Is there a way of doing the maths to see which method of capturing ideas is more environmentally friendly - does digital use more energy?

[TimBourne]

Title: Is there a way of doing the maths to see which method of capturing ideas is more environmentally friendly - does digital use more energy? in terms of elctcity (electricity)

Thread 'summarizing what I took from the book "checklist manifesto" in appreciation of user @Wilson Ng'

Oct 4, 2024

I tried uploading an mp4 , sort of summarizing what I took from the book "checklist manifesto" in appreciation of user @Wilson Ng .

[https://www.facebook.com/timothy.bourner.3/videos/469809912747908/]


In conclusion actually felt as if wasn't able take that much from the book.

"it enumerated more on the idea of problem which I feel have reading information, being in period right now - where don't have next book on my list? '

• TimBourne
• Replies: 47
• Forum: PUBLIC: Discuss the GTD Methodology

Basically from previous thread where polifax - linked a video by productivity game.

Said something -
If you don’t want to use type of capturing digital tool, you can just use a note pad.
‘Which myself - and automatically I would think like everyone reading that - would be put off by doing so because immediately one would think - well theres negatives of not using digital- such as it creates physical clutter, or - digital is quicker for example.

But what do people think about this - does it actually use more resources from mother earth - of we use digital (because of the electricity from digital devices? ) is there a way being able to do the maths perhaps.

this also linked to other previous thread made about capturing ideas:

[https://forum.gettingthingsdone.com...deas-in-theory-for-health-productivity.18625/]

The idea of this threa steamed from my notes app 's less resources' cost of digital versus paper. - and wonder do people know if actual way to figure this out
Thread
Working out which method of capturing uses less resources- is there way figuring exactly cost of digital versus paper. ITM why not work on this "

STN?

 

[mcogilvie]

I taught a physics course for non-majors where we considered such questions. Like a lot of these kinds of questions, it’s hard to answer. You should allocate a fraction of the total energy used by a cell phone based on usage. However, different people have different usage patterns. Should we include the energy costs of manufacturing the cell phone. Most experts would probably say yes. Do we know these? Not well, but there are estimates. What about the energy cost of creating the software? And so on, and then we should do it all again for pen and paper. Intuitively I expect pen and paper to have a lower energy cost, but then what? Carry a paper binder and a cell phone because you can’t make phone calls with a paper binder? There are many ambiguous microeconomic questions people want to guide their behavior by, when in reality the related macroeconomic questions are easier to define and answer.

 

[TimBourne]

I taught a physics course for non-majors where we considered such questions

right that's surprising

. Like a lot of these kinds of questions, it’s hard to answer.

about working out the maths to do with cost?

You should allocate a fraction of the total energy used by a cell phone based on usage. However, different people have different usage patterns.

Right what are the different patterns? myself tim will normally charge my phone once a day

Should we include the energy costs of manufacturing the cell phone. Most experts would probably say yes. Do we know these? Not well, but there are estimates.

right your saying I should be thinking of this?

What about the energy cost of creating the software?

? *1

And so on, and then we should do it all again for pen and paper. Intuitively I expect pen and paper to have a lower energy cost, but then what? Carry a paper binder and a cell phone because you can’t make phone calls with a paper binder?

right - well I myself don't use ' calls on my phone much at all "

There are many ambiguous microeconomic questions people want to guide their behavior by, when in reality the related macroeconomic questions are easier to define and answer.

You are using very high technical English grammar here which I don't understand 100% completely says V

*1 - what do you mean when software - means the type of applications which are already digital on the device (these things don't take energy right, but the things which take energy are the physical hardware which the user decided whether turn or keep on for - amount of time he desires? "

STN

I have other background things I could write about '

 

[mcogilvie]

Sorry, let me give an example and then explain a little more. Suppose you are taking digital notes using software with AI (artificial intelligence) features. The AI software requires large amounts of energy to train before anyone can use it. It also may require your cell phone to communicate with a server which runs the AI software. This also takes energy.

The US government has an agency, the Energy Information Administration (eia.gov), which gathers, analyzes, and reports on overall US energy production and use. This enable us to see if US electricity use is going up or down, and even which part of the economy (consumers, industry, offices) is using how much. So we know the very big picture but not the details. Energy use is only part of overall environmental impact anyway.

 

[TimBourne]

Sorry, let me give an example and then explain a little more. Suppose you are taking digital notes using software with AI (artificial intelligence) features

'I didn't have that in mind creating this post - but was simply wandering with the circumstance of myself using apple phone, I don't actually know what are AI features?

. The AI software requires large amounts of energy to train before anyone can use it.

right training how to use AI software?

It also may require your cell phone to communicate with a server which runs the AI software. This also takes energy.

Yes cell phone takes energy
a server you mean like Wi-Fi?

The US government has an agency, the Energy Information Administration (eia.gov)

right

, which gathers, analyzes, and reports on overall US energy production and use. This enable us to see if US electricity use is going up or down, and even which part of the economy (consumers, industry, offices) is using how much.

right

So we know the very big picture but not the details. Energy use is only part of overall environmental impact anyway.

"very big picture but not the details." - your writing as if , with the idea ' were going down hill and can't do anything about it'
...

myself writing this thread maybe could convince others to try to better use or limit electricity and help mother earth literally? "

STN

 

[mcogilvie]

AI stands for Artificial Intelligence. It’s a very hot area of technology right now. Nvidia is the 2nd most valuable company on US stock markets because it makes hardware for AI. Apple, Google, Microsoft and Meta are all rushing to integrate AI into their software. AI software has to be “trained” to recognize patterns of speech or in pictures so it knows what to do.

 

[cfoley]

I think that the environmental impact of capturing will be dwarfed by the environmental impact of doing the projects that result.

As such, an efficient GTD system (including efficient capture) can lead to less waste overall. A striking example is that a well-organised errands list might result in fewer car trips to run those errands. I would imagine that it wouldn't take many such efficiency savings to outweigh the environmental impact of the GTD system in its entirety.

Therefore, I would propose that rather than trying to optimise components of a GTD system for environmental impact, larger environmental savings can be made by making efficient use of our GTD systems to run our lives and businesses less wastefully.

 

[TimBourne]

Right mi not sure you were able to answer all my questions above cos you were busy ?

AI stands for Artificial Intelligence. It’s a very hot area of technology right now.

Right yeah I've herd of it.

Nvidia is the 2nd most valuable company on US stock markets because it makes hardware for AI.

Right , don't think I've herd of Nvidia before, I'm in the UK .

Apple, Google, Microsoft and Meta are all rushing to integrate AI into their software.

Oh right - yeah I am familiar with the first three companies you mentioned in this sentence.

AI software has to be “trained” to recognize patterns of speech or in pictures so it knows what to do.

Right.

Right , person Mark Tassi says he knows that Google , is not the best company, actually corrupt in certain ways.

ERm how exactly does AI technology connect or relate to the topic of this post again I wonder?

STN?

 

[TimBourne]

I think that the environmental impact of capturing will be dwarfed by the environmental impact of doing the projects that result.

"environmental impact of capturing" your saying digitally?
That - its just best to be productive an not care about your eletcity electricity bill your saying?

As such, an efficient GTD system (including efficient capture) can lead to less waste overall.

Right I feel like I haven't been able to accomplish this yet personally '

A striking example is that a well-organised errands list might result in fewer car trips to run those errands.

I don't have this '

I would imagine that it wouldn't take many such efficiency savings to outweigh the environmental impact of the GTD system in its entirety.

OK
yeah you must be saying if an average person implements a GTD system it won't take much signficancye - basically won't take anything from "savings" - but that wasn't the topic of this post *1

Therefore, I would propose that rather than trying to optimise components of a GTD system for environmental impact, larger environmental savings can be made by making efficient use of our GTD systems to run our lives and businesses less wastefully.

Right - are you saying you basically think digital GTD is better?

*1 it was about comparing digital to a non-digital GTD - do you understand?
But myself in writing creating the post ( don't actually keep to an entirely none digital GTD system - (but the point of writing this post was to try to contemplate in theory (do you understand?)

And thought to myself - maybe it would also be possible to give some practical examples of equations or bills or maths (like how much digital house hold devices take up of bills was an idea after - I posted the first post of this thread) - but in hindsight now Im not sure this is worthwhile writing about says voice

STN

 

[cfoley]

"environmental impact of capturing" your saying digitally?
That - its just best to be productive an not care about your eletcity electricity bill your saying?

No and no. I did not comment on electricity bills.

OK
yeah you must be saying if an average person implements a GTD system it won't take much signficancye - basically won't take anything from "savings" - but that wasn't the topic of this post *1

Yes, that's more or less what I am saying.

Right - are you saying you basically think digital GTD is better?

No. I am saying it makes no practical difference.

 

[TimBourne]

No and no. I did not comment on electricity bills.

oh right'

Yes, that's more or less what I am saying.

Yes - I would like to think that is true'

No. I am saying it makes no practical difference.

Oh right - so that's the conclusion of this post in a nutshell ?

Or V says - is it not worth I give examples of how much certain house hold devices use energy to motivate other user humans to be more electricity conservative and help mother earth?

S