Nick wrote:
> Brian A wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 21:24:00 -0800, LVMarc <LVMarc@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> A new guide shows how much energy is saved by small diferences in
>>> product energy consumption. Perhaps now is a good time to consider
>>> the value of ultra low powered devices.
>>>
>>> http://reviews.ebay.com/Energy-Savin...00000002996002
>>>
>>>
>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...me=mem_guide:2
>>>
>>>
>>
>> This is something I have been commenting on for a long time in
>> relation to services that require the use of a PC to operate (e.g.
>> Skype etc.) I maintain that you need to add the cost of running
>> hardware to the cost of your telephone service.
>>
>> Even a very modest modern PC consumes 70Wh (without the monitor) -
>> many others take much more.
>> I did an audit on hourly power consumption of other devices in my
>> house when on standby.
>> This might surprise you:-
>> Sky box 19W
>> Netgem DTT STB 8W
>> DVD 16W
>> VCR 5W
>> Hard disk DTT recorder 23W
>> Cordless phone (satellite NOT main base) 2W
>> There are 4 cordless phones in total but it isn't practical to switch
>> those off. The remainder of the above items, however, use up approx.
>> 52 units of electricty per month. That's 624 units per year. At
>> 9p/unit that's GBP56/year! A 70W computer (AMD64 2800 for example),
>> running 24/7 for Skype, would ADD another GBP 55/year to that.
>>
>> I don't leave my PC switched on and I have since unplugged most of the
>> above. The Sky box is now on a timer so it is switched off during the
>> night.
>>
>
> Actually I think the VOIP device energy saving predictions based on a
> seven year life span are clearly silly. Most devices get binned long
> before 7 years.
>
> However a time switch on a socket that services many small devices
> around say a TV or PC does sound sensible.
>
>
>
>> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
seven yars is the modeled lifetime of typical consumer products. The
combine-a-line will last even longer thasn that! The seven yeas is
also the balamce point for a 42 dollar net savings which is equal to the
typical price of these adapters.


as you noted the power levels were much higher than the 4.2 watts I
used! so the payback and energy waste is eve higher than stated..

Thanks for reading

Marc