Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Dell, Lenovo Adding Solar Option for PCs

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Sep 16, 2007 11:23 AM
from the well-not-exactly dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Lenovo just announced a solar power option for PCs, and Dell is about to do the same, according to Advanced Energy Group. But the solar hardware weights 86 pounds and costs $1,300! Lenovo officials admit they had to do this to reach the 75% mark to gain EPEAT Gold status; Dell couldn't be reached for comment. Hopefully the technology will get smaller and more affordable."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • All right! (Score:5, Funny)

    by iknowcss (937215) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:25AM (#20626157) Homepage
    Just what I need! Solar power for my desktop computer! This will go great right next to my windo-- wait. I don't have any windows. Oh, shit.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 16 2007, @12:09PM (#20626557)

      Just what I need! Solar power for my desktop computer! This will go great right next to my windo-- wait. I don't have any windows. Oh, shit.
      Just buy some more light bulbs and mount them over the solar cells. Incandescent bulbs tend to work the best in my opinion. And if it gets too warm then you should turn on your AC.
  • ...to get solar power for my laptop!

    Maybe Dell could get a rep for being "pro-fitness", too, with that 86 lb. power supply.

    • Wait for what? (Score:5, Informative)

      by DaleGlass (1068434) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:49AM (#20626365) Homepage
      Solar laptop solutions are sold by many companies already. You can get it as a foldable panel, panels on laptop bags, panels that can be glued to the back of the screen (probably suboptimal), and even a solar jacket [scottevest.com]

      They're available in all sorts, from cheap ones that can only slowly charge the battery (though they seem to be able to provide part of the required power while the laptop is on, extending the battery's life), to more expensive ones that produce enough power to keep the laptop on, assuming favorable light levels of course.

      • Re:Wait for what? (Score:4, Informative)

        by CaptnMArk (9003) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:56AM (#20626429)
        Unfortunately most laptop screens dont view at all well in sunlight.
      • What we really need is some kind of helmet with solar panels on each side, and on the top. That way, it can collect all that wasted light emitted by the laptop screen, provide shade to keep the laptop cool, and keep the glare off the screen, all at the same time.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I use a fold-able, portable, 6 panel, 3 pound solar solution for my ThinkPad X60s which puts out about 12W in direct sunlight. I have tuned the laptop's power usage to be between 12W and 15.5W when operating.

        With this setup I can run on the smallest battery Lenovo offers for the unit, a 4-cell Li-Ion good for about 1.5 hours, for a little over 10 hours. If I simply close the lid, thereby turning off the screen, the usage goes down to about 6W so the laptop can charge while running. Shutting it down for
  • Batteries Included (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:29AM (#20626185) Homepage Journal
    PC tech has financed huge tech returns for non-PC products, especially in power conservation and management. I'd like to see Dell and other PC OEMs evolve into supplying solar power systems (with embedded PCs for ease of open integration and smart operation) for general use in our homes, offices and mobile.

    A real winner would be mobile phones whose cases all recharge off solar (or just ambient light, even indoors). That kind of mass market could drive down the price:performance curve, open up the tech to all our powered devices. And make the "solar look" popular that even people who buy on nothing but fashion (most people) would start saving power with all these accessories.
    • How long would it take to charge with indoor light, or even reflected sunlight? The solar batteries I've seen require extended periods in direct sun.

      I've been considering a solar charger for all my C/AA/AAA battery powered home devices (remotes, cordless phones, clocks, etc.). Maybe a centralized solution like that might be better. Then you can just put a small panel up on the roof or a south facing wall or something.

      The problem there with cell phones (and watches for that matter) is the utter lack of batte
      • by NeilTheStupidHead (963719) on Sunday September 16 2007, @12:27PM (#20626743) Journal
        Unfortunately, cellphone batteries are used for vendor lock-in, you can only easily get a new battery directly from the manufacturer at a steep price. I agree that the battery should be an insert with a simple cover over it, but then, when someone makes a phone smaller than a 'standard' cell phone battery, the whole thing goes out the window. And there seems to be this fascination for making cell phones un-usably small. I have a samsung A860, which is the largest phone I could find at the time and I'll be keeping it when I renew my contract as all the new phones I look at have buttons that are too small to push.

        When it comes to watch batteries (properly called button cells): Why do we need different types of 'normal' batteries? (i.e. AA, AAA, D, etc) I seem to remember from school that larger batteries tend to have better output in terms of Amp-Hours, but large batteries are not always practical. Would you carry around an MP3 player that used a D battery instead of an AAA or AA? Very small devices, like hearing aids and watches, need very small and/or very thin batteries, but things like calculators can have larger batteries for longer life span. As far as visually undistinguishable batteries, take a close look at the package, they're often the same battery from a manufacturer with a different numbering scheme or the same battery with different innards (like Ni-cad vs Li-ion). Just look at the wikipedia entry for the extremely common LR44 [wikipedia.org] battery, there are dozens of manufacturer or retailer part numbers. The IEC [wikipedia.org] defines standards for naming, but can't force anyone to use their system of nomenclature. I would double check, but in my experience, two identical-looking button cells are often the same battery but for a manufacturer's stamp.
  • Yep. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is exactly how you are going to "save the planet" by solving the energy problem, folks. Not by not using coal/oil plant electricity. But by captalism: profiting from selling clean energy solutions.
    • Re:Yep. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by toppavak (943659) on Sunday September 16 2007, @12:10PM (#20626573)
      In terms of "saving the planet" or solving any kind of energy problem, these kinds of bottom-up approaches simply wont do much in most industrialized countries. Its simply much more efficient (energy efficient, cost efficient etc) to centralize power generation- even considering losses through distribution. Even if we expand our power generation capabilities through the consumption of oil or coal, using electric cars that charge off of that infrastructure will be more efficient than placing small ICE in cars they way things are currently done. In industrial-scale facilities its also easier / cheaper to install highly effective scrubbers than it would be to install similar technology in every single vehicle / generator currently in use. Replace those oil/coal/gas burning generators with nuclear and your overall positive impact on the environment goes through the roof. The point is, putting a few small and expensive solar panels on your house to run a computer isnt going to make a difference well, not as much of a difference anyways, as centralized industrial-scale efforts for alternate technologies. Its cheaper, its easier, its more painless and it doesnt really require people to change their lifestyles. Stop asking people to drive less, pressure your local government to phase in more and better public transportation systems. Enforce more rigorous controls on vehicle efficiency and put in place requirements for the implementation of transitional technologies such as hybrid and LPG powered systems. Build more nuclear and wind power plants, start a reprocessing program to reduce the amount of hazardous waste coming out of the nuclear plants. Expand power distribution infrastructure in anticipation of a greater demand as centralized power is utilized more for plug-in type vehicles and public transportation systems. Phase out oil and coal fired plants, keep expanding nuclear generation capabilities, increase funding in power storage research and invest heavily in battery recycling programs. With aggressive governmental and corporate backing of such policies I dont think it would be unreasonable to ban the ICE within the next 50-75 years, and either have significantly reduced or completely ceased the production of electricity through the consumption of coal and oil. It wouldnt matter if oil is going to run out in 50 years or 150 if we're prepared for it. It doesnt matter if we've caused the globe to heat up yet or not, it will never be something we have to worry about. All this bickering over whether its a problem now or not is completely irrelevant, even if it isnt yet, it will be. Maybe not in the next century, maybe so. It doesnt matter. The problem with democracies is that most are almost universally incapable of planning for the future. It doesnt fucking matter if its a problem today or not if its going to be a problem in the future. Expand our fiber networks today, phase out environmentally harmful technologies today, push the envelope of human technology and progress. FUCKING DO SOMETHING PEOPLE. We have the technology, we have the resources. It will cost a lot yes, but nowhere near as much as enacting hasty fixes to save our asses once its crunch time.
      • Mod Parent Up! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Conspicuous Coward (938979) on Sunday September 16 2007, @01:10PM (#20627133)
        Solar powered PC's for 1500$ are a prime example of what's wrong with the consumerist approach to environmentalism.
        I doubt whether the energy saved by running a PC off this thing will even offset the energy used in it's manufacture, but hey it sounds good and people go "aren't dell good environmentalists".

        Everybody goes out and replaces their (perfectly functioning) fords with a "green" Prius. Totally ignoring the fact that manufacturing the Prius itself requires large amounts of energy, therefore emitting a lot of carbon. It would be better for the planet to keep to old car for a few years, or even better to use public transport.

        The consumerist approach to environmentalism is like trying to fight WWII by asking individual members of the population to buy guns and go out and shoot a few Germans in their spare time. If governments took this problem remotely as seriously as they claim to there would be proper regulation, as indeed there must be. Consumerism will not solve this problem, we need people who can actually add up working out how existing resources can best be directed to save the planet; not the bloody marketing department at dell.
  • by weirdcrashingnoises (1151951) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:32AM (#20626219) Journal
    Hopefully the technology will get smaller and more affordable.

    ...and a resounding "DUH" was heard across the lands...

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Not quite sure how this would be possible.

      Consumer-grade panels are less than 20% efficient, an average PC with an average monitor and some gadgets attached use about 150W, at ~12h/day, this is about 1.5kWh/day. There is usable sunlight less than 8h/day so the solar array needs to provide at least 600W during that period under worst-case lighting conditions to enable fully off-the-grid operation and this requires at least five square meters of said consumer-grade panels. With much of the usage occuring outs
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          For low-power battery-operated equipment, solar can open interesting possibilities since the application already contains a battery and charge controller... all that's needed is exposed surface area and you can, even if you fail to go completely unplugged, at least extend your battery life by a significant amount: a cell-phone on standby draws less than 10mA, which is within the realm of what a cell-sized solar panel could provide at the required ~4V.

          Dunno for your original comment... it kind of made it see
  • How many trees... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tx (96709) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:35AM (#20626237) Journal
    ...could you plant for $1300? That's something many environmental types love to ignore. They spend large amounts of money on things that have pretty small environmental benefits, and then say "every little bit counts" and so forth. Whereas what they should be asking is "how could I spend this money so as to do the most good/least damage to the environment?"
    • by Dunbal (464142) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:40AM (#20626289)
      could you plant for $1300? That's something many environmental types love to ignore.

            but if i plant trees then there will be too much shade to run my solar PC, you insensitive clod!
    • ...here, have a few freebie trees on me! Go ahead, claim a dozen, they are cheap! You have to go way out of your way to NOT have trees gradually take over pastureland. We have untold *thousands and thousands* of wild trees sprout all on their own here every year. Carbon offsets and new green taxes and whatnot though are scams, pure bloated governmental bureaucracy/corporate dodgy scams.

      With that said, solar PV *works* and works well, and is affordable now if you extrapolate probable electricity costs for a
      • Re:trees and solar (Score:4, Insightful)

        by BlueParrot (965239) on Sunday September 16 2007, @12:25PM (#20626709)

        With that said, solar PV *works* and works well, and is affordable now if you extrapolate probable electricity costs for a coupla decades into the future.

        It works if you ignore that it has a poor energy/dollar ratio as compared to a wind turbine. Even if you ignore all other short comings of solar photovoltaic cells, you still won't get away from this simple fact. Wind power is cheaper. MUCH cheaper. Of course, on life cycle costs modern nuclear power plants are cheaper still, but I suspect you don't like those or won't believe me, so I'm using wind power instead. It doesn't really matter, the conclusion is still the same.

        There is one advantage to solar however, and it is why you use it on satellites and other remote installations. It requires very little maintenance, no refuelling, and it is extremely portable. In most applications a battery will prove to be more suitable, but in certain niche applications where recharging or refuelling is impractical ( as it is on a satellite or Mars probe ) solar cells are popular.

        For laptops I'd rate it as simply stupid. A simple conservation of energy calculation against incoming insulation and the capacity of a Li-ion battery should make this obvious. Maybe if you are studying the ecology of a remote pacific Island or something, but for normal consumers it is just a waste of cash.
        • by zogger (617870) on Sunday September 16 2007, @01:52PM (#20627459) Homepage Journal
          ...and before you casually hurl "know it all" insults. I live in georgia, and also own an aeromarine wind power generator, but I use solar for my alternative energy of choice, because it works *much much better* here than wind. There's no one single "best" power source, it depends on use, location, etc. Solar just works hella better here than wind, right now,I am getting decent sun, but the wind is quite calm. Other areas it is way more windy most of the year, but solar might not be as good. Some guys are lucky and can run decent hybrid systems, using both, especially good as wind picks up in the winter when there is less sun, and vice versa. It just depends. Here ya go, look at some solar and wind potential maps [nrel.gov]

          I've been into alternative energy since the 60s (you??) when I first worked with my dad and we built from scratch some solar heating for our swimming pool (added a month decent swimming both spring and fall for only a couple hundred bucks and some labor), and since that time as a hobbiest and also it was my business for a few years (might be again possibly, the interest has picked up a lot this past year with all the energy cost increases), by actually "doing* stuff with it, everything from solar thermal space heating and solar water heating for household use to making biofuel ethanol and methane, working on superinsulated structures (several of those, best dollars you can spend is more insulation and better windows), etc. etc, along with solar PV and wind. I am fully aware of the pluses and minuses of this or that technique and what stuff costs, etc. This isn't theoretical casual web board commentary from me, it is hands on experience. I don't write code, so I don't comment about that a whole lot, but with alternative energy I can speak from some significant experience. I don't claim to be the expert's expert, because I am not, but I do have a lot of hands on with this stuff and try to keep up with the industry in general terms. And it worked just swell with that laptop, and it also ran a reading light and a small TV and a radio at the same time during the evenings, it wasn't stupid at all, it "just worked" for relatively cheap money, and it has been long paid off and the same rig still works fine, even that original single battery that is going on ten years old now works fine, and the larger battery bank is 8 years old now and works fine.
            • ..do a site survey, use those maps from the link as part of it, look at your wallet and go for it. to me it is like computers, if you wait for the next great thing and price drops-you'll never own a computer. Comes a time you need to just take the plunge, knowing full well ten years from then there will be better deals. so it goes. but..in the meantime you have some guaranteed juice, and it is a lot cleaner as well, both from an environmental standpoint and from the actual sine wave standpoint. As geeks, we
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Well, you'd have to buy some deforested land to plant them on, so not very many; and planting trees is mostly a stupid way to help the environment anyway. If there's enough incentive to cut trees down, you won't keep up by planting them, and if there isn't, they'll plant themselves. I consider myself an "environmental type" because when I spend money on things that benefit me, I try to do it in ways that don't have a negative impact on shared resources. Planting trees does little for the environment, and
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Most things are clunky, rickety, and expensive when first invented. There has to be a starting point.
    • by SuperBanana (662181) on Sunday September 16 2007, @12:36PM (#20626811)

      That's something many environmental types love to ignore. They spend large amounts of money on things that have pretty small environmental benefits, and then say "every little bit counts" and so forth. Whereas what they should be asking is "how could I spend this money so as to do the most good/least damage to the environment?"

      "They" are "ignoring it" because trees aren't the largest source of oxygen on the planet- phytoplankton in the oceans are. I've seen numbers as high as 90%, but I think most scientists would agree it is "more than half."

      They" are "ignoring it" because trees don't remove industrial pollutants, they don't bring much in the way of renewable energy (they do have lots of side benefits, like preventing erosion, providing habitat for ecosystems, shading the ground and buildings from solar radiation in hot areas, providing renewable construction materials, etc) and so on. Planting trees does jack shit to address the pollution from power plants (more than a third of the United States electricity comes from coal, of which the soot contains radioactive particles among other things), planes, trains, and trucks.

      The problem here is not that manufacturers aren't trying; it's that these companies make a business out of reselling other people's stuff. That Dell laptop was not actually designed by Dell; Apple is one of the few companies to design in-house. Dell goes shopping each year in Asia and sees what OEM laptops it likes, and then slaps their label on 'em.

      What is needed is a company other than Advanced Energy Group slapping a $1400 price tag on what is essentially:

      • A $30 cart with wheels and a handle
      • A $600 dollar solar panel (120W Sunwise)
      • $50-100 in batteries (2-3 car batteries will do in a pinch. AGMs are a little more expensive.)
      • A $30 inverter
      • A $30 charge controller (not sure on this one, but you can get pretty cheap+simple if need be.)

      Far as I can see, they're making a 100% profit margin ON TOP OF RETAIL PRICES for all those components. The problem with most solar "technologies" is that everyone is exceptionally greedy. If they priced the stuff with more reasonable profit margins, they'd sell quite a bit more of 'em.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          And this, ladies and gentleman, is why one should never post to Slashdot before consuming coffee.

          The point I was attempting to make, "would you rather sell a nickle twenty times, or a dollar just once?" is an attempt to illustrate why, exactly, it is that profit margins are so high on low-volume electronics -- or anything else of low volume, for that matter.

          Yeah, sure, they could drop the price and sell a lot more of the photovoltaic kits.

          But they're not trying to sell PV kits, per se, but they are instead
      • by Antony.Muss (1152597) on Sunday September 16 2007, @01:09PM (#20627115)

        When you buy a plane ticket, you don't also thereby purchase therapists for the prostitutes whose lives you're ruining there, or make up (with medical coverage) for the STD pandemic you're helping to cause by entering the market for prostitutes there. If prostitution leads the women involved to up and die, be beaten by their johns and tricks, etc, etc, you're not paying for ANY of that, even though you're CAUSING IT.
        I am a courteous John who never hurts his prostitute. I'm improving her live by outcompeting abusive Johns, like a bacterium that outcompetes penicillin-resistent bacteria, which incidentally she has.
  • by downix (84795) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:38AM (#20626267) Homepage
    First computers and cell phones, then cars which run off of batteries, but use solar panels while sitting at the mall or work parking lot, and finishng up with solar farms running all of our electrical needs through smart reduction of power demands...

    Ok everyone, I feel a hearty round of kumbaya coming on.... **ducks the vegetables**
    • Until we find that intercepting all this power from reaching the earth and converting it to energy in the atmosphere causes "Earth Core Cooling(TM)" and atmosphere warming with sever weather to follow.
  • by Twid (67847) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:38AM (#20626273) Homepage
    Once again copying Apple: PowerBook: Solar Powered Solutions [apple.com] - and only 13 years after this support article was written. :)

    Pics here [sinanco.com].

    Someone told me that one of the *old* powerbooks has a replacable top panel in which there was some sort of official apple solar panel option. I did some googling but couldn't find any evidence of that.
  • Bah (Score:5, Funny)

    by antifoidulus (807088) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:48AM (#20626359) Homepage Journal
    just let me know when they provide a nuclear option
  • by Plocmstart (718110) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:50AM (#20626383)
    Build your own for around $300: http://www.energyrefuge.com/how-to/solar_power_generator.htm [energyrefuge.com]
    This is essentially the same thing: a solar panel, battery charger, deep-cycle battery, and (optionally if you don't have a 12V laptop adaptor) a power inverter. The solar cell is what costs the most. The battery is what weighs the most.
    • Agreed. Their price is not just outrageous, it is crazy. I am pretty sure I could build it for even less than the $300 you claim.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Sure, but that doesn't help the computer makers check a box on the feature list, which is the whole point here.

      I doubt if they even want to sell any. Do you think Dell wants to be taking support calls about solar panels? They probably deliberately priced it unattractively.

    • I agree this could be provided cheaper, but you underestimated the solar power requirements by a long shot.

      The solar panel suggested in your link is an 18-watt ($175) solar panel, and is inadequate to charge the 60-Ah battery included with the Xantrex Xpower 1500 Powerpack. A complete charge would take several days of full sun.

      The Lenovo & Dell packages include a 110-watt solar panel, which sells for about $6-700 dollars at Real Goods [gaiam.com] or Mr. Solar [mrsolar.com].

      For $1500, you could by a decent laptop for $1000, and t
  • But... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Epsillon (608775) on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:52AM (#20626403) Homepage Journal
    ...will it run Solaris?

    Joking aside, this is something I have been toying with for the past few months. I have a couple of polycrystaline panels on the roof of the workshop and a small LV controller/wet battery arrangement. Getting LV PSUs for standard PC hardware is a pain, though. They are available, and the beauty of them is that you don't have to faff about with DC-AC inverters, but they're more than double the price of a high-end AC PSU.

    There are also those small PSU modules for the likes of Via's EPIA mini-ITX boards that will supply the other voltages from a single 12V feed. The main problem with these is that they supply the board with 12V directly from the source. With Lead-acid and solar, you can bet that this will vary with load, time of day, weather and other factors. The best solution for off-grid solar is a 24V system with a real 24V DC-DC PSU that will regulate the 12V rails. As soon as I am comfortable remortgaging the house I may get one...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 16 2007, @11:58AM (#20626441)
    When we factor in the environmental and monetary cost of producing this product (panels and battery systems) to run a PC which would be practically free in terms of cost and carbon emission to run on the grid in many countries...I'm left scratching my head... how is this a good deal for either the environment or the buyer?

    If you really want to save the planet take that $1300 and use it for a down payment on a ground source heat pump for your home.
  • This shares the same problem as all the others. What you want if you are trying to save power is a system that uses the sun as much as it can and fills in the gaps with power from the AC supply. This uses solar only if the main power is cut. Thanks for nothing.

    If anyone from APC or Belkin is reading this... what I want is a reasonably-priced UPS that takes AC power and DC power in and connects to 2 banks of (user-provided) batteries. One bank is for interruptions, the other is to store enough power tha
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      What you are looking for is here;

      http://www.outbackpower.com/ [outbackpower.com]

      My dad has one of these in his house. When the batteries are topped off, it kicks over an auxiliary load (part of the rest of the house such as freezer and some additional lights) and when that drops the charge, it switches the auxiliary load back to shore power. His computers used for video editing of home movies is on the solar system 24/7. The solar system and windmill is his UPS. His system provides about 30% of his total load. It still d
  • Who here works in a cube farm and doesn't see on a daily basis a few people that could stand to do the exercise and would be better off generating power for the folks that are effective. It would work (and we would get healthier geeks to).
  • by bcrowell (177657) on Sunday September 16 2007, @12:28PM (#20626745) Homepage

    A more worthwhile goal is just to reduce the power consumption of your PC. The computer referred to in TFA draws 45 W, which is nice and low. I would just call that a victory and stop there. When I built my most recent machine, I decided to go for low power, and without using any particularly exotic hardware, I managed to get it down to 98 W, including the monitor, when the CPU is idle. It's a nice, snappy computer, with a dual-core AMD x64 CPU. If you're shopping for a power supply, make sure and get an 80PLUS model. Another reasonable thing to do, if you're concerned about your impact on the environment, is if you're just going to do word processing, programming, and web browsing, don't buy a gaming machine with a video card that gets hot enough to fry an egg.

    The solar thing being discussed in the article is clearly a silly gimmick. You'd get more environmental bang for the buck by installing photovoltaics on the roof (and that's an option for businesses as well as homeowners). YMMV, but where I live in Southern California we get a lot of sun, and my roof faces south, so photovoltaics ended up being a good deal for me. (It's hard to estimate how long the investment will take to pay for itself, because it depends sensitively on how much electric rates go up in the future. The historical trend has always been up, but it's hard to predict exactly how much more rates will go up in, say, the next 10 years.) There is at least one theoretical situation in which a special-purpose solar panel for a specific device can make sense, and that's where you have a device that uses a lot of power, and can run on DC. The classic example is pool pumps. Pool pumps tend to be insane power hogs, and they use DC motors, so you can actually be more efficient by using special-purpose photovoltaics than plugging into the AC from a general-purpose PV system's inverter. A computer can also run on DC, and I believe in some big data centers they do use hardware that runs on DC, because it saves the electricity that would have been wasted by inefficiency in the individual computers' power supplies. If you were running such a center in an area with a lot of sun, and you had some roof space available, it could certainly be smart to get a big PV system installed, without an inverter, to supply DC to the machines.

  • If they really want to help out with alternative energy usage there are a few things they can do easily:

    - Design the power supplies and charge controllers of laptops to accept reasonably "wild" voltages on the input jack, publish the specs and limits, and approve direct connection to panels or 12v renewable energy systems. Alternatively they could make available an INEXPENSIVE charging brick that accepts such voltages on its input.

    By 'reasonably "wild"' I mean the voltages that would appear off, say, a 12v panel (about 14.5v) or a 12V renewable-energy battery bank (about 13.5, up to 14.something during equalization). Disconnect at a minimum charge to protect batteries from undercharge would be a good idea, too. (Make it resistant to voltage spikes from switching of inductive loads and it could also be plugged directly into a cigarette lighter in a car as well.)

    Down-converter bricks for 24 and 48 volt systems would be good, too. Working through one step of conversion, rather than running the system's big (and thus lossy) inverter to get power up to 120VAC for a standard brick and then bringing it back down to what the laptop wants, would be a big win.

      - Improve power management (including clock-speed management, disk shutdown, and screen backlighting control) for lowered power consumption when not needed for heavy crunch or display. (For linux: Provide the hooks for the open software to do this.)