Quote:
What I do know is, my "energy conservation" is nullified by so many inefficient and wasteful systems out there. And my energy waste is similarly dwarfed by them. Makes me wonder what is the power consumption of the entire WCG (or any other distro computing project)? Maybe we should opt for having a super computer do it slower but with less total (project life) power consumption.

The way I see it, the old saying "Think globally, act locally" applies.
This Slashdot topic from a couple of days ago relates the massive engergy savings possible if only everyone switched out their normal incandescent bulbs for fluorenscents. (Much arguing ensued, I'll let you read it and draw your own conclusions.)
The amount of *additional* power expended on the part of my PC while doing chores for WCG amounts to *maybe* 50W (I'm guessing conservatively high). I could easily offset this by replacing a few bulbs with the swirly fluorescents. Of course, this is my opinion.
As for the supercomputer question, WCG answers this by mentioning the high cost of supercomputing support and infrastructure. Many grid-possible projects just don't get the funding required for supercomputing. For the 'grid-vs-supercomputer' argument, they're mostly citing usage-based cost issues, not power-based cost issues.
_________________________
10101311 (20GB- backup empeg)
10101466 (2x60GB, Eutronix/GreenLights Blue) (Stolen!)