<to...@tuxteam.de> wrote: > On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 04:41:07PM +0100, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk > wrote: > > Greg <curtys...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> older machines are also normally using a lot more electricity > > > >> than something small and more recent might use. > > > > > > > > While that's obviously good, that doesn't necessarily justify > > > > buying a new machine from an ecological perspective: AFAIK the > > > > embedded energy in a laptop (i.e. the energy that was necessary > > > > to produce the laptop) is typically higher than all the > > > > electricity that the laptop will consume during its lifetime. > > > > > > So you're saying the embedded energy in an obsolete laptop is > > > lesser than the embedded energy in a modern one to the exact > > > extent where there is no ecological profit in using the modern > > > one as opposed to the obsolete one? > > > > No, he's not saying anything that requires exactness. He's saying > > that the energy to make a new laptop is greater than the energy > > that will be used by operating the old laptop. > > > > Nothing to do with the embedded energy of the old laptop at all. > > Simply that there's no justification on energy grounds to make the > > new laptop, however little energy it uses. > > IOW: the embedded energy in the old + new laptop is greater than just > the embedded energy in the old one.
No banana! The embedded energy in the new laptop is greater than the operational energy used by the old laptop in its lifetime. Why is this so difficult?
