Phone Chargers...

gromituk

Altarf wrote:

Setting limits for energy usage for appliances on standby is much more sensible.

But that neatly takes all the responsibility away from the consumer and puts it on the device manufacturers, leaving the consumer at a loss to do anything about it - until they splash out on a new appliance (which they will likely either choose for factors other than its standby power consumption anyway, or mistakenly buy in the belief that it will reduce their environmental impact compared with using a perfectly serviceable existing appliance).

We need to push for both.

And however little standby current a device takes, it will still take more than if it were switched off at the wall.

Yes, people don't understand much about energy consumption, but allowing them to make a difference, however small, actually gets people thinking about the issues involved, and will lead to greater things. We have an awful lot of catching up to do, but these "silly figures" are newsworthy and so they get the debate going.

You definitely have a point, but you are pushing it too far, making you appear polarised and defeatist.

gromituk

Altarf wrote:

Silly argument, you would have to be a complete plank to plug in a dangerous phone charger that would burst into flames

Strangely enough, though, that's not what ailuro2 is saying. Any charger is a fire risk. The more you have switched on, the greater the risk of fire. The risk is small, of course, but the consequences are serious.

By the way, Aliuro2, no phone chargers that I know of switch off completely when not connected to a phone. It would not be possible to switch them on again if a completely dead phone were connected.

Also, putting a mains-rated switch on something costs considerably more than putting a low voltage switch on it. That is why an increasing number of appliances don't have mains switches any more.

Cardew

Altarf wrote:

As for the stupid numbers quoted by EST, they only manage to get the high figures by suggesting silly things. I mean, who is going to unplug their video recorder at the wall when they are not watching something. Setting limits for energy usage for appliances on standby is much more sensible.

Although I think that the Energy Saving Trust are a useful organisation, with a good website, I have to agree that their latest attempt to get some publicity is a nonsense.

It seems to me that Mr and Mrs Joe Public have no idea what the terms power/watts/kWh mean. From the mis-information put out by the EST it is understandable they think that a TV on standby is a major cause of their high electricity bill - instead of costing, for most modern TVs, pence per year.

Nobody is arguing that you shouldn't switch off if feasible and convienient. However my Sky+ box is used for recording and, much as I don't like it taking 14 watts, it would be pretty useless to me switched off at the mains; and I don't wish to get up at 2am to switch it on to record a programme from the USA. Ditto I don't wish to reset the timer on my Microwave and cooker constantly.

gromituk

Cardew wrote:

much as I don't like it taking 14 watts, it would be pretty useless to me switched off at the mains; and I don't wish to get up at 2am to switch it on to record a programme from the USA.

Put it on a plug-in timer then.

deanos

I dont think they mean turning things off at the plug like Sky+ off that need to be on , however you can put it in standby and it will still record not sure if it uses less electricity but it will do your hard drive alot of good by having a rest anyway

Cardew

deanos wrote:

I dont think they mean turning things off at the plug like Sky+ off that need to be on , however you can put it in standby and it will still record not sure if it uses less electricity but it will do your hard drive alot of good by having a rest anyway

Sky and Sky+ boxes are the worse culprits in that they use the same power(approx 14 watts) under all conditions - there is no standby as such.
Sky+ is either:
on and giving an output to the TV,
Recording,
On its internal timer for a future recording
none of the above!

Under all 4 conditions(and any combination of them) it draws the same power! Cost is £9 a year for me.

Cardew

gromituk wrote:

Strangely enough, though, that's not what ailuro2 is saying. Any charger is a fire risk. The more you have switched on, the greater the risk of fire. The risk is small, of course, but the consequences are serious.

By the way, Aliuro2, no phone chargers that I know of switch off completely when not connected to a phone. It would not be possible to switch them on again if a completely dead phone were connected.

Also, putting a mains-rated switch on something costs considerably more than putting a low voltage switch on it. That is why an increasing number of appliances don't have mains switches any more.

Grommit,
Nobody can dispute that anything with electricity connected to it is a fire risk; however as you say the risk is small.

From our meter onwards we have 240 volts supplied by(hidden) wire to every socket and switch in the house. I would have thought the chance of this high voltage shorting, sparking and starting a slow smouldering fire is much higher than any other source.

Think of the things we never switch off at the mains. My list would be:
Burglar alarm
Broadband router
Several radio alarm clocks.
Electric garage opener
Cordless telephone
Fire alarm and sprinkler – on mains not battery - (how ironic if that caused a fire)
Security floodlights
Kitchen appliances where mains switch is hidden
Fridges
Freezers
Fuse box
Door bell
Sky+ box
TV amplifier in attic
Plug in timers
Etc Etc

deanos

Cardew wrote:

Sky and Sky+ boxes are the worse culprits in that they use the same power(approx 14 watts) under all conditions - there is no standby as such.
Sky+ is either:
on and giving an output to the TV,
Recording,
On its internal timer for a future recording
none of the above!

Under all 4 conditions(and any combination of them) it draws the same power! Cost is £9 a year for me.

If you put the Sky+ box into standby it will stop the instant rewind recording and stop the hard drive from being in use, so it is good to put it into standby as a habit at night to stop wear on the hard drive.

Gray0103

My phone charges off my handsfree kit in the car, I have never charged my phone via mains electricity.

gromituk

Cardew wrote:

From our meter onwards we have 240 volts supplied by(hidden) wire to every socket and switch in the house. I would have thought the chance of this high voltage shorting, sparking and starting a slow smouldering fire is much higher than any other source.

I'd disagree with you there. Yes there is some risk, but there is much more from a power supply which is a portable appliance (so gets knocked about), generates heat anyway and contains components which are selected to just about do the job without failing.

You can make a big list of stuff which can fail and cause a fire, but I don't see the relevance of that. It doesn't make the extra phone charger any less likely to cause a fire, does it? I understand your point - there is a lot at risk anyway - but I don't accept that as an excuse for not trying to minimise the risk by minimising the number of unnecessary appliances on standby.

PS thought about putting your Sky+ box on a timer?