To explain Energy to non-scientists you could try Cambridge University physics professor David Mackay, whose free PDF ebook is very readable and easy to grasp.(www.withouthotair.com).
My house uses 13-20kWh daily, the computing baseload is about 300W (8kWH/day) so ditching the server and desktops and going exclusively on-line would save 30-50% of our electricity bill.
Natch, I can't run those CAD and EDA tools on an iphone, but a laptop is fine and doesn't run all the time.
BTW its funny in a wry way to see the fat boys finally noticing and indeed courting the Cinderella of efficiency, after decades ignoring all common-sense protest in the name of market forces...
Could frugality ever be fashionable?
Quote: "Simply put, we have to initiate change and rethink Moore’s Law to include the long-ignored fourth dimension of efficiency."
AMD championed multi-core processing over 10 years ago, driven by power density issues, among other things. Intel reached the same barrier, as power and energy densities went higher than electric lamps, skillets, and rocket nozzles. While performance is still the main metric used to judge processors, reaching even higher performance was achievable only by spreading out the power consumption across the die, and capping the power density. Ultimately, this is MIPS per Watt.
ARM architecture is clearly showing high efficiencies, but Intel architecture remains the choice for high-performance. More performance means more functionality. People do low-power when their needs have been met first, or there is a physical or monetary constraint. In low-cost applications, ARM is already proving this.
The USERS of computing devices choose if they want performance or low power or low cost. If Marvell can deliver the best combination of all three, the world will beat a path to their door -- or so the saying goes...
Let's use Super DST (Daylight Savings Time) to turn off all the stadium lighting. Set our clocks ahead by twelve hours. We work at night where the office buildings use less HVAC energy and the same lighting energy as during the day. All sports would then be played during the day where no stadium lighting would be required. As a bonus, we would be in the same Time Zone as China making the semiconductor business even more efficient. A true win-win-win.
It will take the government to make it happen - where can that go wrong? :)
I wonder what is the end-limit of Moore's so called 4th D. power efficiency space where we use semi conduction abilty of such metals to act as switch which is basically energy consuming process. Perhaps we might be in need of switching to other technical solutions where we can control circuits with cold-electronics. Not?
@prbhakar_deosthali, I agree, there is lots of other way of saving the energy...but we need a mechanism to hae them implemented and incentives to do so...how exactly would you shut down night sport activities? government regulations? I think the only real mechanism is energy costs, let energy be more expensive and people will make some behavioral modifications...as for now energy is too cheap, my electricity bill is $40 a month, to little to bother saving! Kris
I think more energy can be saved by building Environment friendly buildings that use more natural light and ventilation than those Air conditioning plants and artificial lighting. More energy can be saved by reducing those night sports activities where millions of units are consumed for those flood-lit football, rugby and cricket stadiums, more energy can be saved by reducing the working hours of those heavily lit shopping malls . Compared to all these energy-guzzlers I think all that energy consumed that electronics will be a minuscule part of the world's energy consumption.
Moore's law survives because it benefits consumers while also benefiting producers through economies of scale. Efficiency as defined in this article as power consumption is not always a perceived benefit to consumers. It works in the context of mobile devices because it correlates directly to functional use. But to wall powered devices there is no perceived benefit because power is cheap and there is no convenience premium to be had for a lower power solution. While noble, until the market forces shift driven by the need to reduce the power of the plug-in computer, it's not going to go anywhere. Why would someone pay for an efficiency factor that does not benefit them?
An understanding of energy versus its rate of transfer/consumption is fundamental to properly characterizing the World's energy problems and engineering the right solutions. Without the right scientific/engineering foundation, we will keep making mistakes that waste our resources and create new problems rather than solve existing ones.
I think you can correlate Moore's law to other things that also increase exponentially, such as: Earth population, monetary debt, number of biological species(yes, evolution is exponential), communications/the internet, probably some things in economics, actually entropy itself is increasing exponentially because, probably, of a law of the universe or something far greater than human society anyway. We can barely understand things like global warming(which by the way doesn`t exist - it`s just sun activity) let alone control it. I agree with the OP in some way but I think we cannot control it, it`s just the way nature works.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.