22 May 2007


BlackleBlackle is a way to combine Google’s wonderful search algorithm with some good ol’ environmental responsibility. Based on the idea that a black background uses less energy than a white background, they’ve essentially created the black version of Google.

According to Blackle’s website, “Black Google Would Save 750 Megawatt-hours a Year” due to the search engine’s popularity. That sounds like a lot of Megawatts, doesn’t it?

Try Blackle for yourself »


  • Ms. Wakame
    January 12, 2008 Reply


  • paull
    January 8, 2008 Reply

    I’m using at the moment BLACKOOGLE, which is similar to blackle but offers a lot more functionality like image search, youtube search, mail access, etc. And looks nicer too, give it a try!




  • Ms. Wakame
    December 29, 2007 Reply

    Great suggestion!

  • Energy Saver
    December 27, 2007 Reply

    There is also the Carbon Neutral Search Engine, they offset each search by 100g of CO2 … (or black background for CRT monitors)

  • Seth
    August 4, 2007 Reply

    I prefer using http://www.Darkoogle.com as their text are green which reduce eye strain. So instead of saving energy from our monitor, it also save our user’s eye energy.

  • nathan
    July 30, 2007 Reply

    Nice. 🙂

  • Jason
    July 29, 2007 Reply

    Nathan your wish has come true.


  • nathan
    May 24, 2007 Reply

    Hah! That’s great Niqkita, I was just thinking the same thing today while hanging out the window for a smoke…

    Greygle would hilariously solve all of our problems! And it could even be red and green combined for Xmas!

  • Niqkita
    May 24, 2007 Reply

    I too am overwhelmed by all the damned options and confusing/conflicting info to be had. Can we just stick with grey and hope to land safely in the middle? ~;P

  • nathan
    May 23, 2007 Reply

    Yeah – I was wondering, while looking at the shiny black screen presented on their site via my shiny bright screened laptop if the black color was actually not being produced via lights…

    But even if CRTs are going the wayside, I’d still wager that the majority of screens are CRT (think big offices where they have dozens and dozens of computers that have yet to be replaced – plus at the office I used to work in, the IT guy wouldn’t even buy us LCDs as he said they had a shorter lifespan than the hunkomonsters).

    Also, given the fact that black is the absence of light while white is the presence of light’s full spectrum, all of this is beginning to confuse me…why does humanity insist on defeating the very fabric of nature?

    We did this with colors on earth – when it comes to light the above is true, but when you’re talking about mixing paint colors, the opposite is true.

    I just can’t handle living in a world where there are options.

  • Ken
    May 23, 2007 Reply

    awesome… someone other than me with geekish knowledge 😀


  • aj
    May 22, 2007 Reply

    this only makes sense if you’re using an old-fashioned CRT display (an energy hog in and of itself), or a plasma display. Liquid-crystal screens, as found in all laptops and as used in or with an increasingly large number of desktop systems, only use energy when they are darkening a pixel element. Without voltage applied, the pixel appears clear; when voltage is applied, it polarizes the light coming through it, gradually darkening it to “black.” So an all-black screen on a laptop uses MORE energy, not less.

    the biggest energy hog in a laptop screen is the cold-cathode fluorescent tubes at the edges. As recently reported, most manufacturers are now switching to brighter, longer-lasting and more energy-efficient LED light sources. Eventually LCD screens are predicted to give way to so-called thin-film organic LEDs altogether – more like a television with light-emitting LED pixel elements, rather than today’s backlit, transmissive screens.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.