In message , Johny B Good
writes

Comparing your electric consumption against others, it seems to me
that you could have a continuous background consumption averaging
around the 500 watt mark.

Oh, I agree. However, yesterday, I did get the usage down to 84w by
switching off almost everything, except a router and a couple of phones.
What I don't know yet, of course, is whether something else, somewhere,
is coming on at other times, and boosting usage. I also don't yet know
whether the main meter is reading correctly. Investigations are
continuing, although I do have to work around the family's requirements.
I could just send the wife out shopping, but that may obliterate any
savings achieved :-)

--
Graeme

In message , Tim Streater
writes
In article , News
wrote:

2 x laptop chargers 140w

Continuous or just when charging? Room for improvement here.

I had the power off, then watched the change when turning the power on,
so they must have been charging, if only a slight top up.

5 x fluorescent tubes 215w (2', 40w each)

Are these on a lot? Look to making changes here.

Yes, they were all switched off last night. The dog survived :-)

fridge and fridge freezer 275w (but I think only one was running)

Is one of them old? Or both, possibly? May be worth re-investing.

Both are more than 12 years old. Probably about 15 years.

Son's PC 40w

This is OK.

My PC 240w (scary)

Agreed :-)

Unbelievable, but I had never set power saving options. Now set to
sleep 20 minutes after non use.

--
Graeme

On 24/09/2014 14:57, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 07:52:25 +0000 (UTC), Adrian
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 03:32:38 +0100, Johny B Good wrote:

Such "Downlighters" are the spawn of the Devil. Sometime in the past,
a **** of a "Lighting Designer" (no doubt calling himself a fashion
designer) in the employ of a lighting accessories manufacturer, decided
the mis appropriation of these lamps into a stylish table lamp in an
exercise of "Fashion over Function" would be a "Jolly good wheeze" and
set the ball rolling which eventually led to the concept of ceiling
downlighter luminaries we loathe today.

These spot lighting lamps did have a legitimate use to begin with
which was, essentially, to provide an unobtrusive source of spot
illumination in retail stores for such things as shop window and counter
displays of the "Goods on Show".

The lamp manufacturers were only too happy to supply the extra demand
opened up by this market demographic (basically pretentious gits with
more money than sense).

We should all go back to lovely flouro strip lights everywhere,
especially in the living room, eh?

I wasn't suggesting going to that extreme as you know full well,
although fluorescent tubes have been available in circular form for
just such "Not out of place in the Living Room" usage for the past 4
decades or so. Now we repeat the same exercise using small, highly
loaded spiral tubes, cunningly disguised as incandescent bulbs.

My message was simply, "For sanity's sake, _don't_ fit ceiling
downlighters _anywhere_ in a domestic property!"

Why not? In some places they work quite well... say a small bathroom,
easy to get IP44 fittings, 4 x 20W 12V halogen lamps give a good white
light.

Wall washers can add a nice atmospheric effect in some locations. The
trick is to use them appropriately and with sensible lamp choices.




--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 24/09/2014 23:01, Tim Watts wrote:
On 24/09/14 22:29, bert wrote:
In message , charles
writes
In article ,
News wrote:
In message , John
Rumm writes
So I slapped a clamp meter round one of the meter tails, and switched
off various bits to see what showed up...

Interesting. So, if I am reading these figures correctly, that is a
total draw of 6.07 amps. What I don't know, is how to convert that to
KWph. In other words, if you used exactly 6.07 amps for one hour, how
many units of electricity would that be?

try multiplying by 0.24 That comes out at 1.45kWh

Or even better 0.23

Notionally or in reality?

Neither, you would be better off measuring the actual voltage and using
that in this circumstance.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In message , Tim Watts
writes
On 24/09/14 22:29, bert wrote:
In message , charles
writes
In article ,
News wrote:
In message , John
Rumm writes
So I slapped a clamp meter round one of the meter tails, and switched
off various bits to see what showed up...

Interesting. So, if I am reading these figures correctly, that is a
total draw of 6.07 amps. What I don't know, is how to convert that to
KWph. In other words, if you used exactly 6.07 amps for one hour, how
many units of electricity would that be?

try multiplying by 0.24 That comes out at 1.45kWh

Or even better 0.23

Notionally or in reality?
Nominal
--
bert

Johny B Good wrote:

You seem to be making it harder to test than is necessary. Assuming you're
talking about a small electric hob designed to be plugged into a 13A
socket on your kitchen ring main,

No, T&E into a cooker point.

just unplug/switch off the fridge for the required time to get a useful
reading off the supplier's meter (or else use the plug in monitor).

Yes, I was just trying to illustrate an example use of subtraction.


An electric oven is usually connected to a cooker point fed via a
dedicated spur from the CU, usually 6 or 10mm FT&E cable fused at 45A
(same applies for the immersion heater but fused at 15A using 2.5mm FT&E).
You'd need to make sure everything else was shut off to test this by
counting revs/blinks at the supplier's meter.

Or... supply the other stuff (eg fridge) via plug-in meter... and subtract,
which is the point I was making.


--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to replacing "aaa" by "284".

On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:34:07 +0100, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
wrote:

Johny B Good wrote:

You seem to be making it harder to test than is necessary. Assuming you're
talking about a small electric hob designed to be plugged into a 13A
socket on your kitchen ring main,

No, T&E into a cooker point.

just unplug/switch off the fridge for the required time to get a useful
reading off the supplier's meter (or else use the plug in monitor).

Yes, I was just trying to illustrate an example use of subtraction.


An electric oven is usually connected to a cooker point fed via a
dedicated spur from the CU, usually 6 or 10mm FT&E cable fused at 45A
(same applies for the immersion heater but fused at 15A using 2.5mm FT&E).
You'd need to make sure everything else was shut off to test this by
counting revs/blinks at the supplier's meter.

Or... supply the other stuff (eg fridge) via plug-in meter... and subtract,
which is the point I was making.

Yep, that works too but I'd have thought a relatively short test for
the oven/hob would allow you to disconnect things like fridges and
freezers and avoid the need to subtract a reading made by another
meter with its own accuracy tolerences.

Obviously, if you're going to do a protracted test over a matter of a
day or so, you might need more than a single plug in energy monitor
that can register the KWH usage.

It depends on what type of data you're trying to collect. There are
often a few ways to skin this particular cat. In the end it all boils
down to what you think is the most pragmatic solution.
--
J B Good

News wrote:

our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high

Did you find any hogs?

On 14/10/2014 01:04, Andy Burns wrote:
News wrote:

our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high

Did you find any hogs?

Many digital TVs have a default setting that powers the TDTV tuner when
in standby and consumes 20-30W continuously doing this. Check options
menu on system settings to disable default power hog mode.

The amplifier for my PC speakers consumes 10W whether it is switched on
or off! The only thing that changes is the on LED lights when on.
(unless the volume is wound up very high)

I found several wallwarts for ancient long unused modems plugged in
lurking behind desks and cupboards too. If you work at it you should be
able to get your overnight base load down to (well) under 100W.

It is useful to have a 13A plug/socket version to check individual
components behaviour with higher precision. Much modern kit these days
is on standby at consumption well under 0.5W.

My base load consists of the alarm, emergency lights, clock radio,
kitchen appliances and various kit on standby totalling 90W all up.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Martin Brown wrote:

On 14/10/2014 01:04, Andy Burns wrote:

News wrote:

our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high

Did you find any hogs?

Many digital TVs have a default setting that powers the TDTV tuner when
in standby and consumes 20-30W continuously doing this.

I'd accept that some do, but not necessarily many, both mine (one a few
months old, the other seven years old) are 1W when on standby.

In think in the O/P's case, he'd need to find fifty TVs eating 30W to
explain his consumption ...

In message , Andy
Burns writes
News wrote:

our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high

Did you find any hogs?

Still searching, although away from home ATM.

I remain (almost) convinced that it is a lifestyle thing, mainly
carelessness. That has been tightened up considerably, but will really
be long term to see any major effect.

In the meantime, I have purchased a usage monitor which is being used
with various appliances, to see if any are using more than expected. No
unexpected results yet, but I'm running each one for a week at a time.

Odd house. There are five lofts, two of which I have never
investigated. Could there be something up there? I suggest because
there is a tube heater in one loft, presumably to protect the cold water
tank. I insulated the tank years ago, and the tube heater is off, but I
begin to wonder what may be hidden elsewhere.
--
Graeme

In message , News
writes

A bit OT, but our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high
to me. Not how much we pay, but the actual units used. Looking back,
the last time I read the meter was 26.09.13, which is almost exactly a
year ago. Reading it today, I find we have used 9128 units over a year.

Apologies in advance for following up my own thread, and resurrecting an
old subject.

Just out of interest, I never did find a 'phantom' usage, which does not
necessarily mean there isn't something ticking away that I haven't
found; just that I haven't found it yet.

However, I have been carefully noting meter readings since we discussed
this in October, and our quarter October last year to January is 25 per
cent down, which is a result. No major changes - just being aware,
really. The only changes are two desktops off when not in use rather
than on 24/7, and lights off in rooms not in use.

Even at 75 per cent of the units quoted above (9128pa) our usage is high
compared to some, so I'm still being vigilant, but delighted that total
usage is going down, particularly during a winter quarter.

Cheers,
--
Graeme

On 14/01/2015 21:19, News wrote:
In message , News
writes

A bit OT, but our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high
to me. Not how much we pay, but the actual units used. Looking back,
the last time I read the meter was 26.09.13, which is almost exactly a
year ago. Reading it today, I find we have used 9128 units over a year.

Apologies in advance for following up my own thread, and resurrecting an
old subject.

Reading the meter once a year doesn't give you much data to go on!

Just out of interest, I never did find a 'phantom' usage, which does not
necessarily mean there isn't something ticking away that I haven't
found; just that I haven't found it yet.

However, I have been carefully noting meter readings since we discussed
this in October, and our quarter October last year to January is 25 per
cent down, which is a result. No major changes - just being aware,
really. The only changes are two desktops off when not in use rather
than on 24/7, and lights off in rooms not in use.

Even at 75 per cent of the units quoted above (9128pa) our usage is high
compared to some, so I'm still being vigilant, but delighted that total
usage is going down, particularly during a winter quarter.

If you are serious about figuring out where the electricity is going get
one of the realtime meters like OWL or similar. Getting the base load
down will make a significant difference ~10% of your bill.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Energy-Monit.../dp/B006R7E8MG

Mine paid for itself within two years. The one in our VH paid us back
much faster since it stopped people leaving power hungry kit on.

You also could do with one that can measure individual appliances to see
which are quietly gobbling power whilst in standby. Much modern kit is
1W now but some TVs have really stupid default settings ~30-40W.

Regards,
Martin Brown

"Martin Brown" wrote in message
...
On 14/01/2015 21:19, News wrote:
In message , News
writes

A bit OT, but our electricity usage has always seemed incredibly high
to me. Not how much we pay, but the actual units used. Looking back,
the last time I read the meter was 26.09.13, which is almost exactly a
year ago. Reading it today, I find we have used 9128 units over a year.

Apologies in advance for following up my own thread, and resurrecting an
old subject.

Reading the meter once a year doesn't give you much data to go on!

Just out of interest, I never did find a 'phantom' usage, which does not
necessarily mean there isn't something ticking away that I haven't
found; just that I haven't found it yet.

However, I have been carefully noting meter readings since we discussed
this in October, and our quarter October last year to January is 25 per
cent down, which is a result. No major changes - just being aware,
really. The only changes are two desktops off when not in use rather
than on 24/7, and lights off in rooms not in use.

Even at 75 per cent of the units quoted above (9128pa) our usage is high
compared to some, so I'm still being vigilant, but delighted that total
usage is going down, particularly during a winter quarter.

If you are serious about figuring out where the electricity is going get
one of the realtime meters like OWL or similar. Getting the base load down
will make a significant difference ~10% of your bill.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Energy-Monit.../dp/B006R7E8MG

Mine paid for itself within two years. The one in our VH paid us back much
faster since it stopped people leaving power hungry kit on.

You also could do with one that can measure individual appliances to see
which are quietly gobbling power whilst in standby. Much modern kit is 1W
now but some TVs have really stupid default settings ~30-40W.

Yes base load is a major thing.
But all you need is a £10 plug in meter.
Start with fridges and freezers. A faulty thermostat here can run away with
a fortune if stuff is running continuous.
Get yourself LED lights.
Dump your tumble dryer/dishwasher.
Use your washing machine efficiently.

I use around 4000Kwh per year. (But no gas, so occasional fan heater.)
Two people three bed bungalow.
Main users are fridge/freezers.
And the TV, remarkably.

Tim Streater wrote:

Should be reading every first of the month. Then it's easy enough to
plot a graph showing monthly usage.

If you read instead on the last day of the month, the graph (and
pivot table, if you get that far) will be labelled with the right
month. ;-)

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.