• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

energy star version of google...

richardycc

Diamond Member
did a search, hope its not a repost..anyway, its supposingly same as google.com, but uses black background to draw less electricity, so it will lower your electric bill, not sure by how much thou....
 
...?
I don't think it really saves any energy.

Better way to save energy, replace all the light bulbs in your house with CFL bulbs... 😀
 
i doubt it. in fact, since LCD displays are far more common and LCD's work by blocking light from the backlight that is on anyway, this actually makes the crystals do work while white doesn't.
 
Originally posted by: joshsquall
This was on Slashdot a while ago. Someone estimated it would save X millions of dollars. I don't buy it.

Well, with their estimated savings on their home page (which I think is probably an overestimate) they've saved about $17 worth of electricity so far.

I wonder if they make money off this like Mozilla does.
 
Maybe someone with a kill-a-watt can compare their monitors usage on both google.com and blackle.com
 
Originally posted by: mb
Maybe someone with a kill-a-watt can compare their monitors usage on both google.com and blackle.com

The difference between them would be almost impossible to measure.
 
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Originally posted by: mb
Maybe someone with a kill-a-watt can compare their monitors usage on both google.com and blackle.com

The difference between them would be almost impossible to measure.

That's what I'd like to know. Or if there's even a difference between how much power an LCD uses in an hour on a white page vs a black page.
I have two monitors so I'd be willing to test it, but I don't have a kill-a-watt.
 
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
It would save energy with a CRT, but not an LCD

yup, useless for lcd which save a ton of power over crt anyways.
lcd backlight is always on.
perhaps if you had a new led backlight where parts of the backlight dim independently.
 
Originally posted by: mb
Maybe someone with a kill-a-watt can compare their monitors usage on both google.com and blackle.com

There was a group that did that with a bunch of different monitors. They said the energy savings were negligible for lcd screens.
 
Originally posted by: Indolent
Originally posted by: mb
Maybe someone with a kill-a-watt can compare their monitors usage on both google.com and blackle.com

There was a group that did that with a bunch of different monitors. They said the energy savings were negligible for lcd screens.

Ah, thanks. That's just what I would have thought.
 
I just did a quick test with my kill-a-watt, with the regular google.com home page, my 22" LCD draws a constant 39watts with no fluctuation, with the blackle.com page, the reading would fluctuate between 39-40watts, so the blackle.com might be actually drawing slightly more power than the regular google white front page. YMMV.
 
Any power savings is going to be offset by the power it takes to run the server that site is hosted on...
 
Originally posted by: mb
Maybe someone with a kill-a-watt can compare their monitors usage on both google.com and blackle.com

Well I just did. I am using a 17inch HP mx704, using IE 7 with tabs. While on a this forum page or when using the regular google, my monitor is using 66-67 watts of power. When I switch to blackle, the monitor usage goes down to 55-54 watts of power :Q. Impressive to say the least.
 
I like black if reminds me of of DOS days, I don't care if people say white backgrounds are easier on the eyes, I can't get use to them. blackle.com is my new search engine, I feel like I'm on DOS again woowoo.
 
TreeHugger has a page about Blackle, but do note that their conclusions are somewhat biased by the fact that one of their own apparently came up with the original idea.

There are lots of better, more effective ways to save power.
 
Back
Top