Would you pay more for a greener machine?

[Tarinder]

A study has found that users are willing to pay up to an extra £108 for a more environmentally-friendly PC.

Click here for the skinny.

Would you pay more. If so, how much more?

[jamiecockrill]

i reckon i'd happily pay £108 extra for a more environmentally friendly PC.

However the study was probably conducted to find some measure of how much computer users care about the environment, and putting a price on it to quantify their results. I'm no material scientist, but would it actually cost more money to manufacture components using 'environmentally friendly' materials? Materials such as arsenic and lead were originally used because they had properties that made them useful and no one really understood very much about their adverse properties. Obviously since, we know a good deal more about these materials. However, manufacturers are generally too lazy to go find alternatives while they are still allowed to produce goods from such materials. And indeed, why would they!

[BEANFro Elite]

I don't actually want a more environmentally friendly PC, I do however want a faster PC!

[Iain]

I don't actually want a more environmentally friendly PC, I do however want a faster PC!

And that, kids, is why the world is doomed.....

[Mike Fishcake]

There's a comment on there which is totally true - Your average Joe Public will go into PC World and see an identical spec PC cheaper, and although you'll have some people who are more 'green' than others, the vast majority will go for the cheaper option.

[Consumption]

I don't actually want a more environmentally friendly PC, I do however want a faster PC!

To be honest I'd proably be the same, given the choice of spending £100 on making my computer faster or making it greener I know which one realisticly I'm more likely to go with..

[Xaneden]

Most people can't afford to pay more to get a greener machine. The only way such an environmentally friendly initiative will take off is if the components can be priced to match existing ones.

[Tomahawk]

Most people can't afford to pay more to get a greener machine. The only way such an environmentally friendly initiative will take off is if the components can be priced to match existing ones.

Exactly!

People would definitely choose a machine (or components) which are going to last longer for them and so more powerful or "up-to-date" rather than an environmentally friendly PC which will cost them a 100/200 more.

Most want to get best value for money, which obviously doesn't equate to the best choice for the environment.

[iranu]

As a materials scientist I can certainly say that the cost of a more environmentally friendly machine will be much greater than £108 and as has been said Joe Public buys with price/performance in mind first.

We still use an aweful lot of lead/silver solder simply because there are very, very few alternatives. Whom ever comes up with an environmentally sound alternative to lead solder that costs the same will make a fortune. Mercury is certainly being phased out wherever possible in all products whether they be PC parts or otherwise. People will be surprised by the number of restrictions placed on manufacturers with regards to (potentially) toxic materials.

eg: the UK government will not allow the aerospace industry to use Beryllium even though for example it's % in say an aluminium casting is 0.15 and is of benefit to the castings fatigue properties. The chance of anyone breathing in dust containing Be during the manufacturing process is zero. There maybe some exceptions where a material must be used but a case must be justified.

I am always surprised that we cannot recover alot of these and other metals from PC parts. It would require alot of nasty solvents and multiple processes and would obviously have to be profitable but I'm sure it could be done. The price of Gold continues to rise due to increased demand caused by it's use in electricals and reclaiming this would be beneficial but it would require a leaching process using a cyanide solution which is (done in the gold industry on mine spoil heaps but it's) very, very nasty. Copper prices are also high - your multi-layered pcbs in mobos and gfx cards use copper for the tracks.

Dumping of this waste is not a problem if done responsibly at sites where the water table is not involved, however, as the report states, alot of this waste goes to China where they are not interested in the environmental consequences of industrialisation.

I did see somewhere about making pcb's from bird feathers which I think is a great idea. We could also look at using more plastics that (bio) degrade. If anything dies I tend to take it apart and put the steel and aluminium into the recycle bin the pcb and plastic gets chucked

The best thing you can do to ensure that you are greener with regards to your PC is to continue to get use out of it when it is no longer cutting edge.

My first AMD 750Mhz machine is still in use - it has winxp on (with 512mb ram) and is used by my aunt for word, excel, photos and email.

My last machine - xp2500, 1gb ram, 9700 pro will become my multimedia/HTPC when I get a suitable case for it - other parts were used to build my brothers machine and continue in my current rig.

Look to give old parts/machines to Charity there are a number of them around

[UKMuFFiN]

I think i've only ever bought a PC once, i've just basically upgraded it bit by bit since then. If i was to get a complete system though or if the components came in the two options, I prob would get the green things, but they'd have to be significantly green.

[autopilot]

Slightly off a topic, in a way, but I think grid computing schemes like Seti@home have a lot to answer for too. I mean, all those thuosands and thuosands of PC's chugging away 24/7 do a lot of damage to the environment.

It could be argued that medical research, like folding@home etc, might be of benifit to mankind. But i do wonder if the results are really worth it in terms of the environmental damage from the extra electricity being used, for what has essentially become a 'show of your PC' club.

Ironic that the BBC are doing a climate change grid scheme, but maybe thats the one people should be doing, if any.

It's not just the materials used to produce the hardware, but user habits that need to change too.

On that note, i recommend people buy one of these - http://www.oneclickpower.co.uk/home.htm. I have one, and as well as doing my tree hugging bit, it's makes life a lot easier (and cheaper).

People who turn thier overclocked folding PC's off at night could probably save themselves the best part of £108.

[ExceededGoku]

I'm sorry but I think all this "green" environment stuff is really becoming rediculous, there is no green way for us to live comfortably without sacrificing a lot of our standard everyday stuff and so, really, to be talking about "green" PCs is a bunch of sh**.

Before we even consider "green" PCs we should be looking at "green" energy, I mean currently the best option for power is nuclear, yet we still burn coal and other crap to generate energy which is not only inefficient but causes a great deal of CO2 emissions and other harmful effects. Once our power has become more eco-friendly then we will have no reason to have "green" products. Therefore, I will not only not buy "green" pcs but will outright refuse to even consider buying them. Until I see an actual move towards eco-friendly Britain (and other countries for that matter) then I will have absolutely no part of it as it seems like the government and businesses are just exploiting us into spending money where it is not needed to be spent. If I wanted to have an eco-friendly computer I would have bought a VIA with a 60W PSU and perhaps an X300 or something so that I could crawl along in Source. But I (and I assume many others) decided that I wanted power, quite simply so that I could enjoy myself.

Perhaps this is a selfish way of thinking, but isn't it selfish to think that I should deal with pathetic equipment when no-one else is? Shouldn't we be starting big and working our way down to smaller things?

I for one will not be spending an extra £108 for an "environmentally-friendly" computer.

[Oobie-]

Personally I don't have the money to make things greener. I think this is a problem but like the comments on the bbc page, what about the other things that are worse than this?
Money makes the world go round - greed is its friend. The way society has built itself something like this is gonna be hard to change especially with more money involved.

what Xaneden said is something I agree on.

[Kumagoro]

I dont think the irish think britains nuclear stations are that enviromentally friendly.

[pak000]

Slightly off a topic, in a way, but I think grid computing schemes like Seti@home have a lot to answer for too. I mean, all those thuosands and thuosands of PC's chugging away 24/7 do a lot of damage to the environment.

It could be argued that medical research, like folding@home etc, might be of benifit to mankind. But i do wonder if the results are really worth it in terms of the environmental damage from the extra electricity being used, for what has essentially become a 'show of your PC' club.

Ironic that the BBC are doing a climate change grid scheme, but maybe thats the one people should be doing, if any.

It's not just the materials used to produce the hardware, but user habits that need to change too.

On that note, i recommend people buy one of these - http://www.oneclickpower.co.uk/home.htm. I have one, and as well as doing my tree hugging bit, it's makes life a lot easier (and cheaper).

People who turn thier overclocked folding PC's off at night could probably save themselves the best part of £108.

The Grid computers are possibly a better way of doing it., just imagine the cost, both financially and environmentally of having supercomputers churn away at this instead? The research would be carried out regardless of whether people could use grids or not

[waterdrop]

Everyone can ship thier old PCs and componets to me if they want. As long as you don't charge me shipping. And I only accept PCs and components from 2001 or newer. Don't need anymore Pentium IIs, but even a Athlon XP or older Pentium 4 could be of use to me.