What can Gamers do to save energy?

[MrPopo]

I'd rather we focus on getting off this rock rather than halting the inevitable decay.

[harper]

I'd rather we focus on getting off this rock rather than halting the inevitable decay.

That statement made me think of this guy:

[pankakes123]

I only play a handheld on Earth Day.

[Cronozilla]

that doesnt have alot to do with video games, but anyway, a few car companies are looking into steam powered engines, cars in the 30s ran off of steam at 40 mph and some car companies plan on having naturaul/fossil fueled cars that the 2 engines alternated between in 2012.

Cars and other response:

Cars aren't the main issue. Power plants are. If you removed all vehicle emissions, we'd still have a very large problem on our hands. (Though if we're going to talk car technologies ... instead of switching to a NEW fossil fuel to get everyone to invest in, they should use the more efficient ones we have first, like diesel and use it as a stepping stone to straight electrical engines with many diverse ways in recharging. Then you focus on general power production which will charge everything.)

These problems are also way more imminent than cosmological events or even the potential life cycle of our planet itself. We're talking about something that can do irreparable damage in our lifetimes, not something that's going to be fixable or avoidable for another 200+ years.

It absolutely has to do with video games considering the thread is asking what you can do, as a gamer to help out on that day ... just because you're a gamer doesn't mean you'd have to do anything explicitly different than you should already be doing.

But, OK, there is one thing gamers can specifically do to help: get surge protectors that shut off power to your consoles when they're not being used. It's a fraction of energy used per year ... but it is a noticeable amount that gets eaten up by devices that aren't in use. Just because something's off, doesn't mean it's not using power, and consoles use up a lot.

Some hard realities on the matter:

But, honestly, most of the advancements need to be made on the political side of the spectrum. So while you can reduce all you like ... and you should ... we're encroaching on the threshold of how much more benefit we can get from that. It is purely a bandage to a large problem. They BOTH need to happen for any of this to even mean anything.

Earth Day, like Black History Month, actually detract more from the causes than help, because they also double as a way to dupe people into only doing something once a year instead of all the time and they firmly embed the issue as a "special issue that only needs passing involvement". Which is very far from what actually needs to happen.

I'm sorry if this is not what you wanted to hear or seems radical ... it's just the situation we're facing.

[Menegrothx]

I'd rather we focus on getting off this rock rather than halting the inevitable decay.

I think its more important to focus on the short term plan so we can focus on the space stuff later once we got shit under control on earth, rather than finding ourselves in a situation where we are depleted of natural resources AND technology/mankind isnt ready for space colonization yet. We still have a lot of time before sun burns out.
I'm not sure whether you talk of mankind's or this planet's inevitable decay, but I wouldn't say that mankind is doomed. I guess it depends on how much you have faith in humanity and it's willingness to succumb to authoritarianism and collectivism for the greater good of future generations.

[elmagicochrisg]

Eneloop rechargeable batteries with an MH-C9000 Powerex charger.

Bliss...

I'd rather we focus on getting off this rock rather than halting the inevitable decay.

That statement made me think of this guy:

So that's what smurfs look like under their hats...

[MrPopo]

I'd rather we focus on getting off this rock rather than halting the inevitable decay.

I think its more important to focus on the short term plan so we can focus on the space stuff later once we got shit under control on earth, rather than finding ourselves in a situation where we are depleted of natural resources AND technology/mankind isnt ready for space colonization yet. We still have a lot of time before sun burns out.
I'm not sure whether you talk of mankind's or this planet's inevitable decay, but I wouldn't say that mankind is doomed. I guess it depends on how much you have faith in humanity and it's willingness to succumb to authoritarianism and collectivism for the greater good of future generations.

I think mankind is far too selfish to actually clean up its act. If the concern is really that we're going to screw ourselves over then we're better off flinging ourselves to the four corners of the universe and persist that way. Don't forget that there is a fundamental environmental problem: people keep breeding faster than they die off. You can switch to clean energy and recycling and all that bullshit, but the population pressure is what's really going to do the damage. And the only solution to that which doesn't bring to mind thoughts of eugenics is space or the ocean, and the ocean has more technical problems than space.

[ninjainspandex]

the answer is simple create more wars = shrinks the population, dunno why all you enviromentalists are always so anti war...

[DinnerX]

I guess it depends on how much you have faith in humanity and it's willingness to succumb to authoritarianism and collectivism for the greater good of future generations.

Anything for the "greater good".

[Menegrothx]

Don't forget that there is a fundamental environmental problem: people keep breeding faster than they die off. You can switch to clean energy and recycling and all that bullshit, but the population pressure is what's really going to do the damage. And the only solution to that which doesn't bring to mind thoughts of eugenics is space or the ocean, and the ocean has more technical problems than space.

As if human population could not be controlled. The population is already shrinking in many industrialized nations, with out any help from the government. Educated people who live in a safe, stable society who have access to birth control methods simply don't breed like rabbits.
If you cut foreign and and most of immigration from third to first world countries and manage to reduce corruption and increase education and economic growth in third world countries, then the problem would solve itself. Lack of education, foreign aid, bad economy, low life expectancy and corruption are the main reasons why people are having so many children in third world countries. I'd count the influence of islam and catholic missionaries as lack of education in this case. Once global human population stabilizes and technology becomes more energy efficient and less dependant on depletable natural resources, we should focus on space.

I'm sure that once global overpopulation actually starts to affect the quality of life of the global elite, then you will start see sudden drops in the population. It's not like some dirt poor Indians and Africans with their great breeding super powers can defeat the people who own majority of worlds resources.

Anything for the "greater good".

Its a term you cant subjectively define, but I doubt most people have any trouble deciding which helps more people, and which is more important to the future of mankind
A) Spending 2 million dollars on a Bugatti Veyron
B) Spending 2 million dollars on building schools to children of third world countries

Like I said, some collectivism and authoritarianism might be in order if we want for the mankind to have a future. But things like misallocation of resources and harming other people with your choiches are part of individual freedom and pursuit of ones own happiness. The planet has limited resources, so we need to choose which is more important, upholding all the ideals of classical liberalism and 18th century philosophy as sacred, or admitting that maybe that pop star or sports player does not need that 35th sports car or that private jet when there is a world full of starving people out there and people who actually benefit society and mankind with their work have to struggle with bad salaries. But I am sure that is exactly the same thing as majority of 51% voting for the 49% to be their slaves, mob rule, racism, homophobia and socialism in the mind of some hardcore libertarian.

the answer is simple create more wars = shrinks the population, dunno why all you enviromentalists are always so anti war...

Are you serious?