Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 13 Jul 2006.
Perhaps it will encourage manufacturers as a whole to think about how they're using energy.
Ok, take your PVRs, Sky+/TVDrive, VCRs etc there now usless along with quite a few other usefull items... imagine having to turn off your mains powered alarm clock radio every night because it goes into standby?
So why not have a battery in these items that is charged during use and then powers the standby at night? Or one step further have a solar charger during the day that charges that battery for the night?
Ok yeh im being vague and idealistic but there has to be less narrow minded ideas than simply banning a (very) useful feature.
Wouldn't that just use the same amount of power, except the mains energy is being used during the day?
And I have to say I hate stanby LEDs in my room, they annoy me at night and they don't have an off button such as my sky box and TV, I can't turn them off by the mains since my server runs on them and I need that overnight sometimes (I do turn it off when not in use for a while to save energy and reduce heat output).
What manufacturs should be concentrating on is reducing power usage whilst on standby.
Please use the whole quote...
It makes sense then
Yes, but you were implying charging the battery up in the day weren't you.
But if you went one step further to use solar, then yes it would make sense. In fact why not everyone have solar panels on their rooftops? In the long term its a money saver, or even a money maker.
A friend of mine's grandparents has solar panels on their rooftops, they make more electricity than they use so sell some to the national grid, not bad eh?
Takes about 40 years to break even last time I checked. High investment, hardly generates any significant energy. My school had a couple of solar cells on the roof, they had a single plug in the physics department for using the energy produced by those cells and when we tried to boil the minimum ammount of water that the departments kettle needed it didn't manage it.
I did imply that yes but I did hope people understood the progressive thinking in the way I wrote it.
But again that was my point, the narrow minded approach to the whole situation is whats really wrong. In 5 mins of posting between us we have come up with possible solutions and the governmet thinktank that came up with this idea took how long and cost how much? The quick and seemingly simple solution will in the lonng run cause more trouble than its worth.
How much electricity does an ATX PC use when it's shut down? There's always a small amount of power (5v?) running through the motherboard so it can be powered back up when you press the momentary button. Are we going to have to go back to the old AT days when we had a "proper" power switch.
I don't buy the whole energy saving light bulb thing.
An incandescent light bulb gives out heat and light, neither of which are wasted in a home environment. Whereas "energy saving" bulbs that give out only light, after about 5 minutes of giving out a dull glow.
Maybe I'm just cynical...
No. But ignorant maybe. Hmmm... I really relish all that heat being given out by my bulbs in these summer months. What are people complaining about?!?!
Maybe I'm just taking the piss...
Dunno about you mate but my flat's freezing
Why am I not surprised? It's 28C in this room, sometimes it gets as high as 34C, oh the joy of living in the far south
EDIT: And take a look at this
At times like this we could really use solar power!
Ah, sorry, mate. I forgot that the UK's entire energy policy should be balanced by looking at its effects on your abnormally cold flat.
Only a Scot would welcome the heat generated as a by-product of light emission as a saving on their heating bill.
That's good old fashioned family racism
But you agree, in my case, they're not inefficient
By the same standard, the UKs entire energy policy shouldn't be balanced by looking at Tony Blair's house
Edited to add:
Where does all the standby energy go? It can't disappear, so I'm guessing more heat to make my flat that slight bit less bitter in the mornings.
Where's the waste?
True enough, but the levels are so insignificant that the effect doesn't cause enough temperature rise to affect your use of heating (or perhaps air conditioning) systems.
Over my dead body, I'll import if it goes back to that...
In theory, wouldn't a more effective way to lower their fossil fuel use would be to not rely on fossil fuels as much? IE get some new, renewable resources to supply more of their power. This just seems silly in my opinion. Somebody run some tests with a power meter between the PCs to see how much power they actually use when in standby.
For your first statement, I have to agree. Take the hoover dam for example, this has provided millions of people with clean electricity for about 70 years which proves that renewable energy can be sucessful (most people seeem to think the opposite for some reason) wind turbines , sea turbines (plenty of sea in the UK!!!) and solar panels (on the M27 there is a bunch of solar panels that supplies 30 houses with electricity, it was done as a trial about 2 years ago but I'm not sure if it's been sucessful, the panels are still there.). I'm all in favour of this, not entirely sure about nuclear power since I'm a little scared of accidents etc.
As for your last sentence, the amount of power used it just a few watts I think, but that isn't the point. Multiply that but the number of goods on standby in your home, then multiply by the number of homes in the uk... yes thats a lot of wasted energy!
MrWillyWonka, nuclear power is not as bad as most people think. The fear has been drilled into us through events like Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl. With the A-bomb the whole objective was to kill people, so it's no surprise that so many died. Chernobyl, on the other hand, while unfortunate has only claimed ~60 lives to date. Furthermore, some studies suggest that exposure to low doses of radiation can actually be benefiacial and increase *resistance* to cancer. While I'm not a huge fan of nuclear power, I'd rather have that than rely on fossil fuels from highly unstable regions (which are rather hostile).
we here have lots of sun, and people use solar panels to heat water, it gets realy hot, like boiling hot. it saves energy when you want to shower and you dont want to burn gas.
the thing is....there are places on earth that are not populated but have tons of solar exposure, USE THEM. there are rivers that can be damed and dont affect anythng, USE THEM, there are hundreds of ways to save energy.
another thing about turning off lights at night on the streets....its idiotic in my perspective, you could get beat up, killed, rapped, robbed, kidnaped, etc.....
for cars we could be using methanol and other less polutent and efficient fuels, we dont use them because if we do, the world econoby goes to the ground....BAH!!!!! what a f***ed up world.
Separate names with a comma.