Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

i wrote this.

stilleto

ELITE MENTOR
EF VIP
today. i know, it's long, and probably boring as hell to most people. and for all i know, it doesn't make an ounce of sense, since my eyes glazed over hours ago and I have a bottle of black cherry vodka i've been drinking.

if anyone is bored, please read it and tell me what you think. I crossed off a company name, so i'm not associated with it here. it took me all friggin day to write it, other than when i was out shopping, having lunch, and having sex.



The Green Misconception

As the United States falls behind in the race to be Green, a common misconception remains that environmentally friendly options involve tremendous capital and a long payback period. Actually, plenty of green initiatives’ payback periods are three years or less, while some are even immediate. Large capital expenditures such as cooling equipment aren’t always necessary; simple approaches, such as obtaining high-efficiency lamps with reduced mercury content and alternative suggestions for custodial and other supplies are both immediate waste and cost reductions. Re-using your companies IT assets rather than destroying them provides an immediate return on investment (ROI), while saving recycling resources and landfill real estate.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has states that in 2005, used or unwanted electronics amounted to approximately 1.9 to 2.2 million tons. Of that, about 1.5 to 1.9 million tons were primarily discarded in landfills, and only 345,000 to 379,000 tons were recycled. Replacing a working PC with a new one generally means a large consumption of resources for the new machine and, unless you recycle your PC, a landfill problem at the other end. Recyclers recover more than 100 million pounds of materials from electronics each year (EPA).

The Plug-In To eCycling Campaign is one of many new efforts under EPA's Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) which seeks to increase the national recycling rate to 35 percent, among other goals. The campaign aims to get the word out about opportunities to reuse and recycle your old computers, TVs, and cell phones, and to build momentum for even more reuse and recycling programs.

“Your assets are fully depreciated and do not have any market value.”
“No one will buy your assets, so please be advised that there will be a cost to dispose of them responsibly.”

These, and other myths have been perpetuated upon corporations and government agencies as the e-waste from these companies and government agencies grow year by year. The only organization that is benefiting from these and similar statements are the recycling companies, and they may not always be truthful to their clients regarding the final disposition of their assets.

Adding to the misconception is the promotion of new products as green replacements for existing technology. For example, the concept of replacing a current PC with another more energy-friendly model. According to a June 2008 Kiplinger report, a new PC for a knowledge worker costs roughly $500. How much energy would it have to save for you to actually save money on it? At 10 cents a kWh, it would take 5000 kWh. Most energy-efficient $500 PCs today save at most 80 watts per hour compared with their forebears, about one-twelfth of a kWh. Hence, it would take 60,000 hours to recognize any savings on power consumption alone, or almost seven years. That is far longer than the average life of a PC. The resale market residual value of commercial grade IT equipment, which can be significant in many cases, can be used to offset the costs of new assets, fund additional hardware, software, or personnel costs.

With 80% of corporate America expecting to engage in green at least 16% of the time by next year, it’s a safe bet your peers and competitors are either doing likewise or about to. Environmental responsibility has emerged as an important consideration for corporations today. The IT sector is becoming aware of the environmental and financial impact of issues such as increased power consumption, data center cooling issues and e-waste from IT operations. Long term changes to the ecology and corporate finances obviously include improving data center efficiency but to see immediate change, the measured green benefits must translate into a precise ROI. This is perhaps the most important criteria for both long and short term. Green has to make sense economically, or it has to solve some other problem that trumps the ROI issue, such as data security. One US based company, XXX, has been a leader in the green and sustainable IT movement well before those descriptions became popular. By providing a service for companies to sell, or resell their IT equipment, corporations reap the benefits of the ROI, while keeping millions of computers out of the waste stream. The monetary benefits can be seen immediately, while the global advantages continue to accumulate.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has states that in 2005, used or unwanted electronics amounted to approximately 1.9 to 2.2 million tons. Of that, about 1.5 to 1.9 million tons were primarily discarded in landfills, and only 345,000 to 379,000 tons were recycled. Replacing a working PC with a new one generally means a large consumption of resources for the new machine and, unless you recycle your PC, a landfill problem at the other end. Recyclers recover more than 100 million pounds of materials from electronics each year (EPA).

In 1992, the U.S. EPA launched Energy Star, a voluntary labeling program which is designed to promote and recognize energy-efficiency in monitors, climate control equipment, and other technologies. This resulted in the widespread adoption of sleep mode among consumer electronics. The term "green computing" was probably coined shortly after the Energy Star program began; there are several USENET posts dating back to 1992 which use the term in this manner. Concurrently, the Swedish organization TCO Development launched the TCO Certification program to promote low magnetic and electrical emissions from CRT-based computer displays; this program was later expanded to include criteria on energy consumption, ergonomics, and the use of hazardous materials in construction. The Plug-In To eCycling Campaign is one of many new efforts under EPA's Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) which seeks to increase the national recycling rate to 35 percent, among other goals. The campaign aims to get the word out about opportunities to reuse and recycle your old computers, TVs, and cell phones, and to build momentum for even more reuse and recycling programs. The key to success lies in continually evaluating solutions, implementing, and reassessing.

With programs available such as the EPA’s Energy Star, RCC, and companies like XXX, corporations can enjoy the benefits of a green initiative, without any justification or qualification. Going green is no longer the burden it once was. It’s now an opportunity to do business responsibly, as well as profitably.
 
green equals utter dung for the most part

don't get me going on this issue

Save the planet! OLOLOL
 
ill read this at like 4 in the morning .. when im bored
 
The last two laptops I have canned I actually recycled. I am a good boy. I wonder if Stiletto will give me a candy?
 
well first of all, i'll give you all candy.

second, when you write an article, you often have to follow a certain direction. I"m writing this for a company that doesn't just recycle computers, but buys them from corporations and resells them. so even though it's for an IT magazine, it has to focus on one option for IT buyers.

i can't say "green is shit". I have to say, "green doesn't have to be shit...."
 
I like it. I think you've generated interest in what the company *XXX* does, objectively, and without proselytization on why the customer should go green or not.
 
BlueBird said:
I like it. I think you've generated interest in what the company *XXX* does, objectively, and without proselytization on why the customer should go green or not.


ah, thank you.
you hit the nail on the head with what my objective was.
 
stilleto said:
i see a typo!!!!!
"has states" instead of "has stated".
yes, in paragraph 2 and in paragraph 8.

also in paragraph 1, i think should be "re-using your COMPANY'S" instead of "re-using your companies"
 
Smurfy said:
yes, in paragraph 2 and in paragraph 8.

also in paragraph 1, i think should be "re-using your COMPANY'S" instead of "re-using your companies"

wtf. paragraph 2 is repeated verbatim in paragraph 8. there goes my friggin' word count.
 
Stilleto=my kinda gal. Talks about getting stoned, drinking, having sex....awesome.

I live in the middle of nowhere and have lots of trees that I take care of, im doing my fair share.
 
rsnoble-im-back said:
Stilleto=my kinda gal. Talks about getting stoned, drinking, having sex....awesome.

I live in the middle of nowhere and have lots of trees that I take care of, im doing my fair share.

i live in the middle of nowhere but I don't do shit for the trees. I did just buy flowers at the grocery store though.
 
I was going to type a long post to this but doing that and then clicking send would cause more energy use and would not be considered environmentally friendly.
 
Cardinal Slin said:
I was going to type a long post to this but doing that and then clicking send would cause more energy use and would not be considered environmentally friendly.

how would that have been any different from your short post that explains it?
 
Stefka said:
Second paragraph - has stated, not has states

thanks- i fixed that already and also figured out that there's a duplicate paragraph.

It has to be between 500-2000 words. It's 1000. that's all i can possibly do.
 
I wrote this:
"The problem with having sex with a blind person is that they cant see you"
 
Great article informative without being repetitive, I know very little about going green, however, I have been coming across alot of articles lately that point out the importance of environment and context in influencing behavior... after reading your article and the articles signifying the importance of environmental context's significance on influencing perception and behavior, makes me appreciate that you are pushing this issue forward. I had no idea that much waste was dumped into landfills in 2005 and so little was recycled. I'm glad Energy Star was established. Also, it is a good sign that the forward thinking company sets an example for others that going green can be done successfully. Well written article letto. Kinda reminds me how ignorant I am when it comes to the environment and the financial issues that are intertwined.
 
thank you so much. if anyone here can understand it, i'm happy. It's a very specific point i'm trying to make, so if i made it, i'm happy.
 
blueta2 said:
Great work
I just had a letter published but I would never post it. It would cause an uproar
But good work

who cares, its not like this board is populated with scientific and literary luminaries or anything.
 
Top Bottom