Ummm... no, you didn't. It's right there: "...TVs and computers, which just
happen to be the main uses of power in the average home ..."
Now that may not be what you *meant* ... but it is what you *said*.
Yes, did you miss the collectively?
How could you possibly think otherwise?
Isn't this whole thread about the amount of energy wasted while in standby?
Actually, and I had misnamed before, Energy should be what we are
talking about as energy has a time component. The power company bills
for the amount of energy you use. The amount of power you use at any
instant is usually irrelevant (unless you have peak billing).
Now, I would say that most stoves use more energy on than off(there's
wide range here, I'm sure my old Jennaire uses no power when off).
I don't know how much power a typical stove with electronic controls
uses but I found this.
The clock on the microwave uses more energy than the oven
The first time I heard that statement I thought,"Great, another
electrical myth, like the myth that you should leave lights on because
they take a lot of electricity to start up.". After all, I knew that the
oven uses about 1000 watts while the clock uses five.
But then I thought, wait a minute, the clock is running 24/7, while the
oven is running just a few minutes a day. Then I did the math:
How much energy the clock uses in a day: 5 (watts) x 24 (hours) 120 (watt-hours)
How long it takes the microwave to the same amount of energy:
120 watt-hours / 1000 watts = 0.12 hours, or 7.2 minutes
This means that if you use a typical microwave oven for less than 7.2
minutes/day, the clock uses more electricity than the oven. Wow.
That sounds perhaps even low to me and it is possible it uses twice
the power while off. I suppose I could dig out my amprobe and check my
late model name brand microwave since I don't have a kill a watt meter.
They are but one "electronic" device in a home though.
Who said otherwise? If you read this thread, I've never advocated
removing a clock from a stove, quite the opposite.
You are, of course, neglecting the power supply losses. Non switching
regulators typically throw away half or more of the power. The trend is
away from them.
Oh blah blah blah.
For my late model GE smallish microwave, it uses 3 watts on idle. That
required winding 30 turns on an amprobe, measuring the current and
dividing by 30 and then multiplying by the line voltage. If you had the
same MW and used it 5 minutes the phantom energy is equal to the in use
What does yours use?
I have never recommended removing clocks from anything, quite the
contrary. But just because they are necessary does not mean they aren't
trivial. Considering that a microwave is a high drain device while in
operation just shows the depth of the problem for all the low drain
devices that probably have higher idle drain. The old cable boxes
certainly spring to mind. So does anything run by a wall wart.
I have no problem in believing that at least 5% of the energy used in
this country is phantom losses. Probably half of that is recoverable by
better design. With the cost of copper what it is, I'd think wall warts
have a limited future.
Well, we do seem to be arguing the number of angels dancing on pinheads.
That sounds believable, and since you actually measured I'll accept that.
Actually, I wish they would do away with clocks in microwaves and
kitchen appliances in general. I don't need or want extra clocks
in my kitchen. The only reason my coffee maker has one is that the
coffee makers with clocks have an auto-shutoff that I consider a
safety freature. I really don't like that there are 2 LEDs on there
that do nothing of value, but stay lit all the time.
Again, I'm probably not typical as I only have 1 TV and no cable box
or satellite receiver. My stereo receiver stays on 24/7 because it
has some issues with powering on after being turned off and is too
old to have any sort of standby mode or remote control, but I'll be
replacing that one of these days. That receiver also exhibits some
elements of poor design, in my opinion. For example it has a pair
of lights which indicate a "high blend" function is either on or off.
This function is automatic and there is no user control to defeat it,
so why do I need a pair of lights to tell me about it? I see a lot
of stuff like that which I consider a waste of both materials and
Really, I'm pretty much in agreement with you here. 5% sounds reasonable.
Even 10% would not surprise me. I just don't like alarmist language
and exageration when real facts and reasonable arguments should be enough.
And, I will say that you, Jeff, are not who I'm talking about being
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:03:28 +0000 (UTC), firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Not really. Transformers draw significant power even when there is no
demand upon them. They just turn it into heat rather than work.
Plug in a wall wart with no load on it and measure the temperature and
current draw after an hour. That's a very tiny transformer.
If you remove one tube form a two tube florescent light fixture with
an old fashioned transformer, it hardly changes power consumption at
On that last point, I find that the power consumption changes a lot.
The change is less when the ballast is one of those "pseudoparallel"
electronic ones rated to power more than one quantity of tubes, and the
remaining tube(s) get increased power when one tube is removed. But the
overall power consumption still goes down when one tube is removed.
- Don Klipstein ( email@example.com)
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.