Dell, Lenovo Adding Solar Option for PCs

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."

All right!

[iknowcss (937215)]

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.

Re:All right!

[by Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:All right!

[g0dsp33d (849253)]

Just wait until you hear about my solution for server rooms...

Re:All right!

[geobeck (924637)]

getting a kick in the face from some wanker who has placed in trousers round his ankles.

That sounds like quite a trick.

I can't wait...

[Donniedarkness (895066)]

...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?

[DaleGlass (1068434)]

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?

[CaptnMArk (9003)]

Unfortunately most laptop screens dont view at all well in sunlight.

Re:Wait for what?

[g0dsp33d (849253)]

Neither do most slashdotters :-p. Sorry Mods, couldn't resist.

Shade.

[statemachine (840641)]

Use the solar panel for shade. Problem solved.

Batteries Included

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

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.

Re:Batteries Included

[NeilTheStupidHead (963719)]

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.

What is that i hear?

[weirdcrashingnoises (1151951)]

Hopefully the technology will get smaller and more affordable.

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

How many trees...

[Tx (96709)]

...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?"

Re:How many trees...

[Dunbal (464142)]

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!

Trees clean up pollution...how exactly?

[SuperBanana (662181)]

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:trees and solar

[BlueParrot (965239)]

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.

check your maps for a better idea...

[zogger (617870)]

...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.

Re:How many trees...

[Antony.Muss (1152597)]

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.

Once again copying Apple

[Twid (67847)]

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

[antifoidulus (807088)]

just let me know when they provide a nuclear option

Or build your own for $1000 less

[Plocmstart (718110)]

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.

Re:Yep.

[toppavak (943659)]

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!

[Conspicuous Coward (938979)]

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.

Re:But...

[Chris Mattern (191822)]

...will it run Solaris?

Yes, but it doesn't support Eclipse.

Chris Mattern

Re:ACE OF BASS DIED FOR YOUR SINS

[mstahl (701501)]

Best AC comment EVER. Way to go as far off-topic as humanly possible (without, of course, meta-commenting on the hilarity of an AC comment).