HDTV phantom power drain

I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.

On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:08 -0600, root wrote:

I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.

I'm a firm believer in using electronics the way they were engineered.
In the case of most all flat panel TV's, that means leaving them
plugged in and using the power button on the unit, or the remote
control to turn them on.

In the case of my Sony, it avoids having to go through a PITA
initialization routine every time its cold started.

I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
patently false and misleading.

A_C

On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:10:39 -0400, Agent_C
wrote:

I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
patently false and misleading.
I suspect the TV ad's I have seen are some of the worst possible cases :/

Have you bothered to measure your stuff?
Believe me, there is stuff at both ends of the % of in normal use scale for
stuff that is "OFF" or standby.
Is it warm after long periods of non-use is a clue that power is being
dissipated.

1) Wall warts never turn OFF, so if each one drew +only+ 1 Watt in idle mode,
That is 24 watt hours EACH or a roughly a KWH every 40 days. NB Really cheap
ones (containing cheap Iron transformers) idle at 3 to 5 Watts.

2 Having a AC power cord does not prove idle power efficiency. It depends
where the "Power" switch" interrupts the power (and to *What*). Some things
take the /easy way out/ and just blank the displays and indicators

Add that there are probably some things you don't want to power off fully
*ever*: Clocks, Security appliances, Freezers.
The biggest savings are for things that are not used for days at a time.
If you are talking a few hours of OFF, then I think the extra stress of
frequent cold starts is going to be more costly than the savings potential
YMMV

Agent_C wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:08 -0600, root wrote:

I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.

I'm a firm believer in using electronics the way they were engineered.
In the case of most all flat panel TV's, that means leaving them
plugged in and using the power button on the unit, or the remote
control to turn them on.

In the case of my Sony, it avoids having to go through a PITA
initialization routine every time its cold started.

I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
patently false and misleading.

A_C

Have you measured the vampire power drain of some of your electronics?
You may be surprised at how much some devices suck down when they are
'off'. Get a Kill-A-Watt meter and find out.

Alan F

On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:10:39 -0400 Agent_C wrote:
| On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:08 -0600, root wrote:
|
|I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.
|
| I'm a firm believer in using electronics the way they were engineered.
| In the case of most all flat panel TV's, that means leaving them
| plugged in and using the power button on the unit, or the remote
| control to turn them on.

I'm a firm believer in not using electronics the way they were mis-engineered.
I'm also a firm believer in using energy efficiently, and not using when it is
not needed.


| In the case of my Sony, it avoids having to go through a PITA
| initialization routine every time its cold started.

In the case of Sony, it is clearly very poorly engineered, especially at the
software level, if it can't complete its bootup and initialization withn in
second or two. It doesn't need to be starting up a web database.


| I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
| consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
| example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
| use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
| patently false and misleading.

A few actually do use as much as 25%. Most use about 5% to 10%.

A friend of mine with a large CRT-type TV found that his TV was using 65 watts
of power when off, and about 350 watts when on.

Would you leave a 60-watt lightbulb on that was not lightning up anything that
is used most of the time, just so you'd have the light just a bit quicker than
if you had to turn it on by hand, a few times a day you go into that room?

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:10:39 -0400 Agent_C wrote:
| On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:08 -0600, root wrote:
|
|I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.
|
| I'm a firm believer in using electronics the way they were engineered.
| In the case of most all flat panel TV's, that means leaving them
| plugged in and using the power button on the unit, or the remote
| control to turn them on.

I'm a firm believer in not using electronics the way they were mis-engineered.
I'm also a firm believer in using energy efficiently, and not using when it is
not needed.


| In the case of my Sony, it avoids having to go through a PITA
| initialization routine every time its cold started.

In the case of Sony, it is clearly very poorly engineered, especially at the
software level, if it can't complete its bootup and initialization withn in
second or two. It doesn't need to be starting up a web database.


| I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
| consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
| example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
| use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
| patently false and misleading.

A few actually do use as much as 25%. Most use about 5% to 10%.

A friend of mine with a large CRT-type TV found that his TV was using 65 watts
of power when off, and about 350 watts when on.

Would you leave a 60-watt lightbulb on that was not lightning up anything that
is used most of the time, just so you'd have the light just a bit quicker than
if you had to turn it on by hand, a few times a day you go into that room?

If "a bit quicker" meant moving furniture around to reach the outlet to
plug it in and again to unplug it when I'm through with the lamp I
would. With some electronics this would instead involve scanning
channels for a digital tuner, maintaining the contents of a program
guide, waiting to reload the decryption authorizations for a
cable/satellite STB, setting a clock or charging an MP3 player.

On Wed, 07 May 2008 18:41:06 -0400 RobertVA wrote:
| wrote:
| On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:10:39 -0400 Agent_C wrote:
| | On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:08 -0600, root wrote:
| |
| |I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.
| |
| | I'm a firm believer in using electronics the way they were engineered.
| | In the case of most all flat panel TV's, that means leaving them
| | plugged in and using the power button on the unit, or the remote
| | control to turn them on.
|
| I'm a firm believer in not using electronics the way they were mis-engineered.
| I'm also a firm believer in using energy efficiently, and not using when it is
| not needed.
|
|
| | In the case of my Sony, it avoids having to go through a PITA
| | initialization routine every time its cold started.
|
| In the case of Sony, it is clearly very poorly engineered, especially at the
| software level, if it can't complete its bootup and initialization withn in
| second or two. It doesn't need to be starting up a web database.
|
|
| | I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
| | consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
| | example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
| | use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
| | patently false and misleading.
|
| A few actually do use as much as 25%. Most use about 5% to 10%.
|
| A friend of mine with a large CRT-type TV found that his TV was using 65 watts
| of power when off, and about 350 watts when on.
|
| Would you leave a 60-watt lightbulb on that was not lightning up anything that
| is used most of the time, just so you'd have the light just a bit quicker than
| if you had to turn it on by hand, a few times a day you go into that room?
|
| If "a bit quicker" meant moving furniture around to reach the outlet to
| plug it in and again to unplug it when I'm through with the lamp I
| would. With some electronics this would instead involve scanning
| channels for a digital tuner, maintaining the contents of a program
| guide, waiting to reload the decryption authorizations for a
| cable/satellite STB, setting a clock or charging an MP3 player.

I've yet to see a lamp, such as a table lamp, where the integrated on/off
switch doesn't really turn it all the way off. So you would not need to
do that with a lamp. Just turn the lamp off and it's off.

FYI, many, but not all, computer PSUs have a switch on the back that really
turns them off. Does yours? Do you use it when turning your computer off?

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2008 18:41:06 -0400 RobertVA wrote:
| wrote:
| On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:10:39 -0400 Agent_C wrote:
| | On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:08 -0600, root wrote:
| |
| |I shut the HDTV off (Philips 42PFL7422D/37) first with the remote, then with a power strip to eliminate power usage when I'm not using it. Any drawbacks to this, other than a slower turn on time? I am concerned about the electronics blowing out because there seems to be some sort of trauma to the thing when the plug is pulled.
| |
| | I'm a firm believer in using electronics the way they were engineered.
| | In the case of most all flat panel TV's, that means leaving them
| | plugged in and using the power button on the unit, or the remote
| | control to turn them on.
|
| I'm a firm believer in not using electronics the way they were mis-engineered.
| I'm also a firm believer in using energy efficiently, and not using when it is
| not needed.
|
|
| | In the case of my Sony, it avoids having to go through a PITA
| | initialization routine every time its cold started.
|
| In the case of Sony, it is clearly very poorly engineered, especially at the
| software level, if it can't complete its bootup and initialization withn in
| second or two. It doesn't need to be starting up a web database.
|
|
| | I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
| | consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
| | example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some appliances
| | use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
| | patently false and misleading.
|
| A few actually do use as much as 25%. Most use about 5% to 10%.
|
| A friend of mine with a large CRT-type TV found that his TV was using 65 watts
| of power when off, and about 350 watts when on.
|
| Would you leave a 60-watt lightbulb on that was not lightning up anything that
| is used most of the time, just so you'd have the light just a bit quicker than
| if you had to turn it on by hand, a few times a day you go into that room?
|
| If "a bit quicker" meant moving furniture around to reach the outlet to
| plug it in and again to unplug it when I'm through with the lamp I
| would. With some electronics this would instead involve scanning
| channels for a digital tuner, maintaining the contents of a program
| guide, waiting to reload the decryption authorizations for a
| cable/satellite STB, setting a clock or charging an MP3 player.

I've yet to see a lamp, such as a table lamp, where the integrated on/off
switch doesn't really turn it all the way off. So you would not need to
do that with a lamp. Just turn the lamp off and it's off.

FYI, many, but not all, computer PSUs have a switch on the back that really
turns them off. Does yours? Do you use it when turning your computer off?

Actually I do have a lamp I don't want to replace that has a
non-functioning oddball switch that would be hard to replace.
Fortunately that lamp is in a location where I like to leave it
operating all evening, so I've equipped it with a compact florescent and
a timer.

Nope, I'm not getting on my hands and knees to reach the back of CPU's
power supply and if I were to move the UPS to a position that isn't
equally inconvenient I'd be tripping over it or all the cords coming out
of it (CPU, monitor, modem, router, speakers, scanner, printer, external
hard drive etc).

On Thu, 08 May 2008 04:22:37 -0400, RobertVA
wrote:

and
a timer.
Look at the power consumed for a timer :/
Almost Half of what a small CFL draws

On May 7, 8:37*am, Steve Urbach
wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:10:39 -0400, Agent_C Agent-C-hates-

wrote:

I think FAR too much is made of this tiny trickle of power they
consume while not in use, and it's often grossly overstated. For
example, I read in a brochure from Con Edison, that some
appliances
use 'as mush as 25%' of their power while not in use; that's just
patently false and misleading.

I suspect the TV ad's I have seen are some of the worst possible
cases :/

Have you bothered to measure your stuff?
Believe me, there is stuff at both ends of the % of in normal use
scale for
stuff that is "OFF" or standby.
*Is it warm after long periods of non-use is a clue that power is
being
dissipated.

1) Wall warts never turn OFF, so if each one drew +only+ 1 Watt in
idle mode,
That is 24 watt hours EACH or a roughly a KWH every 40 days. NB
Really cheap
ones (containing cheap Iron transformers) idle at 3 to 5 Watts.

I have my doubts about 3-5 watts. That 'much' power in a small box
such as the wall wart would get pretty hot. Check the heat from a 4
watt night light.

2 Having a AC power cord does not prove idle power efficiency. It
depends
where the "Power" switch" interrupts the power (and to *What*).
Some things
take the /easy way out/ and just blank the displays and indicators

Add that there are probably some things you don't want to power off
fully
*ever*: Clocks, Security appliances, Freezers.
The biggest savings are for things that are not used for days at a
time.
If you are talking a few hours of OFF, then I think the extra
stress of
frequent cold starts is going to be more costly than the savings
potential
YMMV

Like the "Energy Star" monitor that has to be partially powered so
that is 'hears' the sync pulses to turn on for real. My first 4 PCs
actually went stone dead at power down.

GG