[JagoPlasma]

people are always moaning about standby and the government/eu are all talking about banning it.

imo its a big mistake as id just end up leaving my tv and kit on all the time, the manufacturers had it right by creating standby (all imo of course)

what if we had a little solar panel hooked upto a rechargable battery in the tv, and we could hang the panel outside.

it doesnt take much at all to power standby so do you think this is a solution thats workable?

of course too many devices will lead to alot of panels outside, so maybe a socket on the wall that leads to just one panel outside, and then you can connect a few of the devices to it

any other ideas?

something tht measures the power flow on the main socket so when the stand by mode kicks in the devices picks it up and after say 5 minutes of the lower power flow, kills the power to the device in standby??

why not make it a "standard" of all wall sockets? so basicly there is no "off" mode for the device jst standby and no power from the main socket [do the revers of what the gov. wants to do {take standby away, Take "off" away}] and implement a "Smart" socket [they are getting outdated imo]

[njp]

I don't think the standby function should be banned. I think there should be mandatory requirements on how much power it is allowed to use, and I also think that manufacturers should be required to provide an 'off' switch on the front panel so that consumers can switch off their appliances completely if they wish to without recourse to pulling out the plug.

I think the environmental harm from adding rechargeable batteries and solar panels would almost certainly outweigh any advantage such a scheme might have over a well designed standby function.

Originally Posted by njp

I don't think the standby function should be banned. I think there should be mandatory requirements on how much power it is allowed to use, and I also think that manufacturers should be required to provide an 'off' switch on the front panel so that consumers can switch off their appliances completely if they wish to without recourse to pulling out the plug.

I think the environmental harm from adding rechargeable batteries and solar panels would almost certainly outweigh any advantage such a scheme might have over a well designed standby function.

Does anyone have any figures for standby power consumption? I think even older equipment uses only 5W max and recent stuff < 1W. That is peanuts compared with leaving 50-100W lights on for hours when minutes is all that is needed, not to mention all the inefficient fridges, CH boilers, etc., out there.

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by nikyzf

Does anyone have any figures for standby power consumption? I think even older equipment uses only 5W max and recent stuff < 1W. That is peanuts compared with leaving 50-100W lights on for hours when minutes is all that is needed, not to mention all the inefficient fridges, CH boilers, etc., out there.

Well if you look at the figures quoted by many of manufacturers of standard sized plasma sets (42"), they quote a standby figure of 1 watt, which for a 300-400W device is pretty good. However the crazy figures quoted by the media of 100% power consumption on standby might refer to some set-top boxes. The biggest waste of power IMHO must be the huge number of fashion shops who use huge arrays of high pressure discharge lamps where probably half the consumption would be suffice.

I think the way forward will be for manufacturers to install 'intelligent' standby whereby the standby power will be knocked off during the night and 'resurrected' during operational hours either automatically or by the user.

[njp]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

However the crazy figures quoted by the media of 100% power consumption on standby might refer to some set-top boxes.

I think the main problem is that most journalists have no clue at all about what they are saying. There is a lot of confusion between power and energy, so some of the "crazy" figures are the result of assumptions about the duty cycle of a typical appliance. A TV that consumes 100W when it's on, and 1W when it's on standby, will obviously consume as much energy on standby as when on, if it spends 100 times as much time on standby, and by tweaking those numbers you can get any answer you want. Such an analysis can actually make low power appliances look worse, because there is no reason why standby power needs to increase in line with "on" power. Journalists typically just repeat such figures without explaining (or knowing) where they come from.

I do think that there is a lot of room for improvement in appliances where the standby mode does something other than just wait for a command to switch on - as in the typical set top box.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by njp

I think the main problem is that most journalists have no clue at all about what they are saying. There is a lot of confusion between power and energy, so some of the "crazy" figures are the result of assumptions about the duty cycle of a typical appliance. A TV that consumes 100W when it's on, and 1W when it's on standby, will obviously consume as much energy on standby as when on, if it spends 100 times as much time on standby, and by tweaking those numbers you can get any answer you want. Such an analysis can actually make low power appliances look worse, because there is no reason why standby power needs to increase in line with "on" power. Journalists typically just repeat such figures without explaining (or knowing) where they come from.

I do think that there is a lot of room for improvement in appliances where the standby mode does something other than just wait for a command to switch on - as in the typical set top box.

A nice little analysis NJP.

[njp]

Consider yourself thanked, Damo, in the absence of the button...

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

A nice little analysis NJP.

Agreed. There is a lot of nonsense said about this, usually by people who don't even know what a watt is. Some journalists know the basics, but many don't.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by njp

Consider yourself thanked, Damo, in the absence of the button...

Why's there no button mate?

To many a layman, the terms 'power' and 'energy' are interchangeable, in my opinion. From my experience most journo's haven't a clue about science.

[njp]

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

Why's there no button mate?

It's back, so I've used it before it vanishes again...

There seems to be a lot of tweaking of the forum software going on at the moment...

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by njp

It's back, so I've used it before it vanishes again...

There seems to be a lot of tweaking of the forum software going on at the moment...

I presume it would be bad form to thank you for thanking me, it could end up with a kind of runaway reaction But thank you anyway.

I was in, just for one moment, my paranoid mood once again. I for a minute wondered if the ‘Thanks’ button had been removed from only my posts

Since my Road Pricing thread was closed by Ian J I have been a little defensive. I haven't bothered to contribute in the last couple of days as it appears my views, nor indeed my 'style' of posting, are welcome here, at least from the perspective of Ian J. My complaint, through the legitimate mechanism, has not elicited a response so I can see the direction the wind is blowing here.

Zone appears to be a good sport though

PS, by the way, have you noticed our post count recently

[Corey USA]

Our nature center has done a study on there electrical draw and in the case of the TV's it consumed 6 watts not 1 watt that the label on back claimed.

even if you did have it at 1 Watt it has a accumulative effect with everything else plugged in. along with adding all the people who have things that have standby mode. It adds up and it is energy wasted that is not actively being used. Where is the proof that by shutting it off your shortening the life of the gizmo? The proof needs to be done independently of big business.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Corey USA

Our nature center has done a study on there electrical draw and in the case of the TV's it consumed 6 watts not 1 watt that the label on back claimed.

even if you did have it at 1 Watt it has a accumulative effect with everything else plugged in. along with adding all the people who have things that have standby mode. It adds up and it is energy wasted that is not actively being used. Where is the proof that by shutting it off your shortening the life of the gizmo? The proof needs to be done independently of big business.

One Watt, over say, the entire world population, is around 6GW. How many coal fired power stations is that? What percentage of world power consumption is that?

Get some perspective man.

[Corey USA]

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

One Watt, over say, the entire world population, is around 6GW. How many coal fired power stations is that? What percentage of world power consumption is that?



Get some perspective man.

one person may have more than one thing using standby. it depends on the number of things a person has that uses stand by. Also I pointed out that the TV claimed to use 1 watt at standby when in reality it uses 6 watt.

The other point why waste energy when you are not actively using it??

we have finite resources and the pollution associated with the use of energy.
It is total waste when using energy such as standby when not actively using it.

that is the whole issue of standby its using energy when not actively using it.

My perspective is waste not, when not using.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Corey USA

My perspective is waste not, when not using.

Did you turn your computer off between your last post and your reply to mine?

[Corey USA]

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

Did you turn your computer off between your last post and your reply to mine?

If I am not activly using it it gets unplugged.

[JagoPlasma]

but some things need standby. like a sky box, if i want it to record something i have to leave it in standby.

and leaving everything else in standby helps me as it means i dont have to get off my fat arse to turn things on its not the 80's you know

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by JagoPlasma

but some things need standby. like a sky box, if i want it to record something i have to leave it in standby.

and leaving everything else in standby helps me as it means i dont have to get off my fat arse to turn things on its not the 80's you know

I think you'll find that memorised settings, such as timer and programmed recordings, for example will be safely stored, but relatively power-hungry LED displays might be shut down through standby. But really, it's all a storm in a teacup!

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

I think you'll find that memorised settings, such as timer and programmed recordings, for example will be safely stored, but relatively power-hungry LED displays might be shut down through standby. But really, it's all a storm in a teacup!

We can agree on something! There are far more wasteful things than standby to worry about, if only to cut our bills.

[nabby]

For those of you interested, here's a link to a report ("The Ampere Strikes Back")just published by the Energy Savings Trust (EST)
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/...trikesBack.pdf

[njp]

I'm not sure I could ever forgive them that pun, regardless of the content (which I haven't looked at yet)!

[JagoPlasma]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

I think you'll find that memorised settings, such as timer and programmed recordings, for example will be safely stored, but relatively power-hungry LED displays might be shut down through standby. But really, it's all a storm in a teacup!

safely stored yes, but will it record when the powers off? no, hence the need for standby.

As for tvs i dont see why we cant have standby, you could also say whats the point in remote controls? they use power, yet if you get up and go to the tv to change channel then you dont need them.

if standby and remotes get banned il be going black market and aftermarket modding

[Corey USA]

Originally Posted by nabby

For those of you interested, here's a link to a report ("The Ampere Strikes Back")just published by the Energy Savings Trust (EST)
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/...trikesBack.pdf

that was sobering just goes to show the need to reduce and conserve as much as possible.

Now if we could just get people to recognize the total cost which includes the human suffering. thus I added the thread related to the human cost and over population.

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by JagoPlasma

safely stored yes, but will it record when the powers off? no, hence the need for standby.

As for tvs i dont see why we cant have standby, you could also say whats the point in remote controls? they use power, yet if you get up and go to the tv to change channel then you dont need them.

if standby and remotes get banned il be going black market and aftermarket modding

But when recording, this is a one off event and not dependant on having all the indicators and clock displays on. Obviously it would make something like a pvr pretty much nonfunctional! The main function of standby power is to allow the item to respond to RCs immediately. However I don't see the need for RC functions to be redesigned so don't give up your day job!