Re: Bollocks: Call to scrap TV standby buttons to help environment

Norman Wells wrote:
In article <put242ltisb7a9ti4723v5qkdmv88b4q55@xxxxxxx>, Hugo Nebula
<abuse@localhost.?> writes
I don't think I'm unusual, and I certainly like my house to be warm.
If you need your heating on 24/7 to keep your house at 21°, you need
to look at insulating it a bit better, and the 6 Watts from your TV
won't make a dent in your heating needs.

My point, which you've overlooked, is that the amount of useful gain
from appliances left on standby is significantly less than half the
energy used (even ignoring the production losses), and is anything but
carbon neutral.

But there's the nub of the argument. If you can't detect the 6 watts
from your TV on standby, and it doesn't alter the amount of heating you
require even in the room where it actually sits, it's hardly
contributing to global warming either.

That's absurd. 6 watts is 6 watts. Multiply by millions of households and you're talking power stations worth of wasted energy, and therefore hundreds of thousands tonnes of CO2 emissions.

The sad thing is the likes of California is always moaning about power brownouts, but I bet you virtually every household in that state has TVs on standby, every office has computers turned on all night and in the summer, the AC would be running almost continuously.

--
"Hello. I'm Leonard Nimoy. The following tale of alien encounters is true. And by true, I mean false. It's all lies. But they're entertaining lies. And in the end, isn't that the real truth? The answer is: No."
.

Quantcast