Keith G wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message
news
Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:40:31 +0100, Rob
wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...
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.
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.
**A common misconception. The killer for most permanently powered items
are capacitor failures. Turning stuff off and on as required does
several things:

* Capacitors last longer.
* The product is shielded from unnecessary spikes on the mains.

I always turn stuff off (except for the obvious stuff, with clocks)
unless I actually want to use it.

One of the few (obviously!) things I remember from physics at school is
that you should use the appliance switch if it has one to avoid damage,
rather than the socket switch or pull the plug. Is there any truth to
this?

Rob
It depends. If the appliance switch is simply turning off the incoming
mains (the traditional way to do it), then pulling the plug or
switching off at the socket is exactly equivalent. If the appliance
switch works through some electronic function, then it isn't.

But whatever the case, there should be absolutely no danger of damage.

d

That's grand - thanks.


Except that it's not (see my posts alluding to burnt sockets).......

Also, do not be tempted to plug in a 'kettle lead' with the mains end
already plgged in - I've done that many times in the past, but had a little
'pop and flutter', once or twice recently.....


Well, yep - it's a bit tricky having being told there's no danger of
damage, but I'll stick to my old habits of appliance first, mains second
for the pure and simple reason that I paid for the switches so I'm
bloody well going to use them :-)

Rob