6 ms·

Solar powered sites are cool and fun, but I find it ultimately lacking because so much of the rest of the networking infrastructure is reliant on the grid. It w

Solar powered sites are cool and fun, but I find it ultimately lacking because so much of the rest of the networking infrastructure is reliant on the grid. It would be more energy efficient to just host the static site on cloudflare or whatever, and use the solar panel to charge some batteries, or something you would normally use the grid for. I suspect overall energy usage would be even lower if the site was hosted on a CDN, due to the CDN operators keeping their machines near full utilization, and fewer network hops required for an average request.

genter 2y ago
You don't like that the rest of the infrastructure is on the grid, so you're proposing moving the site to the grid too?
- ffsm8 2y ago
  He's looking at it from a utilitarian point of view. From that perspective, you've got a finite amount of energy that's being consumed at any point of time and by that logic, you'd be better served to use the solar energy for something else in your household that would've needed the grid, because a cloud provider will almost certainly only need a fraction of the electricity you'd need to keep the static files served. So, by doing that you've effectively reduced your absolute energy footprint. But these projects aren't about reducing your energy footprint. They're about having a local webserver that's running on solar energy. Or in the authors words: At its heart, this project is about learning and contributing to a conversation on a greener, local-first future for the web
  - ericd 2y ago
    Yeah, it’s cool to just see what goes into it, and get a more intuitive understanding of the tradeoffs and what needs to be done to move more of this to green energy. It makes the (large) challenge of matching generation to consumption a whole lot more real. It’s obviously not meant to be a maximized carbon reduction in any way commensurate to the effort.
- skrtskrt 2y ago
  the grid is going to continue to get efficiency and renewable energy improvements that help at a much more massive scale. it's 1000x more helpful to just like only run your big appliances when your grid is using more renewables.
  - teamonkey 2y ago
    Not sure that’s true due to power losses over distance. Running your appliances off your own solar panels and not having to draw from the grid is probably more efficient in terms of energy generation.
- ejddhbrbrrnrn 2y ago
  Yes it is not a contradiction here. Economies of scale make cloud more efficient for basic sites like this. It is like using street lights vs. every house putting out a few candles. In addition we love the grid! We want it to get greener. Put the effort into making the grid energy zero carbon, low pollution while still highly available. Furthermore using that solar to say charge your work laptop and then hosting the site in CF would net use less energy.
Vegenoid 2y ago
Agreed. When I see this type of thing, I am always turned off by people describing it as "greener" or “more sustainable”. Every small website having its own solar panel and hardware is not greener. People frequently think only of the carbon emissions of the energy used by the hardware once it's running, ignoring the carbon (and raw material) cost of building that hardware. Serving websites is an area where capitalism’s promise of achieving efficiency of resource utilization through economic incentives probably actually works, via shared hardware. This is a hobby and aesthetic thing, which is valid and interesting. If anyone has some good data about carbon emissions of self-hosted vs shared hardware I’d love to see it.
- ravetcofx 2y ago
  except all of this could be used hardware and panels. no need to buy new.
  - Vegenoid 2y ago
    "Used" doesn't magically wave away the carbon/resource cost of producing the hardware. Buying used hardware still stimulates demand for the production of new hardware, although to a lesser extent than buying new. Buying used also only works when not that many people are doing it. On an individual level, it is a good thing to do, but it isn't a solution. It does help foster an environment of maintaining and supporting hardware for longer, which is a better solution. I could envision a scenario where solar self-hosters replace hardware at a rate so much lower than than hosting companies that it outweighs the additional hardware it requires, but I don't think it is the current reality.
    - nine_k 2y ago
      It reliability waves away the costs of producing hardware for this particular project. The second-hand computer and second-hand panels have already been produced for someone else, their cost is sunk. But their value can continue with this project, or end with the hardware and panels going to a dumping ground.
j45 2y ago
That doesn't seem to make sense. Yeah, it's only a 50W solar panel. The solar power could be upgraded to a 400W no problem and the issue you have will no longer exist. Often people smart with a small system to get things figured out how they want it before adding more capacity. Seems reasonable, no? Networking equipment shouldn't be much power, speaking from personal experience. It can be on a small UPS, even one from Costco to run it all off battery, and then solar to refill.
jvanderbot 2y ago
Come check out my solar site. it's hosted in my basement and I paid a premium to my utility company so my power comes from solar credits (xcel) It's be neat to have a digital ocean or equivalent that allows locating in data centers by energy source.
lightlyused 2y ago
Have you heard of https://meshtastic.org/ https://meshtastic.org/ ?

genter 2y ago

You don't like that the rest of the infrastructure is on the grid, so you're proposing moving the site to the grid too?

ffsm8 2y ago
He's looking at it from a utilitarian point of view. From that perspective, you've got a finite amount of energy that's being consumed at any point of time and by that logic, you'd be better served to use the solar energy for something else in your household that would've needed the grid, because a cloud provider will almost certainly only need a fraction of the electricity you'd need to keep the static files served. So, by doing that you've effectively reduced your absolute energy footprint. But these projects aren't about reducing your energy footprint. They're about having a local webserver that's running on solar energy. Or in the authors words: At its heart, this project is about learning and contributing to a conversation on a greener, local-first future for the web
- ericd 2y ago
  Yeah, it’s cool to just see what goes into it, and get a more intuitive understanding of the tradeoffs and what needs to be done to move more of this to green energy. It makes the (large) challenge of matching generation to consumption a whole lot more real. It’s obviously not meant to be a maximized carbon reduction in any way commensurate to the effort.
skrtskrt 2y ago
the grid is going to continue to get efficiency and renewable energy improvements that help at a much more massive scale. it's 1000x more helpful to just like only run your big appliances when your grid is using more renewables.
- teamonkey 2y ago
  Not sure that’s true due to power losses over distance. Running your appliances off your own solar panels and not having to draw from the grid is probably more efficient in terms of energy generation.
ejddhbrbrrnrn 2y ago
Yes it is not a contradiction here. Economies of scale make cloud more efficient for basic sites like this. It is like using street lights vs. every house putting out a few candles. In addition we love the grid! We want it to get greener. Put the effort into making the grid energy zero carbon, low pollution while still highly available. Furthermore using that solar to say charge your work laptop and then hosting the site in CF would net use less energy.

Vegenoid 2y ago

Agreed. When I see this type of thing, I am always turned off by people describing it as "greener" or “more sustainable”. Every small website having its own solar panel and hardware is not greener. People frequently think only of the carbon emissions of the energy used by the hardware once it's running, ignoring the carbon (and raw material) cost of building that hardware. Serving websites is an area where capitalism’s promise of achieving efficiency of resource utilization through economic incentives probably actually works, via shared hardware. This is a hobby and aesthetic thing, which is valid and interesting. If anyone has some good data about carbon emissions of self-hosted vs shared hardware I’d love to see it.

ravetcofx 2y ago
except all of this could be used hardware and panels. no need to buy new.
- Vegenoid 2y ago
  "Used" doesn't magically wave away the carbon/resource cost of producing the hardware. Buying used hardware still stimulates demand for the production of new hardware, although to a lesser extent than buying new. Buying used also only works when not that many people are doing it. On an individual level, it is a good thing to do, but it isn't a solution. It does help foster an environment of maintaining and supporting hardware for longer, which is a better solution. I could envision a scenario where solar self-hosters replace hardware at a rate so much lower than than hosting companies that it outweighs the additional hardware it requires, but I don't think it is the current reality.
  - nine_k 2y ago
    It reliability waves away the costs of producing hardware for this particular project. The second-hand computer and second-hand panels have already been produced for someone else, their cost is sunk. But their value can continue with this project, or end with the hardware and panels going to a dumping ground.

j45 2y ago

That doesn't seem to make sense. Yeah, it's only a 50W solar panel. The solar power could be upgraded to a 400W no problem and the issue you have will no longer exist. Often people smart with a small system to get things figured out how they want it before adding more capacity. Seems reasonable, no? Networking equipment shouldn't be much power, speaking from personal experience. It can be on a small UPS, even one from Costco to run it all off battery, and then solar to refill.

jvanderbot 2y ago

Come check out my solar site. it's hosted in my basement and I paid a premium to my utility company so my power comes from solar credits (xcel) It's be neat to have a digital ocean or equivalent that allows locating in data centers by energy source.

lightlyused 2y ago

Have you heard of https://meshtastic.org/ https://meshtastic.org/ ?