![]() |
Tuner memory
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote: tony sayer wrote: With the last increase in energy costs, I went round the house working out what the approximate consumption is of all the stuff left on standby or on permanently, and I come to something around 400W. That's 3500KWh per year! Some of the stuff, like fridge, freezer, cooker hob, ovens etc can't be switched off without risking damaged food or the hassle of resetting clocks, but other stuff certainly can be. Turning off just the hi-fi and TV equipment when not being used saves 584KWh a year, more if I also turn off the wireless router and the computer at night. FWIW all the tuners, etc, I have encountered no problems with being switched off (i.e. unpowered) when not in use. This includes a Pure DAB tuner and a Nokia DTTV tuner. Even if the DAB tuner has been unpowered for a week irt still remembers the user settings, etc, when powered up again. I leave items like a fridge or the central heating control on for obvious reasons. Also the DVD recorder. But I routinely switch off other things. I would suggest that our domestic consumption is typical, even lower than average as our children have left home, so if more people turned off stuff on standby, the power saving would be very considerable. Indeed. I suspect that it will not be long before the UK/EU regulations *mandate* that units have to be designed with this in mind, and pressure is applied on manufacturers *not* to produce units which have to be 'on standaby' simply to recall 'user settings'. Even our fridge and freezed don't 'forget' what temperature settings were made if they are accidentially unpowered for a while. It is quite clear that most electronics could do this - provided the makers design appropriately. There is the anecdotal evidence that equipment left on standby or permanently on seems to be more reliable, but I'm happy to take that chance. I haven't seen any reliable evidence one way or the other that would concern me. If equipment was poorly designed, I'd be more worried by leaving it on unattended. More concerned by a fire risk than by unit failures. If it is well designed, then it really should not seriously affect its reliability to be unpowered overnight. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Tuner memory
In article , Rob
wrote: It's annoying (to say the least) how the recent rash of digital receivers (DAB, Freeview) use almost as much electricity in standby as when they're switched on. Not once you've fitted a torpedo to their mains cable, and remove power from them when they are not in active use. :-) [snip] Ah, all our problems could soon be solved :-) I've just spent half an hour checking out this: http://www.steorn.net/frontpage/default.aspx In fact, if true, our problems could be just beginning ... Not yet looked at the above... Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Tuner memory
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:50:10 +0100, tony sayer
wrote: With the last increase in energy costs, I went round the house working out what the approximate consumption is of all the stuff left on standby or on permanently, and I come to something around 400W. JeeZZsus!.... You sure about that?..... More interesting would be the figure EXCLUDING 'fridge, freezer and other essentials. |
Tuner memory
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:06:14 +0100, Rob
wrote: I remember reading it - quite staggering! It's annoying (to say the least) how the recent rash of digital receivers (DAB, Freeview) use almost as much electricity in standby as when they're switched on. Just a small point - is that 400W taken over 24 hours? I could understand the figure if things like the fridge and freezer were active, but it does seem very high, as does your annual figure - my total use for the last quarter was 509 kWh, almost half your 'background' consumption, and I consider myself an environmental thug (relatively). You seem to be using 400W per hour background - that's just bonkers! "Watts per hour" isn't quite what you mean, I suspect :-) |
Tuner memory
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:15:00 +0100, Eiron wrote:
Anyway, in a country which needs central heating for nine months of the year, kit on standby merely means less gas, oil, coal or wood used to maintain the same temperature. How is a heating system "on standby"? It's on or it's off. Or are you referring to that old myth that it's cheaper to leave the heating on when you aren't in the house? |
Tuner memory
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Serge Auckland wrote: tony sayer wrote: With the last increase in energy costs, I went round the house working out what the approximate consumption is of all the stuff left on standby or on permanently, and I come to something around 400W. That's 3500KWh per year! Some of the stuff, like fridge, freezer, cooker hob, ovens etc can't be switched off without risking damaged food or the hassle of resetting clocks, but other stuff certainly can be. Turning off just the hi-fi and TV equipment when not being used saves 584KWh a year, more if I also turn off the wireless router and the computer at night. FWIW all the tuners, etc, I have encountered no problems with being switched off (i.e. unpowered) when not in use. This includes a Pure DAB tuner and a Nokia DTTV tuner. Even if the DAB tuner has been unpowered for a week irt still remembers the user settings, etc, when powered up again. I leave items like a fridge or the central heating control on for obvious reasons. Also the DVD recorder. But I routinely switch off other things. I would suggest that our domestic consumption is typical, even lower than average as our children have left home, so if more people turned off stuff on standby, the power saving would be very considerable. Indeed. I suspect that it will not be long before the UK/EU regulations *mandate* that units have to be designed with this in mind, and pressure is applied on manufacturers *not* to produce units which have to be 'on standaby' simply to recall 'user settings'. Even our fridge and freezed don't 'forget' what temperature settings were made if they are accidentially unpowered for a while. It is quite clear that most electronics could do this - provided the makers design appropriately. There is the anecdotal evidence that equipment left on standby or permanently on seems to be more reliable, but I'm happy to take that chance. I haven't seen any reliable evidence one way or the other that would concern me. If equipment was poorly designed, I'd be more worried by leaving it on unattended. More concerned by a fire risk than by unit failures. If it is well designed, then it really should not seriously affect its reliability to be unpowered overnight. Slainte, Jim The anecdotal evidence I was referring to is the failure which occurs when power is reapplied. The conventional wisdom in broadcast is to leave everything permanently powered whether in use or not, as the thinking is that stuff fails most commonly on power-up. I too have never seen any real evidence to this effect, but it has become enshrined in "custom and practice". It possibly descends from the days of valved equipment when the thermal shock of power-up could take out heater filaments. Large valves (especially transmitting valves) were left on standby with the heaters at just below dark red and no HT to avoid the thermal shock on switch-on. S. |
Tuner memory
Eiron wrote:
Rob wrote: Just a small point - is that 400W taken over 24 hours? I could understand the figure if things like the fridge and freezer were active, but it does seem very high, as does your annual figure - my total use for the last quarter was 509 kWh, almost half your 'background' consumption, and I consider myself an environmental thug (relatively). You seem to be using 400W per hour background - that's just bonkers! Watts per hour seems to be a singulary pointless measure. Why? I thought it's a pretty standard measure of electricity consumption. Anyway, in a country which needs central heating for nine months of the year, kit on standby merely means less gas, oil, coal or wood used to maintain the same temperature. The heating's usually on 6 hours a day for 6 months. I'm happy at 18C. Rob |
Tuner memory
Laurence Payne wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:06:14 +0100, Rob wrote: I remember reading it - quite staggering! It's annoying (to say the least) how the recent rash of digital receivers (DAB, Freeview) use almost as much electricity in standby as when they're switched on. Just a small point - is that 400W taken over 24 hours? I could understand the figure if things like the fridge and freezer were active, but it does seem very high, as does your annual figure - my total use for the last quarter was 509 kWh, almost half your 'background' consumption, and I consider myself an environmental thug (relatively). You seem to be using 400W per hour background - that's just bonkers! "Watts per hour" isn't quite what you mean, I suspect :-) Er, it was! Have I misunderstood something - wouldn't be the first/last time :-) I mean he consumes 400 Watts of electricity in one hour. Stand corrected awaits ... Rob |
Tuner memory
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 15:34:37 +0100, Rob
wrote: "Watts per hour" isn't quite what you mean, I suspect :-) Er, it was! Have I misunderstood something - wouldn't be the first/last time :-) I mean he consumes 400 Watts of electricity in one hour. Stand corrected awaits ... Not quite. He consumes 400 watts FOR one hour. |
Tuner memory
Laurence Payne wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:15:00 +0100, Eiron wrote: Anyway, in a country which needs central heating for nine months of the year, kit on standby merely means less gas, oil, coal or wood used to maintain the same temperature. How is a heating system "on standby"? It's on or it's off. Or are you referring to that old myth that it's cheaper to leave the heating on when you aren't in the house? Do keep up at the back. We're discussing all the electrical kit that could be turned off or left on standby. Leave it on standby and the central heating will be on for less time to maintain the same temperature. This of course doesn't apply in summer, which this year in England was between late June and the beginning of August. -- Eiron No good deed ever goes unpunished. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk