Saving energy - turning things off at the plug

gavhen

Cardew wrote:

The 'Green Police' preaching their politically correct, self-righteous nonsense fail to appreciate we live in the 21st century.

its not exactly rocket science, and dont try and attempt to make an argument out of something that hasn't been said.

but if it helps here we go again - if its not in use then switch it off - the world wont stop going round, the finnancial markets wont crash, we can all still live in the 21st century but with benefits to us all. as this is a website devoted to saving money i also cant see why all the opposition to an idea which does actually save you money, albeit in your opinion a tiny amount people post coupons, codes, etc on here regarding 10p off items but you dont see others blasting them for wasting their time

Cardew

gavhen wrote:

its not exactly rocket science, and dont try and attempt to make an argument out of something that hasn't been said.

but if it helps here we go again - if its not in use then switch it off - the world wont stop going round, the finnancial markets wont crash, we can all still live in the 21st century but with benefits to us all. as this is a website devoted to saving money i also cant see why all the opposition to an idea which does actually save you money, albeit in your opinion a tiny amount people post coupons, codes, etc on here regarding 10p off items but you dont see others blasting them for wasting their time

Agreed. Rocket science it ain't.

If you read my earlier posts I was making the point that the savings are exagerated.

By all means switch it off if you wish to, who has said otherwise? Certainly no opposition from anyone as far as I can see. Wasting time? blasting? As far as I am concerned that is "something that hasn't been said"

I choose not to switch off for the reasons stated in earlier posts and I am being told I should - to help save the world.

Hereward

Cardew wrote:

This is a money saving website and this forum is Green and ethical Money saving I was simply quantifying how much money is saved by not using standby.

Excatly, so why leave an appliance on wating energy any money, albeit a small amount?

Incidentally on the principle that electrical energy converts to heat, my massive 0.6 watt of standby energy helps warm my house and thus is not wasted for most of the year.

This was discussed earlier (See http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=2401064&posted=1#post2401064 for deatils), but i will quote from my contribution:

Hereward wrote:

This was debunked in a recent BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4922496.stm about 2/3rds of the way down). The amount of heat generated by the CRT, and incandescent light bulbs, is negligible when trying to heat a home.

gavhen

by calling someones ideas 'politically correct, self-righteous nonsense', i would say that was pretty much saying that what we were saying was a load of rubbish, maybe even a waste of our time.

you are of course entitled to your own opinions and your own actions, i would never deny anyone those rights. im just letting you know that they just strike me as being neither money or energy saving, as well as selfish.

i guess we'll just agree to disagree

Cardew

gavhen wrote:

by calling someones ideas 'politically correct, self-righteous nonsense', i would say that was pretty much saying that what we were saying was a load of rubbish, maybe even a waste of our time.

you are of course entitled to your own opinions and your own actions, i would never deny anyone those rights. im just letting you know that they just strike me as being neither money or energy saving, as well as selfish.

i guess we'll just agree to disagree

I mean exactly what I said about the “The 'Green Police' preaching their politically correct, self-righteous nonsense” .

It is the imposing of their values, and the attempts to lay the finger of guilt on people that I find objectionable. That very much includes being termed “selfish” for arguing that the saving of a few pence a year is not worth the trouble(to me) of switching a TV on and off thousands of times a year.

For another example read that excruciating thread where those flying on holiday are castigated for their selfish attitude by sanctimonious morons.

It is ironic that they fail to recognise their own indulgences(like a computer and an Internet connection and thousands of posts on this forum)

I have no difficulty with debating factual points on values and costs of standby consumption – like the exchange with Wig. However spare me the lectures!

Thank you for not denying me my own opinions and actions - much appreciated.

A_penny_saved_3

Lamp said:

4) use regular bulbs in rooms where the light will only be on for a short time. Energy saving bulbs have a big draw on electricity while they 'warm up', not terribly useful in the bathroom or the tool room!


Thanks for your suggestions. I have changed all my lights to energy saving and switch them off as I go along - so that means that each time I go up or down stairs I am adding significantly to my bill. Would I be cheaper off leaving it on all evening?

As an aside: the bickering between posts may generate heat but do not promote reading. Please don't spoil an excellent site with ego trips.

gromituk

amberklene wrote:

As a current service engineer in the electronics industry...
Regulations on energy consumption of equipment in standby are tough. Someone stated that a lot of energy can be lost in the power supply - rubbish.

I said that, and it is not rubbish at all. I was talking about the relative losses in a power supply compared with a liquid crystal clock display. You ought to know that the latter's power consumption is minuscule. I'm sure you do, so you simply did not read my posting properly.

we dont loose sleep over the fridge and freezer being left on do we?

That's because they are doing something useful with that power, so the comparison is irrelevant.

gromituk

Cardew wrote:

So what "Quick search" are you refering to? Or is everyone else lucky with their appliances.

Instead of general statements, why don't you come up with some specific appliances with their data of standby consumption to prove your point.

*Sigh* I thought common sense would suggest that "quick search" would be something like putting "standby power consumption" into Google and then looking at the results.

I'm not disputing the figures for the appliances you mention, although you seem to think I am. I am simply saying that these are not typical. You have not proved your point by deliberately selecting appliances which bolster your argument, while ignoring the others.

Moreover, there may now be strict regulations for standby power consumption of new devices, but this is hardly relevant to all those appliances which are in service already.

Just because I don't agree with everything you say doesn't mean I don't agree with anything you say. There are shades of grey, you know.

Yukko

A_penny_saved wrote:

Lamp said:

4) use regular bulbs in rooms where the light will only be on for a short time. Energy saving bulbs have a big draw on electricity while they 'warm up', not terribly useful in the bathroom or the tool room!


Thanks for your suggestions. I have changed all my lights to energy saving and switch them off as I go along - so that means that each time I go up or down stairs I am adding significantly to my bill. Would I be cheaper off leaving it on all evening?

It's a myth that has persisted for years about flurescent lights. Originally (like decades ago) flurescent lights used to be degraded by switching them on, so it was recommended to leave them on rather than switching them on and off as this would be cheaper (you don't have to replace the expensive tubes). Somehow this has been transformed into the myth that they use vastly more power to switch them on than run them. If that was the case you wouldnt be able to plug them into a lighting circuit.

Cardew

Yukko wrote:

It's a myth that has persisted for years about flurescent lights. Originally (like decades ago) flurescent lights used to be degraded by switching them on, so it was recommended to leave them on rather than switching them on and off as this would be cheaper (you don't have to replace the expensive tubes). Somehow this has been transformed into the myth that they use vastly more power to switch them on than run them. If that was the case you wouldnt be able to plug them into a lighting circuit.

I think this myth is also dependant on the theory that these lights consumed higher power for a few milliseconds switched on' and has been picked up and spread by people that who possibly didn’t appreciate the it was for milliseconds(or didn’t understand the implications)

That said it used to be policy in some Government buildings not to fit fluorescent/energy saving lighting where the light would be on for less than 3 minutes. e.g. toilets/corridors where the light was operated by motion detectors. However this was not to save power but based on the theory that frequent on/off operation shortened the life of the bulbs.