Doorbell always uses electricity!

Page 7 of 10  
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:36:33 -0800 (PST), snipped-for-privacy@care2.com wrote:

True, as I stared before - however if there is no CURRENT draw, there is no POWER. The ones that draw no current consume no power. Those that draw .o5A consume somewhat less than the calculated 5.85 watts at 117 volts.

Nope. 0 amps indicated means less than 0.01 amp. As I clearly stated, accurate to 0.01 amp.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If it indicates less than .01 amp for that Variac, and the Variac is not disconnected somehow, I doubt the emeter is accurate at all.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 02:23:05 +0000 (UTC), snipped-for-privacy@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:

Well, I tested it and it works - and the idle current IS less than .01 amps. I'll check it with my lab meter when I get a chance.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

A true RMS one? If th meter is a true RMS one, it will boast about that.

I have trouble a Variac that size not drawing a watt or two, And aren't they rated in VA and not watts?
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 02:21:21 +0000 (UTC), snipped-for-privacy@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:

It is rated at 200 va - which at unity power factor would be 200 watts. As it was used for controlling a heating element it had a 200 watt limit. It is a 0 - 110% voltage transformer, and the idle current does not change from min to max . The meter I am using is a UPM EM100 energy meter set to the amp scale. The watt scale also reads 0, and when I plug one of the wall warts in it does read - HOWEVER, the minimum reading is 2 watts and 0.02 amps, so when it says 0, it means less than 0.02 amps, and less than 2 watts. (not less than 1, which I had previously reported)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope, most are just rubbing your nose in your stupidity.

No one is getting upset, just rubbing your nose in your stupidity.

Not with a single doorbell, stupid.
And just replacing the transformer with a modern switch mode wall wart will save almost all the power it currently uses, tho it still isnt cost efficient.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:40:02 -0800, "Bill"

Pleae do not confuse Wikipedia for facts. As to that 75% number, it is highly suspect.
Again, a simple cost/benefit analysis would show the best path to follow. However, simple math is beyond many people who blindly follow whatever the current fad is (be it global warming, electric cars, or whatever) in an attempt to appear 'on top of things', and 'all wise'.
In the end, sure you can save a few penny's of electricity, and spend dollars doing so. And perhaps you feel good doing it that way. Fine, it's your house, as long as no one else gets hurt, go for it. But, if you are really interested in saving money (or energy) then I'd recommend thinking about what you are doing, looking at real numbers, analyzing the various factors (including items such as startup current) and seeing what is the real best solution.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Exactly. What interested people here I think was the the fallacy and futility of worrying about a minuscule amount of wasted energy; equivalent perhaps to the home heat lost during time taken to have the front door open on a cold day to bring in a few bags of groceries!
It's heartening though that in this day and age of wasteful and prodigal monster homes, jacuzzi and swimming pool styles of living, V8 Hummers etc. (A situation possibly being currently amended by 'tightening our belts'?) is that there is awareness and interest in WHAT IS WORTH DOING to conserve.
What seems to escape many is that by spending many dollars to use manufactured items one only saves a few cents worth of energy. All manufactured items require resources and energy to manufacture. For example how much elctrcity is required say, to refine iron ore, make galvanized sheet steel and stamp out an electrical outlet box, along with the energy required to run the factory in which it is made, package it, transport it to a local retail outlet, stock the shelves, buy or have screws to mount, bring it home, etc. etc. ??????
A neighbour (driven by a wife with virtually zero technical appreciation) has gone all CFLs. Even for those locations where lights are only used occasionally. Each CFL costs around $3 compared to the 25 cent el-cheapos I use and requires several manufacturing operations involving electronic components and a very small amount of mercury. But their electricity consumption has changed little.
Why? Because they like most here they use electrcity for heating. So any waste heat from 'inefficient' old fashioned incandescent light bulbs does not contribute to warming the home; likewise an 'inefficient' fridge etc. lost heat from an electric hot water tank etc.
One item that does waste heat energy is a clothes dryer; it just chucks warm damp air outside for some 20 to 30 minutes each time it is run. Hey must cost that out! We run ours as little as possible and whenver weather allows dry heavy items, blankets, towels etc. on our two cothes lines. See item on clothe line supports.
Cheers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My best friend has degrees in electronics, electrial power and once was a design engineer for at the time a major power transformer manufacturer.
I asdked him about standby losses, he rreports it depends on ntheb transformer. they can be built to be ultra low, which cost more, or lossy and cheap to build.
government should require energy efficency numbers on everything with minimum standards
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

I respectfully disagree.
It's more than enough that the government has mandated energy efficiency labels on MAJOR energy consuming items such as HVAC components, water heaters, laundry equipment, refrigerators and freezers.
Mandating testing and labeling for energy efficiency on "everything" from toasters (virtually 100% efficient, BTW) to doorbell transformers would be too intrusive, costly and accomplish little if anything.
Government rarely "gets it right" with the big and important things. I shudder to think of it getting into such trivial things.
--
:)
JR

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I've gone through my home and examined *every* electrical gadget, appliance, etc.
98% of the products I have use electricity when not being used! 98%!!!!
Things which have no reason to use power when off! Things which used to have a regular on/off switch.
Seems to me someone wants me to be using more electricity!
So I post on the internet that I am shutting this stuff off and I get a good number of responses NOT wanting me to do this!
Seems to me someone wants me to be using more electricity!
Now a consumer suggests manufacturers should be required to make products which use less electricity when off. Then that person gets hit with flak!
Seems to me someone wants everyone to be using more electricity!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:18:47 -0800, "Bill"

Hey, not me.
Vic - VP Marketing, Commonwealth Edison
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:18:47 -0800, "Bill"

Seems to me that you repeat yourself .... *A LOT*.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill wrote:

It's not that no problem exists. You've said that you've *saved* over $120/mo in electricity (more than twice as much as my entire electric bill!). Clearly somewhere in your house there are things pulling massive amounts of power.
What most of us are saying is that things like doorbell transformers and wall warts don't consume enough electricity to be significant in this. Now, unplugging unused wall warts isn't a bad idea. I've got most of the ones I use to recharge batteries plugged into an outlet strip, and only turn it on when I'm recharging something. But I don't know if I'm recouping enough money to pay for the (cheap) outlet strip. Where you need to look is 1) things that make heat (esp. electric heaters, furnaces, stoves, and water heaters, for the most part stuff like hair driers, coffee makers, waffle irons, etc. aren't turned on for long enough to be of major significance if you're not living in a restaurant or hair salon), 2) things with powerful electric motors (A/C, heat pumps, dehumidifiers, blowers, refrigerators and freezers), and 3) incandescent (including halogen) bulbs that are on for long periods. Pretty much in that order. Those things are where your payback can be real, and large.
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the outlet strip likely has a power on light of some sort wasting power when its on..
individually the amount wasted is likely small, however nationwide for everyone it must add up and waste is waste.....
given global change and energy costs the less waste the better.
and my retired engineer pointed out things can be more efficent if you design it this way.
its governments job to encourage efficency.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:58:51 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@aol.com"

But how do you control it when 95%+ of the crap consuming the "phantom" power is made in China? They don't play by the US's rules.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

But the Chi Coms need to meet our requirements if it is sold here. I can't remember the last time I saw a new walwart that wasn't a much more efficient switcher design instead of an inefficient transformer.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:
[snip]

The new wall-warts are smaller, but it's NOT by eliminating the transformer. These new ones begin with an AC-to-AC converter, that operates on line voltage and raises the frequency. A higher frequency requires a smaller transformer.
"Switcher" refers to a more efficient voltage regulator, that controls the DC output by turning it on and off rather than by wasting power like a linear regulator (as in older wall warts) does. This also makes it smaller by reducing the need for a heat sink.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They dont have any transformer that uses power all the time.

Wrong. It always refers to what you listed above.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:27:10 +1100, "Rod Speed"
[snip]

Possible with any wall-wart you add a switch to. Making it automatic would be tricky, without power to turn it back on.

That's one of the many varieties of "always" that are strangely non-inclusive. Maybe you've never heard of "switching regulators", but I have a lot.
The AC-to-AC converter allows a smaller, lighter transformer (which I expect draws less power with 0 load).. Perhaps you mistake "low power" for "no power". That sort of mistake is very common. [snip]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.