On 2011-09-12, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 12 Sep 2011 14:36:41 GMT, Han wrote:

" wrote in
m:

You're 100% wrong. Light is an *INSIGNIFICANT* part of my electric bill.

If you leave your TV on standby when not watching, then that is a
significant portion.

Wrong. On standby it's next to nothing. When it's on (a significant
part of the day) it's around 100X the power.

I have a TV and a "Kill-A-Watt" meter. My TV consumes 12 watts when
"off" and averaging about 70 watts when "on".

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the majority
of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my computer, or
doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Fridge and A/C are most important,

You forgot hot water and heat.

I spent my whole life in homes where heat and hot water were done with
fossil fuels.

then other appliances.

Light may be a small portion, but CFL's do cut that part very nicely.

A couple of bucks a month. Maximum.

At USA national average, $2/month is about 18 KWH/month, or about 600
watt-hours per day. That is equivalent to all home lighting being
restricted to a single 300W halogen torchiere restricted to 2 hours per
day, or each day having combined-per-bulb 6 hours of running 100-watt
bulbs or 10 60-watt bulbs.
Since CFLs can easily cut this by as little as 2/3, make that 3 hours
per day of combined operation of 3400W halogen torchiere fixtures, or
9 hours per day and bulb (combined-multiplied) for 100W bulbs, or 15 hours
per bulb per day all-done with 60-watters.
It appears strongly to me that most Americans use a lot more lighting
than equivalent to 3 60-watt incandescents 5 hours a day or 5 of them 3
hours a day.

While incandescant bulbs may have a slightly nicer light, we have
gone to CFLs wherever we can.

CFLs will always be ugly and I'm not convinced that LEDs will be any
better for omnidirectional fixtures. That's the primary reason I've
laid in a lifetime supply of incandescents.

So you say...
--
- Don Klipstein )

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 05:43:18 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:

On 2011-09-12, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 12 Sep 2011 14:36:41 GMT, Han wrote:

" wrote in
:

You're 100% wrong. Light is an *INSIGNIFICANT* part of my electric bill.

If you leave your TV on standby when not watching, then that is a
significant portion.

Wrong. On standby it's next to nothing. When it's on (a significant
part of the day) it's around 100X the power.

I have a TV and a "Kill-A-Watt" meter. My TV consumes 12 watts when
"off" and averaging about 70 watts when "on".

500W on/5W standby = 100x. Next.

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the majority
of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my computer, or
doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Not worthwhile.

Fridge and A/C are most important,

You forgot hot water and heat.

I spent my whole life in homes where heat and hot water were done with
fossil fuels.

Goody for you. That isn't normal, here. Electric HW and heat pumps are the
norm here. A few morons have bought into the "green" thing and have been
suckered into LP tankless heaters, but 90% are electric tank heaters.

then other appliances.

Light may be a small portion, but CFL's do cut that part very nicely.

A couple of bucks a month. Maximum.

At USA national average, $2/month is about 18 KWH/month, or about 600
watt-hours per day. That is equivalent to all home lighting being
restricted to a single 300W halogen torchiere restricted to 2 hours per
day, or each day having combined-per-bulb 6 hours of running 100-watt
bulbs or 10 60-watt bulbs.

That's about right; maybe a *little* more. I do know how to calculate Wh.

Since CFLs can easily cut this by as little as 2/3, make that 3 hours
per day of combined operation of 3400W halogen torchiere fixtures, or
9 hours per day and bulb (combined-multiplied) for 100W bulbs, or 15 hours
per bulb per day all-done with 60-watters.
It appears strongly to me that most Americans use a lot more lighting
than equivalent to 3 60-watt incandescents 5 hours a day or 5 of them 3
hours a day.

Whoopie! I don't care. It's there with the pocket lint.

While incandescant bulbs may have a slightly nicer light, we have
gone to CFLs wherever we can.

CFLs will always be ugly and I'm not convinced that LEDs will be any
better for omnidirectional fixtures. That's the primary reason I've
laid in a lifetime supply of incandescents.

So you say...

I did. You don't dispute.

On 2011-09-16, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 16 Sep 2011 05:43:18 0 UTC, Don Klipstein wrote:

On 2011-09-12, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 12 Sep 2011 14:36:41 GMT, Han wrote:
slight snip to edit for space
If you leave your TV on standby when not watching, then that is a
significant portion.

Wrong. On standby it's next to nothing. When it's on (a significant
part of the day) it's around 100X the power.

I have a TV and a "Kill-A-Watt" meter. My TV consumes 12 watts when
"off" and averaging about 70 watts when "on".

500W on/5W standby = 100x. Next.

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the majority
of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my computer, or
doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Not worthwhile.
SNIP from here

12 watts * 22 hours/day * 365 days/1 year * 1KW/1000W * $.14/KWH =
$13.49/year in the case of my TV. In my case, the power strip paid for
itself in less than a year.
--
- Don Klipstein )

"Don Klipstein" wrote in message
...
On 2011-09-16, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 16 Sep 2011 05:43:18 0 UTC, Don Klipstein
wrote:

On 2011-09-12, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 12 Sep 2011 14:36:41 GMT, Han wrote:
slight snip to edit for space
If you leave your TV on standby when not watching, then that is a
significant portion.

Wrong. On standby it's next to nothing. When it's on (a significant
part of the day) it's around 100X the power.

I have a TV and a "Kill-A-Watt" meter. My TV consumes 12 watts when
"off" and averaging about 70 watts when "on".

500W on/5W standby = 100x. Next.

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the
majority
of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my computer,
or
doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Not worthwhile.
SNIP from here

12 watts * 22 hours/day * 365 days/1 year * 1KW/1000W * $.14/KWH =
$13.49/year in the case of my TV. In my case, the power strip paid for
itself in less than a year.
--
- Don Klipstein )

Excellent, Don. 12 watts is indeed substantial. I've been wondering why
the California Energy Commission folks have been so interested in what they
call "phantom loads". You prompt me to measure my TV as well.

Terry McGowan

In Don Klipstein
wrote:

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the
majority of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my
computer, or doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Does your TV remember its settings when power's restored? Mine don't.

--
St. Paul, MN

On 2011-09-17, Bert wrote:
In Don Klipstein
wrote:

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the
majority of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my
computer, or doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Does your TV remember its settings when power's restored? Mine don't.

Mine does.
--
- Don Klipstein

On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 02:36:01 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:

On 2011-09-16, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 16 Sep 2011 05:43:18 0 UTC, Don Klipstein wrote:

On 2011-09-12, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 12 Sep 2011 14:36:41 GMT, Han wrote:
slight snip to edit for space
If you leave your TV on standby when not watching, then that is a
significant portion.

Wrong. On standby it's next to nothing. When it's on (a significant
part of the day) it's around 100X the power.

I have a TV and a "Kill-A-Watt" meter. My TV consumes 12 watts when
"off" and averaging about 70 watts when "on".

500W on/5W standby = 100x. Next.

As a result, I have a power strip to cut power to my TV for the majority
of the day when I am sleeping, at work or commuting, using my computer, or
doing other activities besides TV-watching.

Not worthwhile.
SNIP from here

12 watts * 22 hours/day * 365 days/1 year * 1KW/1000W * $.14/KWH =
$13.49/year in the case of my TV. In my case, the power strip paid for
itself in less than a year.

Wow! WTFC? The Satellite box is several times that and it *hates* being
powered off.