Remote racing and B-spec environmentally wrong?

[squadjot]

Hi, i'm having my Ps3 running 24/7 theese days.. and i can't stop feeling a bit bad..thinking about how much energy is consumed by the hundreds of thousands PS3 runnning 24-7.

First with B-spec endurance races..and now even more power consuming remote racing..more power consuming because there must be some servers pulling all this data.. and CPU usage is pretty equal Kilowatt usage...so

And what do we get from it?.. credits?

Thoughts?

 

[TB]

Which is worse, from strictly a power consumption standpoint - six people separately running A or B-Spec races to make money for vehicles or one running remote races for all six?

FYI - Based on my estimate, it costs approximately $6USD for the PS3 to run for 19 days.

 

[squadjot]

Ok, i don't care about how much it cost me.. i'm thinking about the whole concept, that makes you have your PS3 turned on 24/7

Yes, remote racing is racing for six others.. BUT, in the real world the "six others" are most like ALSO running remote races, during work/school.

 

[McClarenDesign]

Because hopefully, it's my PS3 that breaks the camels back and sends the planet into it's massive apocalypse.

Your welcome.

 

[squadjot]

Because hopefully, it's my PS3 that breaks the camels back and sends the planet into it's massive apocalypse.

Your welcome.

LOL, well it's probably bound to happen anyways.. remote racing or not

 

[the_greeze]

Whoo apocalypse!

Oh, wait...

 

[johnboy_1975]

Hi, i'm having my Ps3 running 24/7 theese days.. and i can't stop feeling a bit bad..thinking about how much energy is consumed by the hundreds of thousands PS3 runnning 24-7.

First with B-spec endurance races..and now even more power consuming remote racing..more power consuming because there must be some servers pulling all this data.. and CPU usage is pretty equal Kilowatt usage...so

And what do we get from it?.. credits?

Thoughts?

I have thought about this too. From an enviromental point of view it's certainly not good - my ps3 has probably had more usage during the past 3 months than during the past 3 years.

 

[snowxdadx3]

Hi, i'm having my Ps3 running 24/7 theese days.. and i can't stop feeling a bit bad..thinking about how much energy is consumed by the hundreds of thousands PS3 runnning 24-7.

First with B-spec endurance races..and now even more power consuming remote racing..more power consuming because there must be some servers pulling all this data.. and CPU usage is pretty equal Kilowatt usage...so

And what do we get from it?.. credits?

Thoughts?

Really? and you're on here wasting energy that i could use to remote race

 

[Vince_Fiero]

Agree with the thread topic.

But: having a PS3 is bad already, being on forums is bad, ....

Flying long distance is still a lot worse I believe, something I avoided when I was alone (I like to drive myself ), but which does not go together with my job and partners requirements sometimes.

 

[Cad-Monkey79]

Sell everything you own and go live in a cave.

Problem solved.👍

My work here is done

 

[dannyg77]

Because hopefully, it's my PS3 that breaks the camels back and sends the planet into it's massive apocalypse.

Your welcome.

Spoken like a person who's done countless hours of critical thinking. It's just this kind of approach to life that breaks backs.

Flying long distance is still a lot worse I believe, something I avoided when I was alone (I like to drive myself

So if I understand you, flying from point A to point B is worse than driving yourself from point A to point B... Really? Are you sure? One airplane, say 200 people all sharing the fuel burden versus one person's gasoline use? You honestly can't see that you're arguing against the concept of mass transportation? Mind you, I love driving too. MUCH more than flying. But that doesn't make it better for the environment.

 

[HOODFIELD]

In reality we can find a lot more things "environmentally wrong" in society. No one said you have to remote race. You could run a Dream Car B-Spec championship and have more money then you make in a day remote racing.

 

[Vince_Fiero]

So if I understand you, flying from point A to point B is worse than driving yourself from point A to point B... Really? Are you sure? One airplane, say 200 people all sharing the fuel burden versus one person's gasoline use? You honestly can't see that you're arguing against the concept of mass transportation? Mind you, I love driving too. MUCH more than flying. But that doesn't make it better for the environment.

Nope, flying from Paris to New York (5,832 kilometers) is worse then driving from Spa-Francorchamps to the Nuerburgring (106km).

Flying is bad since the effort of going up does not seem to make much sense, but on long distance taking 4 weeks on a boat iso flying 10h seems to be nonsense as well.

There is definitely an influence on the environmental impact that when I drive myself I limit the distance. IMHO it is just an excuse I use to justify that I still love driving cars and motorcycles on tracks that can be avoided.

I found an interesting article on the long distance travel (it seems that traveling with fuel for 200 people is the issue)

 

[Rosebudteg]

I've thought about this as well. And here is what I've came up with. I leave my PS3 on for nearly 24 hours a day now due to remote racing. While I do this I'm out working or enjoying my family or anything other than not grinding B-Spec Bob.

To that end, I am making the world a slightly better place by doing that which betters either my family, the world in general or myself. And that is worth more than the couple watts of electricity I could save by grinding by myself.

It's worth more to me, obviously, and it ends up being worth more to you as well. How? Well, if I do better at my job (because of more sleep, better family time, whatever) you indirectly benefit from the increased quality of my work. When I spend time with my children, the could grow up to be better balanced and possibly smarter (if I was teaching them something instead of just playing tickle or a board game or something).

 

[TB]

Nope, flying from Paris to New York (5,832 kilometers) is worse then driving from Spa-Francorchamps to the Nuerburgring (106km).

These area not truly comparable as the distance traveled is 55 times further flying. The only way to compare them is to use the same distance.

I found an interesting article on the long distance travel (it seems that traveling with fuel for 200 people is the issue)

Using this link as a basis, traveling 5000km creates roughly 700kg of CO2. Using this site, my 2005 Honda Pilot traveling the same 5000km would create 1,369.35kg of CO2.

And as I can only carry 8 passengers, not 200, we'd need 25 Pilots creating 34,233.75kg, or just shy of 49 times more CO2 than flying the same number of people the same distance.

 

[FoolKiller]

The first year I had my PS3 it was on 24/7 for nearly a year running Folding@Home. It drains less power now that I only leave it on during B-Spec and Remote Racing.

But is it worse than A-Spec? I mean, when I A-Spec not only is my PS3 on, but so is my DFP, TV and surround sound system, and I am playing for anywhere from 2-6 hours at a time. I've played as much as 6-8 hours before. And I am likely to have lights on. And I use those horribly inefficient, yet proper lighting incandescent bulbs. GE Reveal bulbs to be precise. And assuming my wife and I were lazy, which is highly likely, then bathroom and kitchen lights are still on as well.

But in the end does it matter? I mean, at least this has a purpose and is better than me leaving my satellite receiver on, all my electronics in standby mode, chargers still plugged in, and I can't remember the last time I turned my desktop PC or laptop off instead of standby mode. And I don't recycle.

But does any of that compare to the 40 mile one-way, 80 mile round-trip drive I make to work everyday?


Honestly, the only way I can see this mattering is if you have green guilt to such a degree that you over-analyze every tiny thing you do. I am not burdened by such things.

But hey, if you really think it is a problem just buy some green credits from Al Gore.

 

[Minty]

Maybe now is a bad time to mention that I have my B-Spec driver running the Suzuka Endruance while playing GTA4 on my Xbox while using GTPlanet on my laptop.
Seriously though, for all the time I spend on GT5 B-spec, I spend an equal amount of time finding ways to save energy.

Even with the massive amount of PS3's running constantly right now because of this game, it probably makes up such a minuscule amount of the worlds energy consumption that no one outside the game will ever notice a difference. Especially if you live somewhere using a renewable energy source, or Nuclear. I wouldn't fell nearly as guilty as I do for all of the wasted energy if it weren't for the Coal Plant that's only a few miles away.



Also, as far as the whole plane thing; what he said:

These area not truly comparable as the distance traveled is 55 times further flying. The only way to compare them is to use the same distance.

Using this link as a basis, traveling 5000km creates roughly 700kg of CO2. Using this site, my 2005 Honda Pilot traveling the same 5000km would create 1,369.35kg of CO2.

And as I can only carry 8 passengers, not 200, we'd need 25 Pilots creating 34,233.75kg, or just shy of 49 times more CO2 than flying the same number of people the same distance.

 

[dannyg77]

Nope, flying from Paris to New York (5,832 kilometers) is worse then driving from Spa-Francorchamps to the Nuerburgring (106km).

You argue like American politicians. Well done.

 

[HaylRayzor]

I drive a 2-ton car with a 6-liter V8.

I ride a Harley with a 1.7 liter V-twin.

I run my PS3 24/7.

And the "environment" is not one bit better or worse for it.

 

[squadjot]

I drive a 2-ton car with a 6-liter V8.

I ride a Harley with a 1.7 liter V-twin.

I run my PS3 24/7.

And the "environment" is not one bit better or worse for it.

That's definately not true.

 

[snowxdadx3]

I drive a 2-ton car with a 6-liter V8.

I ride a Harley with a 1.7 liter V-twin.

I run my PS3 24/7.

And the "environment" is not one bit better or worse for it.

I agree. My diesel Excusion is more "environmentally friendly" than an ELECTRIC Toyota Prius. Don't believe me? I present the following:


http://blog.leasetrader.com/archive...ient-and-Environmentally-Friendly-than-a.aspx

 

[HOODFIELD]

^^ Interesting article.

For anyone who actually measures how much power their PS3 is consuming, what is it comparable too? What is the power consumption of Fat vs. Slim. Where's the data? From what I've read (including TB's math) doesn't seem PS3 is the "energy hog" everyone is making it out to be.

 

[Counter_Z23]

I think the Slim uses less power than the Fat.

This means that it will produce less heat and so is less likely to overheat and get a YLOD.

 

[TB]

What is the power consumption of Fat vs. Slim. Where's the data?

When in doubt, check the wiki.

For anyone who actually measures how much power their PS3 is consuming, what is it comparable too?

Instead of giving you a bunch of random examples, take a look at this site (one example of thousands, I'm sure).

 

[dannyg77]

I drive a 2-ton car with a 6-liter V8.

I ride a Harley with a 1.7 liter V-twin.

I run my PS3 24/7.

And the "environment" is not one bit better or worse for it.

I would love for you to support your claim with some facts and arguments. It will be quite entertaining, I am sure.

 

[squadjot]

I agree. My diesel Excusion is more "environmentally friendly" than an ELECTRIC Toyota Prius. Don't believe me? I present the following:


http://blog.leasetrader.com/archive...ient-and-Environmentally-Friendly-than-a.aspx

Ok a bit surprised, but the main issue with that, is that oil is a finite resource..some day you wont have the choice because we will simply run out of oil.. and oh..how many things can you come up with, that does not consist- OR require OIL to be produced?.. not many.. =)

We as b-speccers, are far from the worst sinners..totally agree, much worse harmfull things is going on.. again, it's purely the concept that "bothers" me.. what i do, and what i really get from it.

In my case i am having a computer + PS3 on 24/7 + Load PD servers, to be able to run a videogame that plays itself!, and what do i really get from it?.. the enjoyment of seeing that now i've made a million more credits since yesterday..so i can buy..more virtual cars?..I have to ask myself..is it worth it?, atm the red guy at left shoulder has the overtake ^_^

I think.. if there was laws for these things,.. if this game concept had to go through some environmental overseers board, their computer would say "no" =P

Anyways, there's multiple layers of environmental impacts of buying/using a product.. Already at buying almost any product, 5 times more "waste" is being created than the actual product mass.. (production, packagin, transport etc etc) - thats before you even start using it.. an this is probably already much more harmfull, than us burning electricity.. Atleast electricity can be made environmetally correct!

As one said, i could just sell all i own, and move in a cave.. well ofc i don't want that, and i don't expect that from people neither .. and really, i don't blame any of you..cause i'm doing the same.. just wanted to hear if you had thought of it.

 

[HOODFIELD]

Instead of giving you a bunch of random examples, take a look at this site (one example of thousands, I'm sure).

Thanks TB, very interesting looks to me like leaving your computer on is worse for environment then leaving on your PS3.

 

[HaylRayzor]

I would love for you to support your claim with some facts and arguments. It will be quite entertaining, I am sure.

A single volcanic eruption belches more greenhouse gasses into the "environment" than every human being put together since the discovery of fire. Not to mention thousands of tons of sulpher dioxide (the cause of acid rain). And yet, somehow, miraculously, the "environment" is still here. (I use quotes because the meaning of the word in this context is somewhat different from it's actual meaning.)

The entirety of the global warming hoax has been absolutely debunked. Any who still believe it are engaged in something more akin to religion than science. And I know I waste my time arguing religion with "true believers". Closed minds can't be changed.

 

[tezster]

Closed minds can't be changed.

Works both ways.

 

[F18]

Works both ways.

But one of the ways has accepted science backing up its every claim, the other has a fictional book picked over and revised for centuries to fit the "message" its leaders want to portray.