Hey, while we're ignoring billions of pounds of plastic waste in the ocean and other crazy shit directly effecting the environment and human health, why don't we cut down on gamers. Those assholes are causing global warming, which could lead to the oceans rising, which would mean we would have billions of tons of plastic in our beach resorts and then might actually give a shit.
Looks like their ideas are working!
The sad thing is that if they're confronted with these figures, the easiest way to fix them is more tax, higher import duties and/or restrictions, probably based on some idiotic list of things they think cause emissions during manf.
The commission wants to stop dedicated graphics cards of group G7 from going above 320 GB/s - that is in theory a memory bus at 384-bit connected to memory operating at 6667 MHz or 512-bit with 5001 MHz. This is definitely within reach for the next generation graphics cards. Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition currently has a bandwidth of 288 GB/s with a 384-bit memory bus and 6000 MHz memory. For notebooks the limit will be only 225 GB/s.
Besides that the energy efficiency requirements will be tighter - in this case the energy consumption of the card in relation to its memory bandwidth. Performance delivered in games or general calculations are irrelevant. according to Lot 3. Exactly what the "performance" and energy consumption quote looks like we don't know at the time of writing, but it will also affect cards in the entry level segment and not just performance and enthusiast cards. The quote is strict enough to worry AMD.
Besides that the energy efficiency requirements will be tighter - in this case the energy consumption of the card in relation to its memory bandwidth. Performance delivered in games or general calculations are irrelevant. according to Lot 3. Exactly what the "performance" and energy consumption quote looks like we don't know at the time of writing, but it will also affect cards in the entry level segment and not just performance and enthusiast cards. The quote is strict enough to worry AMD.
EU leadership on climate change masks imports role
The European Union is inflating its position as a leader in tackling global climate change by ignoring the impact of its fall in industrial competitiveness, which means the region is now importing more carbon-intensive goods.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from burning fossil fuels in west Europe have fallen over the past two decades, but the carbon content of consumption accounting for net imports has risen.
Focusing purely on emissions by territory, as the EU does, ignores global international trade as if all economic activity were in isolation. It is a kind of smoke and mirrors that only tells half the story.
Such incomplete data help explain why the Kyoto Protocol has achieved so little to clean industrial pollution as it has diminished the impact of CO2 reduction targets by making these easier to achieve.
Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said this week the EU had cut its environmental impact even while its economy grew, implying it had achieved the Holy Grail of sustainable growth.
"While our economy grew 48 per cent since 1990, emissions are down 18 per cent. These figures prove once again that emissions can be cut without sacrificing the economy," she said.
It is true that the EU has grown its economy much faster than its emissions, reflecting a long-term trend towards efficiency, but by selecting one favourable measure it exaggerates its success.
Consumption emission figures which account for net imports tell a different story, through 2008: GDP up 46.8 per cent, CO2 down just 1.8 per cent.
Consumption emissions have actually risen in western Europe. Wider EU emissions have fallen only because of an industrial collapse in eastern Europe in the aftermath of the fall of communism in 1989.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from burning fossil fuels in west Europe have fallen over the past two decades, but the carbon content of consumption accounting for net imports has risen.
Focusing purely on emissions by territory, as the EU does, ignores global international trade as if all economic activity were in isolation. It is a kind of smoke and mirrors that only tells half the story.
Such incomplete data help explain why the Kyoto Protocol has achieved so little to clean industrial pollution as it has diminished the impact of CO2 reduction targets by making these easier to achieve.
Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said this week the EU had cut its environmental impact even while its economy grew, implying it had achieved the Holy Grail of sustainable growth.
"While our economy grew 48 per cent since 1990, emissions are down 18 per cent. These figures prove once again that emissions can be cut without sacrificing the economy," she said.
It is true that the EU has grown its economy much faster than its emissions, reflecting a long-term trend towards efficiency, but by selecting one favourable measure it exaggerates its success.
Consumption emission figures which account for net imports tell a different story, through 2008: GDP up 46.8 per cent, CO2 down just 1.8 per cent.
Consumption emissions have actually risen in western Europe. Wider EU emissions have fallen only because of an industrial collapse in eastern Europe in the aftermath of the fall of communism in 1989.
Comment