Second life green?

[Jits]

Hello,

A Second Life avatar would use twice as much electrical energy as an Algerian!

Posted by Yaroslav Pigenet (20 Minutes)
By adding the power consumption of the PCs of some 12500 user-avatars connected to Second Life at all times, to that of the 4000 servers and their cooling systems, Carr estimates that the virtual world consumes 60 kW hour every day; i.e. 000 kWh per avatar (4,8 / 60000) per day.

In total, a virtual Second Life avatar therefore consumes 1752 kWh of real electrical energy per year. By way of comparison, in 2003, the average electricity consumption per inhabitant was 5765 kWh in Europe, 7585 kWh in France, 1706 kWh in South America, 1118 kWh in Tunisia or 796 kWh in Algeria. Something to shake the good ecological conscience of lovers of persistent virtual universes.

http://www.20minutes.fr/articles/2007/0 ... e-reel.php
Source (in English): http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/ ... onsume.php

[Polo]

It's very interesting for info, BUT I think it's dangerous; I don't play these games at all (although I will start playing S0S21, a "green" game). Indeed it is by these remarks that ecology scares because of the "return to the age of the caves"!
This is why I doubt the usefulness of these figures, but it deserves a debate.

[Christophe]

What is SOS21? I found nothing (unless it was humor?)

Otherwise I do not agree with you Polo ...

I find this very interesting as a debate.

Pkoi? Because the virtual worlds are only at the beginning of their growth ... In other words: in a few years it risks having more virtual avatars than very real Europeans on Earth. So if each of these virtual lives consumes as much if not more energy (very real it) than our real life and the problem deserves a sacred reflection!

On the other hand personally I am VERY far from consuming 7585 kwh per year !! (I am at 1200-1300 kwh and I already find it huge).

The figures given by this article take the overall consumption of the country compared to the inhabitant therefore industries included .... an avatar would already consume MORE than domestic electricity.
Mind-blowing ...

[Christophe]

ps: the estimate of 60 kWh / day still seems a bit exaggerated ...

[Polo]

We agree on one point: this debate is interesting!

I give you the address of this game: http://www.sos-21.com/.

Back to the debate: I find it interesting because I hesitate. Me it does not bother me but there is who spends a lot of time on it! So if someone tells them to stop, they may be able to take these people for crazy and not follow any of their advice. Which would be a shame.
Besides, I don't see why having an avatar consumes more; when we are on the computer we consume anyway whatsoever on forums interesting;) or on a game. In this case the video game also pollutes much more I think, in construction, in supply, in waste and in use (which consumes power when it happens in front of the computer) .
I'm not saying at all "let's take care of who pollutes the most" because I hate this argument which, for me, doesn't get anywhere. But I say watch out.

[Christophe]

Ok for the game I'll see that (I think it's a joke).

But pkoi still that damn "21" in all that is "green"?

Besides, I don't see why having an avatar consumes more; when we are on the computer we consume anyway whatsoever on forums interesting;) or on a game.

Yes but no because:

1) We generally play more than work or learn.
2) A pc consumes a lot more when it "works" and 3D games require a lot of calculations from the Graphics Card.

I could easily see the phenomenon with my pc thanks to the PM230: at rest 90W, under windows 120W and in game peaks at 190W with a good average at 180W ... and like 99% of games are now in 3D. ..

But I say let's be careful.

+1

[Christophe]

Well, the answer to 21 may be in the Teaser:
http://www.sos-21.com/teaser.html

21st century?

[Polo]

Yes here it is 21 for 21st century. The game was to be operational in February, I do not know if it is the case I will see.
Yeah okay so it consumes +. This instrument is not bad! The trick would be to limit, as usual. To consume with moderation! would this be the ccl?

[Jits]

Hello,

3D network games consume more because it requires more electrical resources from your own PC and often players also add fans to avoid overheating, and large power supplies, but also on remote servers, you need a lot of machinery which requires a lot of electrical energy, in particular coolers which allow a large number of players to find themselves in the same virtual universe.

That said, starting from this principle, browsing the Internet very simply should also be energy intensive, because if we take into account this kind of calculation, we would have to calculate how much electrical energy is used when we type a keyword on Google. Google has very many servers around the world, it is the first information store after the NSA ... and in my opinion it consumes a lot of energy to offer such a fast service when it is a huge information bottleneck ...

[Christophe]

Hello,

3D network games consume more because it requires more electrical resources from your own PC and often players also add fans to avoid overheating, and large power supplies, but also on remote servers, you need a lot of machinery which requires a lot of electrical energy, in particular coolers which allow a large number of players to find themselves in the same virtual universe.

I think the servers (even in the clean room) consume hundreds of times less than the PCs of the players.

Unless, of course, each server manages a very small number of players (10 to 20), which is unlikely ... For Second Life, I know nothing about it, but given the captures that I saw, I don't think that a player needs a lot of server resources ...

To get 60 kWh per day, the 000 players would have to play with a PC that consumes 12 W (huge) for 500 hours a day (huge too) ...

Let's say there are 100 players (weak) per server, or the need for 125 servers. Each server, all inclusive consumes say 300W (exaggerated also I think) then the daily consumption of the servers would be: 900 kWh ... very negligible compared to 60 ...

So I think that the announced figure of 60 kwh is largely exaggerated ... except obviously if we take into account other electrical costs ...

That said, starting from this principle, browsing the Internet very simply should also be energy intensive, because if we take into account this kind of calculation, we would have to calculate how much electrical energy is used when we type a keyword on Google. Google has very many servers around the world, it is the first information store after the NSA ... and in my opinion it consumes a lot of energy to offer such a fast service when it is a huge information bottleneck ...

Well speaking of Google I recently read a news that if Google passed with a black background it would save millions of tons of CO2 per year ... screens consuming more when they have to make white (personally I do not have never managed to see this with my econometre but hey ... it may be more the case with the Flat?)