On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:53:31 +0100, "Harry Stottle"
wrote:

"Mark" wrote in message
.. .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8172850.stm


The savings seem to be calculated on an incoming mains voltage rated at
250v, but my supply seems to range between 230v and 240v, and usually more
nearer to the 230v mark than 240v, so reducing the voltage to 220v would
mean less savings in my case, and if proportionate, any saving would be
reduced by 33% at 240v and 66% at 230v, so more like a 3% to 6% saving than
the 10% quoted. To also quote that this device is similar to loft insulation
is misleading in my opinion, loft insulation is very cost effective, but
£250 for this device (plus installation?) for a potential 3% saving would
seem not to be the case, and as the device seems to be a transformer, I
would imagine that there would be losses through the transformer itself, but
it does not say if these losses had been taken into account when calculating
any savings. In theory, like most of these money saving devices, it looks
good on paper, but some careful calculations and cost comparisons need to be
made on the claims made before committing.

Pretty much what I suspected. I would imagine that their "savings"
conveniently neglected to include losses in the transformer and allied
components.

I am also unsure whether it has a fixed step-down ratio or if it is
variable dynamically.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]