Energy Efficiency of Laptops: Analysis and Alternatives

The report mainly aims at analysing the energy efficiency of the electrical appliances. The energy consuming appliance chosen here is the laptop. The laptop is used at offices, homes, shops, everywhere. Therefore throughout this report the different details of a laptop are analysed and studied. The cost of the device to the cost of energy is investigated. The amount of energy consumption by the appliance and how can it be made more energy efficient is also discussed.

1
Sustainable Systems

Life Cycle Assessment
Executive Summary
In this report the life cycle assessment is conducted for the service of paper clips. The two
alternative brands are selected which produce such clips. There are alternative categories of
these clips. The plastic clips and the steel clips are the two varieties which can be used for the
same purpose. However after an analysis of the entire life cycle which includes the
production to disposal stages of the product, it is seen that the steel clips are more effective in
use. It is feasible to use the steel paper clips as they do not harm the environment much. The
alternative can also be used as a feasible option perhaps some changes are made in its life
cycle, especially post use or during disposal.
Introduction
According to Hellweg and i Canals (2014), by the two different standards of the Life Cycle
Assessment as proposed by the Organization for Standardization (ISO), which are the ISO
14044 and the ISO 14040, the LCA can be defined as the inputs and outputs compilation and
their evaluation and the subsequent impact of the product on the environment during its life
cycle (Jolliet et.al. 2015). There are many uses of the LCA. During the life cycle of a product
there are many ways of improving its impact on the environment which can be done using the
LCA (Cabeza et.al. 2014). The setting of priority to the strategic planning in different
organisations and sectors can be done effectively using the LCA. The factors or the key
indicators which mark the environmental performance of a product are selected under LCA
(Kirchain Jr, Gregory and Olivetti 2017). The different products get their eco labelling from
the LCA. In this report the service chosen is the steel paper clips. The two brands which
produce such steel paper clips are Southington Tool & Manufacturing Corp. (STMC) and the

Goal and Scope
Definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment
Interpretation
Arthur I. Platt Company. These two companies are providing the same service. In the
flowchart given the procedure which is to be followed for conducting the LCA is illustrated.
Figure 1: LCA Flowchart
LCA
The complete assessment of the system environment starting from energy supply to its waste
management is made a part of the LCA (Mills et.al. 2014). There are different types of clips
like steel paper clips to the plastic paper clips.
Estimated weight
The stainless steel paper clips are unexpectedly lighter than the plastic paper clips.
Type Weight
Plastic Paper Clips 0.5 grams
Steel Paper Clips 0.45 grams
Functional unit

Galvanizing of Steel Wire
Steep Crafting
Wire Designing
Paper clips cutting
Packaging and boxing of the clips
The functional unit in case of a paper clip is its holding and binding capacity in terms of
duration of shelf life or the time for which it can function.
Balanced Material Flow
Steel Paper Clip
Manufacturing process of the steel paper clip comprises of the following process described in
the flowchart below:
Plastic Paper Clip
Manufacturing process of the plastic paper clip comprises of the following process described
in the flowchart below:

Procurement of plastic raw material
Melting and Crafting of plastic
Clip Designing
Paper clips cutting
Packaging and boxing of the clips
Impact analysis
The use of stainless steel paper clips is better than the use of the plastic paper clips because
the former has lesser adverse effect on the environment than the latter which are non-
biodegradable in nature and cause harm to the environment unless disposed of well (Plevin,
Delucchi and Creutzig 2014).
Alternative
LCA takes many aspects into account while making a choice between two alternatives. The
two alternatives available here are the plastic paper clips and the stainless steel paper clips.
The different aspects which are analysed under the LCA are the monetary values of the
product, the time duration involved in making the products, the social impact of the
manufacturing process, the environmental impact, the performance outcome, etc. In this case
when the two alternatives are analysed under the LCA it is seen that not much difference
exists between the two. The major area of difference and the reason of choosing the stainless

steel clips over the plastic clips is that the former does not cause much environmental
pollution which is caused by the latter post disposal and while manufacturing.
Environmental impact
There are different stages in the LCA which studies and analyses the environmental impact of
the two alternatives. The first step is that of cradle to grave which analyses the production of
the energy chain and the material. The different stages throughout the production process
starting from extraction of the raw materials to the transportation of the materials, etc. are
investigated. This entire process is incorporated into the life treatment of the product (Plevin,
Delucchi and Creutzig 2014). The second phase is that of cradle to gate. In this phase the
study is limited to the extraction of the materials to its transportation till the gate of the
factory. The phase which comes next is that of gate to grave which is again limited to the
processes taking place after the production is over. After leaving the factory what impact the
product causes on the environment is studied under his phase. Finally the last phase of gate
to gate refers to the production phase itself. This mainly refers to the single step of
production.
Hot Spot Identification
The hot spot identification for this case study suggests that the use of the stainless steel paper
clips is best. This has environmental advantage as the material used here is steel. Steel is a
non-toxic material. This input does not even cause harm to the environment when they are
disposed of after their use. This process has many safety measures which are underlying the
process of manufacture and use of the stainless steel paper clips.
On the other hand, the usage of plastic paper clips would not involve the complications of
metal mining or metal destructions, yet, it would act as a harmful substance for the

environment. Thus over the alternative of plastic paper clips it is environmentally
advantageous to use stainless steel paper clips.
Feasible option
Considering the different phases under the LCA which determines the environmental impact
of a commodity, here the stainless steel paper clips and the plastic paper clips, it is seen that
the first alternative is the best one. The first option creates less environmental hazard and so
the implementation and use of the stainless steel paper clips is most effective.
Remedial measures
Now in case the preference is for the plastic paper clips, there are chances of improvement in
this option or alternative as well. The plastic paper clips do not pose much problem during
their life time (Hertwich et.al. 2015). The usage phase of these clips does not create
environmental hazard. The main problem with the plastic clips is after their life time. When
the plastic paper clips lose their capacity to hold or bind and they become obsolete or misfit
for use, they are throw away. However, the plastic clips are not degradable. Plastic is a non-
biodegradable material and so it cannot be simply discarded after use. These clips need to be
recycled or disposed off in a proper way so that it does not contaminate the soil and water
when disposed without proper measures (Pargana et.al. 2014).
Implementation
Therefore after a proper and planned disposal method is selected for the plastic paper clips
they can also be used as an alternative to the steel paper clips. The life cycle assessment of
the paper clips leaves us with the option of steel clips for usage in the present settings.

References
Cabeza, L.F., Rincón, L., Vilariño, V., Pérez, G. and Castell, A., 2014. Life cycle assessment
(LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A
review. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 29, pp.394-416.
Hellweg, S. and i Canals, L.M., 2014. Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in
life cycle assessment. Science, 344(6188), pp.1109-1113.
Hertwich, E.G., Gibon, T., Bouman, E.A., Arvesen, A., Suh, S., Heath, G.A., Bergesen, J.D.,
Ramirez, A., Vega, M.I. and Shi, L., 2015. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-
supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon
technologies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(20), pp.6277-6282.
Jolliet, O., Saadé-Sbeih, M., Shaked, S., Jolliet, A. and Crettaz, P., 2015. Environmental life
cycle assessment. CRC Press.
Kirchain Jr, R.E., Gregory, J.R. and Olivetti, E.A., 2017. Environmental life-cycle
assessment. Nature materials, 16(7), p.693.
Mills, N., Pearce, P., Farrow, J., Thorpe, R.B. and Kirkby, N.F., 2014. Environmental &
economic life cycle assessment of current & future sewage sludge to energy
technologies. Waste management, 34(1), pp.185-195.
Pargana, N., Pinheiro, M.D., Silvestre, J.D. and de Brito, J., 2014. Comparative
environmental life cycle assessment of thermal insulation materials of buildings. Energy and
Buildings, 82, pp.466-481.

Plevin, R.J., Delucchi, M.A. and Creutzig, F., 2014. Using attributional life cycle assessment
to estimate climate‐change mitigation benefits misleads policy makers. Journal of Industrial
Ecology, 18(1), pp.73-83
Appendix
Material Flow Diagram under LCA
Steel Paper Clips Assessment Diagram

Energy Frequency
Executive Summary
The report mainly aims at analysing the energy efficiency of the electrical appliances. The
energy consuming appliance chosen here is the laptop. The laptop is used at offices, homes,
shops, everywhere. Therefore throughout this report the different details of a laptop are
analysed and studied. The cost of the device to the cost of energy is investigated. The amount
of energy consumption by the appliance and how can it be made more energy efficient is also
discussed.
Introduction
Energy efficiency refers to the total energy percentage which is used as an input in any
equipment or a machine that is being used in useful task and this must not be misused
(Björnson,et.al, 2014). Optimal use of the energy is referred to as efficient use of energy. In
our homes, offices, shops, etc. we see many appliances which use energy as an input for
working. However these appliances at many times consume a lot of extra energy which is
misused in the process (Budzisz, et.al, 2014). The main goal of energy efficiency is to
minimise the misuse of energy and decrease the amount of energy consumed. There are many
ways for reducing the use of energy in different places. The different areas where the
appliances are being used can be insulated for better energy efficiency (Gillingham and
Palmer, 2014). In the office where we work we see many appliances being used, most of
which use electricity to run. Among these appliances the most widely used is the laptop. For
all the official works we use the laptop which consumes a lot of energy. In this report the
energy efficiency and use of energy in a laptop will be analysed.

Energy use
In the laptop almost 70 to 80 per cent of the energy or power is consumed by the CPU. The
other parts in a laptop do not use much energy. The electricity needed for the other
components in a laptop to run other than the CPU is very minimal. Therefore, making an
overall estimation a laptop consumes 20 Watts to 50 Watts of energy, i.e. electricity
(Mallaburn and Eyre, 2014). The laptop can be used in an energy efficient manner as well.
Through the power saving modes the electricity usage in the laptop can be cut down.
Alternatives
An alternative of a laptop is the desktop which is still used in many offices. The energy
consumption in a desktop is around 60 Watts to 200 Watts. In this case it can be seen that the
alternative to a laptop, i.e. the desktop is more energy consuming than a laptop. Thus it is
always preferable to use a laptop in place of a desktop as much as possible.
Efficiency
In terms of energy efficiency, the laptops are much energy efficient (Oro, et.al, 2015).
Laptops are using almost 80 per cent less energy than their alternative appliances. The
laptops have a power efficiency of around 20 per cent more when they run on the adapter
power of the AC than the battery power usage.
Usage
After using a laptop for around one hour, the energy or electricity usage is almost of 12 Wh.
This is equivalent to 83 hours of energy consumption per kWh. The cost of using a laptop at
an average is around 12 c/kWh. The laptop can run for almost 651 hours with an investment
of $ 1 on the electricity. This suggests that the laptop is not very expensive in its energy cost.
The cost of a laptop is little higher than its alternative, desktop. The desktops are cheaper than
the laptops. The laptops come within a range of $ 500 to $ 1000.

The energy which is used in a laptop is electricity. This usage has many stages to it. The
manufacturing of the device, its installation, the decommissioning the device, its disposal,
etc. all have some environmental impact. The use of electricity in a laptop may cause many
forms of adversities to the environment (Lambert, Lannoo and Pickavet, 2014). The
production of the laptop uses rare earth materials which are harmful to mankind and the
environment as it emits the toxic and harmful dioxin. The use of a laptop also has some
carbon foot prints which are harmful for the environment. The disposal of the laptops can
cause contamination of land and water, wherever they are disposed off without proper means.
Organizations in QLD
For purchased electricity QLD, the emission conversion factor into tonnes is 0.79 in kWh.
The Energy Efficiency Council is a very famous organisation in Australia. This is mainly a
not for profit association with its members. The main objective of forming and running this
council is taking some cost effective and energy efficient measures across Australia (Rault,
Bouabdallah and Challal, 2014). The use of a laptop does not consume much energy.
However its disposal is un-eco-friendly. Thus the council tries to reduce the carbon residues
and the toxic emissions of a laptop.
Opportunities to decrease energy consumption
The laptops can be made more energy efficient. The use of a laptop is very common and it is
a part of the work life today which cannot be replaced. Therefore means are taken to improve
its energy efficiency.
Timer switches:

energy can be saved by using timer switches for a laptop. The timer switches will help to
turn off the laptop automatically after preset time duration. This is very useful because most
of the people leave the laptop on even when not in use.
Power saving mode:
The other way of making laptops energy efficient is through the use of power saving modes.
When the laptop is used under power saving mode it saves electricity and reduces the energy
use.
Cost benefit analysis
AC power adapter instead of power battery:
The use of alternative fuel, i.e. the AC power adapter over the battery power is a way of
improving energy efficiency of a laptop (Orgerie, Assuncao and Lefevre, 2014). Timer
switches:
The timer switches are very effective to save the energy when the laptop is not being used.
Power saving mode:
The power saving mode is another option used for the same purpose. These have a minimal
amount of installation and implementation cost while its benefits are huge.
Best Option
The best alternative among these three options is the use of power saving mode. This is just
an in-built mode in the laptop has incurs no additional cost. Thus in terms of cost it is most
effective and for the environment it is useful as it saves energy.

Reference List
Björnson, E., Hoydis, J., Kountouris, M. and Debbah, M., 2014, ‘Massive MIMO systems
with non-ideal hardware: Energy efficiency, estimation, and capacity limits, IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 60,no. 11, pp.7112-7139.
Budzisz, Ł., Ganji, F., Rizzo, G., Marsan, M.A., Meo, M., Zhang, Y., Koutitas, G., Tassiulas,
L., Lambert, S., Lannoo, B. and Pickavet, M., 2014, ‘Dynamic resource provisioning for
energy efficiency in wireless access networks: A survey and an outlook’, IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 4, pp.2259-2285.
Gillingham, K. and Palmer, K., 2014, ‘Bridging the energy efficiency gap: Policy insights
from economic theory and empirical evidence’, Review of Environmental Economics and
Policy, vol. 8, no. 1, pp.18-38.
Mallaburn, P.S. and Eyre, N., 2014, ‘Lessons from energy efficiency policy and
programmesin the UK from 1973 to 2013’, Energy Efficiency, vol 7, no.1, pp.23-41.
Orgerie, A.C., Assuncao, M.D.D. and Lefevre, L., 2014, ‘A survey on techniques for
improving the energy efficiency of large-scale distributed systems’, ACM Computing Surveys
(CSUR), vol. 46, no. 4, p.47.
Oró, E., Depoorter, V., Garcia, A. and Salom, J., 2015, ‘Energy efficiency and renewable
energy integration in data centres. Strategies and modelling review’, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 42, pp.429-445.
Rault, T., Bouabdallah, A. and Challal, Y., 2014, ‘Energy efficiency in wireless sensor
networks: A top-down survey’, Computer Networks, vol. 67, pp.104-122.

Zeng, Y., Pathak, P.H. and Mohapatra, P., 2014, June, ‘A first look at 802.11 ac in action:
Energy efficiency and interference characterization’, In Networking Conference, pp. 1-9