Talk:Standby power

message: "As global warming becomes more of a factor, reducing power consumption gets more and more important and eliminating standby power is a urgent measure to adopt a hard line to save the environment. Standby power is often wasted energy that evaporates without people recognizing. If a majority senses the importance of that "hidden" energy consumption, this could be a first step to face global warming"
Sorry, but doesn't sound very neutral.
:-- I agree, whilst elimination or management of standby power could reduce CO2 emissions, I don't think it's a "urgent measure to adopt a hard line," or a "first step to face global warming." dphrag 19:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The way to do this is to avoid discussion of controversial points like global warming except as explicit quoted in the press. I expect this to be fairly easy, as I've seen a lot of discussion of the idea of "vampire power" popping up in recent news. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: I just noticed how much power my laptop saves by being put on standby. I'd assumed it wouldn't be much, but apparently the consumption drops from about 25 Watts to less than three! If I want to walk away from it for a few minutes, the keystroke it takes to put it to sleep and the one it takes to wake it up again are certainly worthwhile. D021317c 21:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So how many people are there using laptops in your city, do you think? Each of those thousands of people using three watts for possibly hours at a time?176.26.38.86 (talk) 20:04, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the anti-standby bias?

message: Discussion closed. Merging Phantom load and most of sleep mode into Standby power. Zodon (talk) 18:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Merge pages into standby power 

message: The stuff under the heading "Phantom Load" really needs to be merged into the corresponding sections of the rest of the article. Ccrrccrr (talk) 12:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, don't hesitate to go ahead and work on it.  Zodon (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completing the phantom merge 

message: So, i can see where the "consequences" section came from, but shouldn't there be a note about why manufacturers use this technique?  We have the cons, but where are the pros? dunerat (talk) 05:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Pol098 (talk) 16:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Unbalanced 

message: Actual standby power of up to a few watts measured with a Kill-A-Watt type meter shows as zero or very low.
This is original research (though anyone can do it very easily, surely it's been published?). All the following is about measurements with relatively inexpensive equipment (whether for workshop or home use), and does not apply to laboratory milliwattmeters. In the article it's stated and referenced that measuring low ac power is difficult (the difficulty is in measuring low current, not mains voltage). I also added a respectable reference saying that better than measuring standby power directly is to put the standby device in parallel with a steady load, such as an incandescent lamp (an incandescent lamp is a clean resistive load, I wouldn't recommend a non-resistive load with non-unity power factor, non-sinusoidal waveform, and switching effects).
I have just carried out such an experiment with a computer and monitor which, in sleep mode, show a joint power consumption of a steady 0.0W (with no fluctuating digit) when both connected to a meter (a Prodigit 2000M, the 230V version of the Kill-A-Watt, same manufacturer). The LCD monitor is about 5 years old; the motherboard design maybe two years old; the power supply is an 80%-efficient 450W unit.
When the sleeping computer, monitor, and a small incandescent lamp were all connected, displayed power (rms, not VA) fluctuated between 29.0 and 29.3W; the fluctuation is probably meter noise, not actual variation. Disconnecting the monitor, the indicated power dropped to 28.1-28.3W. Disconnecting the computer, it dropped to around 27.4W (fluctuating). The conclusion is that both the monitor and the computer actually consumed roughly 1W each, with fairly large uncertainty due to meter noise. Although the sensitivity of the meter is 0.1W, a power consumption of nearly 2W shows as an unfluctuating zero. I had previously used a similar Brennenstuhl meter which was significantly worse, and another meter which also showed 0.0W for the sleeping computer and monitor: this is a general low power measurement problem with this sort of meter. While it may or may not be possible in principle to measure very low power levels more accurately without seriously expensive circuitry, these meters are not designed or advertised for the purpose, but to monitor normal power consumption, and usually energy consumption over time, which they do well enough.
I'm not at all sure of the significance of actual numerical measurements even with the additional resistive load, due to waveform and power factor effects of these meters of unknown characteristics, and would need to measure with laboratory equipment, which I don't have at the moment, to say more. So don't rely too much on my actual figures, just that low power levels show spuriously as zero.
I haven't experimented to determine the relationship between indicated and actual power at low levels (easy enough for those with experience of safely working with lethal voltages using several 1/2W 560K resistors rated at 350V or over in parallel, each dissipating about 0.1W at 230V), but obviously measurements below several watts are going to be badly wrong. I'd expect a threshold region where power shows as zero or a far too low value, beyond which readings gradually become reasonably accurate. In my case nominal mains voltage was 230Vac, actual voltage 246V. As the difficulty is in measuring current, results with 110V mains, drawing twice the current for the same power, may not be quite as bad.
For higher, but still low, standby power, the meter reads low. A DVD/VCR in parallel with a steady load of 27.2W (a 30W incandescent lamp) read 36.5W, i.e., 9.3W for the DVD/VDR; the DVD/VCR alone read 6.0W, probably about 3W lower than the real figure.
Conclusions: measurement with simple meters of low standby power are wild underestimates and, in particular, a reading of zero does not mean that a few watts are not being consumed; differential measurements with an additional drain of a steady, say, 30W, give results which seem more meaningful (but not checked numerically with laboratory-class equipment). This is not a general inaccuracy but a systematic lack of sensitivity at low current levels, characteristic of most ac power measurement.
All this is trivially easy to do, if you think you disagree I encourage you to repeat what I did.
===Computer standby power===
While this note is about low power measurement, actual standby power levels for reasonably modern computer equipment may be of interest. The monitor power (differentially measured with a 30W lamp in parallel with the equipment) increased by roughly (fluctuating readings) 0.6W from unplugged to plugged in but switched off, and by another 0.3W to switched on, but in power-saving mode with no signal. The computer power of a bit less than 1W above is for sleep mode; when the computer was powered off but with Wake on LAN enabled the power seemed to be the same as when unplugged (i.e., apparently less than 0.1W). Where I am 1 watt-year costs roughly 1 pound sterling.
Pol098 (talk) 23:08, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Measurement of low (especially standby) power with cheap meters 

message: While this note is about low power measurement, actual standby power levels for reasonably modern computer equipment may be of interest. The monitor power (differentially measured with a 30W lamp in parallel with the equipment) increased by roughly (fluctuating readings) 0.6W from unplugged to plugged in but switched off, and by another 0.3W to switched on, but in power-saving mode with no signal. The computer power of a bit less than 1W above is for sleep mode; when the computer was powered off but with Wake on LAN enabled the power seemed to be the same as when unplugged (i.e., apparently less than 0.1W). Where I am 1 watt-year costs roughly 1 pound sterling.
Pol098 (talk) 23:08, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Computer standby power

message: Is the fire risk section really relevant without some figures to either back it up or disregard the notion?
It seems to me it could equally apply to any electrical device whether on standby or not  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.9.100 (talk) 11:06, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fire Risk 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Standby power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080720174525/http://www.energy.unsw.edu.au/NewsInfoStandbyPower.shtml to http://www.energy.unsw.edu.au/NewsInfoStandbyPower.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:20, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Standby power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090825001908/http://www1.eere.energy.gov/consumer/tips/home_office.html to http://www1.eere.energy.gov/consumer/tips/home_office.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dti.gov.uk/homesafetynetwork/pdf/tvdetail.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110209212259/http://www.fypower.org/news/?p=1386 to http://www.fypower.org/news/?p=1386
*Added  tag to http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/bispartners/nmo/docs/eup/leaflets//standby-and-off-leaflet.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090312071207/http://www.austinutilities.com/pages/residential_audit_watts.asp to http://www.austinutilities.com/pages/residential_audit_watts.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071126071350/http://www.lesswatts.org/tips/ethernet.php to http://www.lesswatts.org/tips/ethernet.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:33, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Some chargers spark when you plug them in.  I suppose this might indicate the charging of a capacitor in the charger?  Might this mean that turning power strips off or unplugging chargers when not in use, then re-connecting when needed, might cause you to consume more power than if you just leave the adapter or charger in a standby or “no-load” condition?
Bwrs (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question?