Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Wallwarts & power usage

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc where
they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on "standby"
etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights always
on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
plugged into an "on" socket?

More about : wallwarts power usage

Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Karl Engel wrote:

> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc where
> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on "standby"
> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights always
> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right?

Some. A few watts maybe.

> I
> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
> plugged into an "on" socket ?

A few watts maybe.


Graham
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Karl Engel" wrote ...
> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc
> where
> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on
> "standby"
> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights
> always
> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity
> bills.
> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything
> significant in
> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww
> is
> plugged into an "on" socket?

It might amount to 1-2% of your total power use over the year.
If you are concerned about it, just put everything in the rack on
a switch (like a switched power strip). Your refrigerator likely
wastes far more energy than all your electronic equipment on
standby. Some power companies subsidize their customers to
buy new, more efficient applicances like refrigerators because
it is cheaper than increasing power generation capacity.
Related resources
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Karl Engel wrote:

> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
> plugged into an "on" socket?

Yes, they consume power even when what they're powering is turned off
or unplugged. In fact, someone (a tree hugger, probably) named wall
warts that were plugged in but not connected to a device "vampire power
supplies." Cell phone chargers are probably the most prevalent modern
example.

They don't consume a lot of power, but depending on what it's powering,
may not consume much more power when they're at work. But it's an
incremental thing. If you have a house full of "standby" power supplies
(or even things that are powered but not used full time, like a
computer printer or fax machine), they might add up to the equivalent
of a 50 watt light bulb left on all the time. At our local electric
rate here, that's about $2.50/month, enough to buy a small latte.

Will it ruin the environment in your lifetime, probably not.
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Karl Engel" <karlengel@excite.com> wrote in message
news:43391c9b$0$24165$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc
> where
> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on
> "standby"
> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights
> always
> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant
> in
> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
> plugged into an "on" socket?
>
>

Hey, someone should tell the US Navy not to leave its aircraft carriers on
all the time. They consume 1.5 million litres of fuel PER DAY. Thats
330,000 gallons in the UK. You Americans have smaller gallons than us so
thats even more. Blimey.


Gareth.
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Karl Engel wrote:

> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc where
> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on "standby"
> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights always
> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
> plugged into an "on" socket?

All mine are connected to power via a Tripplite rack mounted power
strip. One switch and it's darkness and no hum city. <g>

--
ha
September 28, 2005 12:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

leave the wall warts on all the time
take one less car trip per year,
you'll be way ahead.

If you take a car trip to go to the store to buy a power strip to turn
off your wall warts, you'll never make the energy of the car trip back
up.

Mark
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 12:19:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Karl Engel wrote:

>> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc where
>> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on "standby"
>> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights always
>> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
>> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right?

> Some. A few watts maybe.

>> I
>> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
>> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
>> plugged into an "on" socket ?

> A few watts maybe.

I would worry (wart worry) more about shortening a wallwart's life by
having it on all the time. Most of them are not very robust. But then,
if the wart uses a lot less juice when it is "standing by" that may actually
extend its life since doesn't undergo as must stress from being off
to fully heated up everytime it is turned on and off.

At least most are cheaply available...

Rob R.
September 28, 2005 12:19:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1127829323.365056.199100@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>
>Karl Engel wrote:
>
>> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
>> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
>> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
>> plugged into an "on" socket?
>
>Yes, they consume power even when what they're powering is turned off
>or unplugged. In fact, someone (a tree hugger, probably) named wall
>warts that were plugged in but not connected to a device "vampire power
>supplies." Cell phone chargers are probably the most prevalent modern
>example.
>
>They don't consume a lot of power, but depending on what it's powering,
>may not consume much more power when they're at work. But it's an
>incremental thing. If you have a house full of "standby" power supplies
>(or even things that are powered but not used full time, like a
>computer printer or fax machine), they might add up to the equivalent
>of a 50 watt light bulb left on all the time. At our local electric
>rate here, that's about $2.50/month, enough to buy a small latte.
>
>Will it ruin the environment in your lifetime, probably not.
>

I have seen some run cool. In some cases there may be an intentional
or unintentional winding short which tends to help stabalize the output voltage.
If there is a short, then it will run warm or hot regardless of load.
Some nice walwarts have switching regulated outputs, which run pretty
cool even under load. Some linear regulated ones will run hot under load.
I always like to run walwarts off a breaker strip, off the floor, for
safety reasons.

greg
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 2:24:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Most wall warts incorperate a transformer in the first stage. In this
case, the device will continue to pass current regardless of the draw
on the secondary side. There may be a way to incorperate a switch on
the primary based on the current of the secondary, but I haven't
researched that yet, and I don't know if any wall warts use it. I'd
think a small SSR would work... Problem is it would need to store a
permanent charge on the secondary side to trip the SSR on to begin
with... Maybe I should think about this more...

I normally plug mine into power strips just to keep them from using up
space! Plug all your devices into one or two and turn the strips off
when not in use.

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 20:19:02 +1000, "Karl Engel"
<karlengel@excite.com> wrote:

>Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc where
>they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on "standby"
>etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights always
>on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
>Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
>assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant in
>energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
>plugged into an "on" socket?
>
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 2:32:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Oh, I thought they were all nuclear now... I'd think they would power
the engines off of electricity or the main generator piston. Probably
aren't. It wouldn't be made in the US if it worked. I'd have the
main piston from the reactor running the generators full time with
gears added to run the propellers when needed. A nuclear reactor can
certainly handle the load. That is, if the plumbing is good enough
that the steam pressure doesn't cause damage...

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 14:09:16 +0000 (UTC), "Gareth Magennis"
<sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote:

>
>"Karl Engel" <karlengel@excite.com> wrote in message
>news:43391c9b$0$24165$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc
>> where
>> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on
>> "standby"
>> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights
>> always
>> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
>> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
>> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant
>> in
>> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
>> plugged into an "on" socket?
>>
>>
>
>Hey, someone should tell the US Navy not to leave its aircraft carriers on
>all the time. They consume 1.5 million litres of fuel PER DAY. Thats
>330,000 gallons in the UK. You Americans have smaller gallons than us so
>thats even more. Blimey.
>
>
>Gareth.
>
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 3:46:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Karl Engel"
>
> Just saw a doco about greenhouse gasses & inefficient power usage etc
> where
> they said you shouldn't leave all your home entertainment gear on
> "standby"
> etc. Made me feel guilty about a studio full of boxes with red lights
> always
> on...trying to do the right thing by the planet & my electricity bills.
> Wallwarts use power even when the appliance is switched off, right? I
> assume so since they're always warm. So do you save anything significant
> in
> energy consumption by having those units switched off even when the ww is
> plugged into an "on" socket?


** The electricity is all converted into heat.

This will aid in warming your place in winter.

It will add to the cooling costs in summer, but only if you have air-con.

In the grand scheme of things it is 3/5ths of SFA, either way.




......... Phil
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 3:51:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Brandon Anderson wrote:

> Oh, I thought they were all nuclear now... I'd think they would power
> the engines off of electricity or the main generator piston. Probably
> aren't. It wouldn't be made in the US if it worked. I'd have the
> main piston from the reactor running the generators full time with
> gears added to run the propellers when needed. A nuclear reactor can
> certainly handle the load. That is, if the plumbing is good enough
> that the steam pressure doesn't cause damage...
>
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 14:09:16 +0000 (UTC), "Gareth Magennis"
> <sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote:

Nope, there are still some fossil fueled carriers in the US navy. They
built the Enterprise nuclear powered, and for a bunch of reasons that
I've mostly forgotten, it made sense to build the next couple oil fired.
The new ones are all nuclear. The reactor boils water to make steam.
The steam turns turbines for the propellors, and turns turbines to spin
generators, and all sorts of other stuff, like the steam powered catapult
and so on.

--Dale
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 6:32:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mark" <makolber@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1127867421.798718.28760
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

> leave the wall warts on all the time
> take one less car trip per year,
> you'll be way ahead.
>
> If you take a car trip to go to the store to buy a power strip to turn
> off your wall warts, you'll never make the energy of the car trip back
> up.

Not to mention the energy invested in the manufacture and marketing of the
power strip.
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 7:46:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>> leave the wall warts on all the time
>> take one less car trip per year,
>> you'll be way ahead.

>> If you take a car trip to go to the store to buy a power strip to turn
>> off your wall warts, you'll never make the energy of the car trip back
>> up.

> Not to mention the energy invested in the manufacture and marketing
> of the power strip.

Let's "do the maths" as the Brits would say...

Assume a wall wart pulls 2 watts, independently of the power taken by the
load. (This occurs because the transformer isn't perfect.) In one day,
that's 50 watt-hours. In 20 days, that's a kilowatt-hour. In a year, that's
180 kilowatt-hours. At even 5 cents per kW-h, that's $9 a year -- $18 a year
for 10 cents per kW-h.

If you use a power strip to disconnect a half-dozen wall warts when the
equipment is turned off (as opposed to shutting off the equipment, but
leaving the wall warts plugged in), you'll quickly amortize the cost of the
strip.

And you can always buy the strips when you're visiting the store for some
other reason.
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 9:04:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Brandon Anderson wrote:

> Oh, I thought they were all nuclear now... I'd think they would power
> the engines off of electricity or the main generator piston.

Piston ? What piston would that be ?

Graham
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 2:03:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"William Sommerwerck" <gizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:sLSdnR447e5N6afeRVn-vQ@comcast.com...
>>> leave the wall warts on all the time
>>> take one less car trip per year,
>>> you'll be way ahead.
>
>>> If you take a car trip to go to the store to buy a power strip to turn
>>> off your wall warts, you'll never make the energy of the car trip back
>>> up.
>
>> Not to mention the energy invested in the manufacture and marketing
>> of the power strip.
>
> Let's "do the maths" as the Brits would say...
>
> Assume a wall wart pulls 2 watts, independently of the power taken by the
> load. (This occurs because the transformer isn't perfect.) In one day,
> that's 50 watt-hours. In 20 days, that's a kilowatt-hour. In a year,
> that's
> 180 kilowatt-hours. At even 5 cents per kW-h, that's $9 a year -- $18 a
> year
> for 10 cents per kW-h.

I have 14 wall-warts; the most power hungry of them is 4 watts. Since
every piece of equipment powered by WW is used every day, it would mean I'd
have to turn them on and off at least once/day. 3 of them are battery
chargers. Those I can unplug after use. 2 more supply power for memories.
If I unplugged those 2, the memory would draw power from the self-contained
keep-alive batteries. 2 are cordless phones which must be powered 100% of
the time. That leaves 7--4 are part of my audio/video system and the other
3 are for the computer. Turning them on and off every day is more effort
than I'd like to expend.

If you really want to save power, look at your car. How much does a kwh of
electricity cost when generated by an automobile engine? What does it cost
to operate your headlights every time you drive your car?

Norm Strong
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 6:17:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

William Sommerwerck wrote:

> >> leave the wall warts on all the time
> >> take one less car trip per year,
> >> you'll be way ahead.
>
> >> If you take a car trip to go to the store to buy a power strip to turn
> >> off your wall warts, you'll never make the energy of the car trip back
> >> up.
>
> > Not to mention the energy invested in the manufacture and marketing
> > of the power strip.
>
> Let's "do the maths" as the Brits would say...
>
> Assume a wall wart pulls 2 watts, independently of the power taken by the
> load. (This occurs because the transformer isn't perfect.) In one day,
> that's 50 watt-hours. In 20 days, that's a kilowatt-hour.

Yes

> In a year, that's
> 180 kilowatt-hours.

Noooo. It's 18 kWh.

> At even 5 cents per kW-h, that's $9 a year

90c

> -- $18 a year for 10 cents per kW-h.

$1.8


> If you use a power strip to disconnect a half-dozen wall warts when the
> equipment is turned off (as opposed to shutting off the equipment, but
> leaving the wall warts plugged in), you'll quickly amortize the cost of the
> strip.
>
> And you can always buy the strips when you're visiting the store for some
> other reason.

You had me worried there !

It still looks attractive to power them down if you have a few though. And you
can easily double those power costs for the UK.

Graham
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 7:03:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> > In a year, that's
> > 180 kilowatt-hours.

> Noooo. It's 18 kWh.

Whoops. There aren't 3600 days in a year. Mea culpa.



> > At even 5 cents per kW-h, that's $9 a year
>
> 90c
>
> > -- $18 a year for 10 cents per kW-h.
>
> $1.8
>
>
> > If you use a power strip to disconnect a half-dozen wall warts when the
> > equipment is turned off (as opposed to shutting off the equipment, but
> > leaving the wall warts plugged in), you'll quickly amortize the cost of
the
> > strip.
> >
> > And you can always buy the strips when you're visiting the store for
some
> > other reason.
>
> You had me worried there !
>
> It still looks attractive to power them down if you have a few though. And
you
> can easily double those power costs for the UK.
>
> Graham


Thanks for catching my mistake. Regardless, if you disconnect enough wall
warts when you're not using the equipment, you will gradually amortized the
cost of the power strip.
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 8:04:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Right. Wrong word. Turbine.

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 05:04:10 +0100, Pooh Bear
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>Brandon Anderson wrote:
>
>> Oh, I thought they were all nuclear now... I'd think they would power
>> the engines off of electricity or the main generator piston.
>
>Piston ? What piston would that be ?
>
>Graham
September 28, 2005 9:14:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
> If you really want to save power, look at your car. How much does a kwh of
> electricity cost when generated by an automobile engine? What does it cost
> to operate your headlights every time you drive your car?
>
> Norm Strong

Well agree...except about the headlights.... if leaving your headlights
on during the day reduces the cahnce of an accident by even .0001%,
then it is worth it.

Mark
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 3:13:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"William Sommerwerck" <gizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:5M6dnUsYTf8ajqbeRVn-jA@comcast.com...

> Thanks for catching my mistake. Regardless, if you disconnect enough wall
> warts when you're not using the equipment, you will gradually amortized
the
> cost of the power strip.

And you need the power strip anyway, don't you?

Tim
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 9:05:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <11jijjimm4pfl3f@corp.supernews.com>, rcrowley@xpr7t.net says...
>
> Your refrigerator likely
>wastes far more energy than all your electronic equipment on
>standby.

Not likely, refrigerators have been made more efficient than any other
appliance. The power consumption of a fridge has been cut by 2/3rds in the
past 20 years.

Had a huge flame war a while back about whether a computer or a fridge consumes
more power, turns out they're about the same (taking power-saving measures into
consideration), but only because refrigerators have halved power consumption in
the past 10 years while computers have doubled in power consumption in the past
5 years.
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 9:08:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <esF_e.2716$9l4.346@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>, tim2718281@ntlworld.com
says...
>
>
>"William Sommerwerck" <gizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:5M6dnUsYTf8ajqbeRVn-jA@comcast.com...
>
>> Thanks for catching my mistake. Regardless, if you disconnect enough wall
>> warts when you're not using the equipment, you will gradually amortized
>the
>> cost of the power strip.
>
>And you need the power strip anyway, don't you?
>

And what about saving power for less of an environmental 'footprint'... be a
good global citizen!
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 9:08:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>> "William Sommerwerck" <gizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:5M6dnUsYTf8ajqbeRVn-jA@comcast.com...

>>> Thanks for catching my mistake. Regardless, if you disconnect enough
wall
>>> warts when you're not using the equipment, you will gradually amortize
>>> the cost of the power strip.

>> And you need the power strip anyway, don't you?


> And what about saving power for less of an environmental 'footprint'...
> be a good global citizen!

This is a different issue from the one about amortizing the cost of a power
strip. Americans waste huge amounts of energy by leaving on lights when
they're not needed. Wall warts, battery chargers, and "soft" switching for
TVs and other devices are minor in comparisons.

By the way, we're finally starting to see switching wall warts that draw
almost no current at all.
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 9:14:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1127952880.191947.165770@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
makolber@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>
>>
>> If you really want to save power, look at your car. How much does a kwh of
>> electricity cost when generated by an automobile engine? What does it cost
>> to operate your headlights every time you drive your car?
>>
>> Norm Strong
>
>Well agree...except about the headlights.... if leaving your headlights
>on during the day reduces the cahnce of an accident by even .0001%,
>then it is worth it.
>

That depends, you could end up minorly injured and get a huge insurance
settlement! In Canada all the cars are built to have the headlights on all the
time, you can't turn them off unless the car is off. I figure the oil
companies sponsored whatever 'safety' lobby got that piece of legislation
passed.
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 9:14:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> That depends, you could end up minorly injured and get a huge insurance
> settlement! In Canada all the cars are built to have the headlights on
> all the time, you can't turn them off unless the car is off. I figure the
oil
> companies sponsored whatever 'safety' lobby got that piece of legislation
> passed.

The power drawn by the headlights is only a small percentage of the power
generated by the engine. Yes, it does slightly reduce the car's mileage.
Slightly.
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 2:43:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

chevdo@chevdont.com wrote:

> In article <1127952880.191947.165770@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> makolber@yahoo.com says...
> >
> >>
> >> If you really want to save power, look at your car. How much does a kwh of
> >> electricity cost when generated by an automobile engine? What does it cost
> >> to operate your headlights every time you drive your car?
> >>
> >> Norm Strong
> >
> >Well agree...except about the headlights.... if leaving your headlights
> >on during the day reduces the cahnce of an accident by even .0001%,
> >then it is worth it.
>
>
> That depends, you could end up minorly injured and get a huge insurance
> settlement! In Canada all the cars are built to have the headlights on all the
> time, you can't turn them off unless the car is off. I figure the oil
> companies sponsored whatever 'safety' lobby got that piece of legislation
> passed.

It's more likely to do with the fact that daylight isn't as bright in more Northern
latitudes actually. That's likely why the same is required in Scandinavian
countries.

You mercuns always seem to think there's some damn conspiracy somewhere !

Graham
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 3:23:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I agree that one should be a good citizen, and do everything reasonable to
save power--not because of the money, but because it conserves a natural
resource.

Although I live in Seattle, which has relatively low power rates, I've
nevertheless made a substantial effort to save electricity. All of the
light bulbs (12) that are left on most of the day are compact flourescent
bulbs. Those include the porch lights, kitchen lights, living room lights,
upstairs hallway and computer room. I use gas for heating the house and my
water. We cook with electric frypans whenever possible, and steam our
vegetables (which greatly reduces the amount of water necessary.

IOW, I'm doing my part to save electricity, which is reflected in the bill,
which now is half the consumption it was when I moved in. There are times
though when the effort required to save additional power is not worth the
effort involved.

Norm Strong
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 4:26:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 04:20:49 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

>>> "William Sommerwerck" <gizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:5M6dnUsYTf8ajqbeRVn-jA@comcast.com...
>
>>>> Thanks for catching my mistake. Regardless, if you disconnect enough
> wall
>>>> warts when you're not using the equipment, you will gradually amortize
>>>> the cost of the power strip.
>
>>> And you need the power strip anyway, don't you?
>
>
>> And what about saving power for less of an environmental 'footprint'...
>> be a good global citizen!
>
> This is a different issue from the one about amortizing the cost of a power
> strip. Americans waste huge amounts of energy by leaving on lights when
> they're not needed. Wall warts, battery chargers, and "soft" switching for
> TVs and other devices are minor in comparisons.
>
> By the way, we're finally starting to see switching wall warts that draw
> almost no current at all.

For the UK, the current estimate is that the total power drain of all the
equipment left on standby uses the output of a whole power station.

d
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 4:26:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> For the UK, the current estimate is that the total power drain of all the
> equipment left on standby uses the output of a whole power station.

I'm sure that's correct. But what percentage of total capacity is that?

I'm not defending leaving things on when they're needed. For example, I plug
in my tootbrush chargers Sunday night, and disconnect them the next day. But
I leave my computer (not the monitor) on all the time, not just for
convenience, but to minimize thermal cycling.
Anonymous
September 29, 2005 4:45:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 04:36:38 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

>> For the UK, the current estimate is that the total power drain of all the
>> equipment left on standby uses the output of a whole power station.
>
> I'm sure that's correct. But what percentage of total capacity is that?
>

A pretty small percentage, I'm sure - but it does lend a kind of
perspective to the problem.

> I'm not defending leaving things on when they're needed. For example, I plug
> in my tootbrush chargers Sunday night, and disconnect them the next day. But
> I leave my computer (not the monitor) on all the time, not just for
> convenience, but to minimize thermal cycling.

Don't we all?

d
!