×480.html

Also, somebody please tell me where I can buy one.

It’s already stored online, just look it up!!! If you didn’t schedule the room and have an immediate need for a room you can either chance it and not check online (and understand you can be kicked out by the person that had scheduled it, which takes all of a minute) or check the reservation on the computer.

I could see the need for this years ago, but at any tech company these days most everyone has a laptop with wireless and takes them to the meetings anyways.

I’ve been at my current employer for the last 8 years. Since I’ve been here we’ve always used Outlook Calendar for room reservations for the 20-25 conference rooms and I’ve never even seen a need for something like this.

It’s a neat project nonetheless and well intentioned. But, IMHO, if you’re goal is to be “green”, eliminating a need for something altogether is always better than just using less. I understand in practice that’s not always possible, but this seems like one of those instances where there would be little to no impact on going without. The short-term people may not like, but over the long-term people won’t even miss it. Just my .02

Just because you slap a solar cell onto piece of electronics doesn’t make it “eco friendly.”

The amount of energy it takes to manufacture a solar cell often exceeds the amount of energy that cell will produce over its entire lifetime. Thus, it is probably more “green” simply to use mains power.

The other thing I wonder about is this: if one accounts for the energy, mining, processing, toxic materials, and waste disposal impact of the electronics, and then balances that against the production and disposal of paper used in the same application, which solution is *really* less damaging to planet?

True, paper production involves some nasty chemicals too, but the source material is renewable and the waste material is recyclable. Even burning waste paper releases potentially useful energy and the process is carbon-neutral because you put no more carbon into the atmosphere than was absorbed when the tree from which the paper was made was grown.

My point is this: This is a nice little project. If you want to tout a gizmo like this as “better” than paper because of its enhanced capabilities, communications, and automation, fine. I’ll buy that. But please, give the “environmentally responsible” stuff a rest.

By the way, a typical web search generates about 7 grams of carbon dioxide. The Times of London reports that Google handles about 200 million searches daily. You do the math. If you’re really objective about it, by far the most “environmentally responsible” thing that google could do is to shut down google itself.

OhDamn. Under the rules of CCCKC:

http://blog.cowtowncomputercongress.org/

Which has a “you said it you so it’s on you to make it so” flavored meme called the “Volunteer Rule” That way we feel obligated to make what we say become realities. Even if it’s not overnight, the beginning of intent shown as any progress in whacking together some alpha proof counts:>

Now, on to get some steppers etc and an assist on vector graphics codings.Exporting from the formats used by Radish etc may be non-trivial. After that gets solved?

The next hard parts will be either plotting for the unbroken line effect-or making a pen lifter. the invert/shake to erase before update mechanics seem trivial by comparison. But? IIRc there were a few times Spider Robinson mentioned we make the erase function long before perfecting a write operation. And it’d look so neat in the cavespace.

If you don’t like what you see go get off your ass and build something yourself.

What are you doing in front of a computer?