PDA

View Full Version : power consumption



doncmdr
2008-08-29, 01:15
Hi!

Can someone provide some information about the power consumption?
I am very interested in using the Squeezebox Boom as an Alarm Clock, so the standby consumption is an important factor for me.

regards,
Jörg

bpa
2008-08-29, 01:29
With beta preproduction unit and 18V power supply.

Using a simple plug-in meter

8W playing
6W standby display off.

IIRC During beta Caleb said that standby power could be reduced by turning off DSP & amps - I suspect that is not happening yet.

pippin
2008-08-29, 04:00
I think that should be better with the 12V power supply. At least judging from the heat it produces with the 18V unit.

simbo
2008-08-29, 04:11
SB3 + Audioengine A2's = ~10W according to my plug-in meter, so the Boom certainly looks like a greener option.

max.spicer
2008-08-29, 04:18
With beta preproduction unit and 18V power supply.

Using a simple plug-in meter

8W playing
6W standby display off.

IIRC During beta Caleb said that standby power could be reduced by turning off DSP & amps - I suspect that is not happening yet.

These figures aren't really representive. The production Boom units do not use an 18W power supply.

Max

Letten
2008-08-29, 04:24
6W standby display off.


Maybe this is a stupid question but why is it that my TV consumes 0.6W in standby and the Boom ten times as much?

Is it because of Wifi being on all the time?

ThomP
2008-08-29, 04:45
IIRC During beta Caleb said that standby power could be reduced by turning off DSP & amps - I suspect that is not happening yet.

So what exactly turns off - other than the display and backlight?

What is the reason for keeping amp and DSP? - I would guess the Wifi was about the only thing that you'd want to keep alive for fast "boot".

Edit: Don't take this the wrong way; I'm only asking, not bitching (I might if there is no reason and it isn't fixed in a future firmware upgrade, though;) )

bpa
2008-08-29, 04:48
I was using Ethernet so Wifi is off.

In standby Boom (and any SB) is essentially on but screen is in a special "off" mode. Boom (and any SB) can be turned on from the web i/f.

Assuming the DSP & amps are not turned off during standby. With Boom the amps and a DSP processor are consuming power even if nothing is being played. Real power saving will happen if the DSP and amps are turned off when Boom is in standby. This was discussed during Beta as I think it can be done by s/w but I can't remember the conclusion.

ThomP
2008-08-29, 05:04
In standby Boom (and any SB) is essentially on but screen is in a special "off" mode. Boom (and any SB) can be turned on from the web i/f.

I agree that it's important to be able to turn it on from the web/a controller/the remote, so of course there must be some power consumption. But keeping things like DSP and amp on when they are not needed is not exactly in line with the "eco-friendly" trends of hardware design - not to mention user demands! I guess we'll just have to wait and see the specs for the final design.

bpa
2008-08-29, 05:24
so of course there must be some power consumption. But keeping things like DSP and amp on when they are not needed is not exactly in line with the "eco-friendly" trends of hardware design - not to mention user demands! I guess we'll just have to wait and see the specs for the final design.


You are not saying anything new and the guys at Slimdevices know the issues and the desirability of low power usage during standby.

My power a supply is 18v and so consumption will be higher than the production units of 12V. It is also possible that the amp & DSP are being turned off but power saving do not show up with 18V supplies.

The hardware design is final, products are in the warehouses and probably being shipped as I type. I believe control of the amps and DSP is under software control so a later firmware may address this issue. I vaguely remember something about power on/off making a speaker "thump" so this power issue may have been delayed until after product launch.

I think just wait for a definitive statement about the DSP & amps before getting too excited.

elziko
2008-08-29, 05:47
With beta preproduction unit and 18V power supply.

Using a simple plug-in meter

8W playing
6W standby display off.

IIRC During beta Caleb said that standby power could be reduced by turning off DSP & amps - I suspect that is not happening yet.

What was your power source? I have a Makita BL1830 battery - it's also 18V (3.0Ah) so from your information above i guess that would give me around 6.75 hours of use. Seems like a long time!

peterw
2008-08-29, 05:59
I agree that it's important to be able to turn it on from the web/a controller/the remote, so of course there must be some power consumption. But keeping things like DSP and amp on when they are not needed is not exactly in line with the "eco-friendly" trends of hardware design - not to mention user demands! I guess we'll just have to wait and see the specs for the final design.

Caleb & the other engineers have looked at all these components, and I think their intention is to shut those circuits down when possible, even though I think turning off the amps will only save about 0.5 watts. If they don't, it's probably because they couldn't avoid a speaker thump or something like that.

There's been talk about shutting down even more circuitry (since the Boom has an RTC), but that would clobber use cases like turning a Boom on with a Controller, or changing the alarm time with a Controller or the Web UI.

Are you aware of any competing products that perform better in this regard?

ThomP
2008-08-29, 06:32
Are you aware of any competing products that perform better in this regard?

I'm not aware of any competing products at all in this class:D But I hope we can agree that just being as good as the competition doesn't really promote innovation and progress and should not set the aiming point!

I'm sure Logitech/Slim are doing what they can to make power consumption as low as possible without sacrificing basic functions! And I really hope they can get it well below 6W:-)

bpa
2008-08-29, 06:45
What was your power source?

The beta test pre-production Boom units were supplied with 18v wall wart power supplies.

Boom can run on a wide voltage range - I don't know min or max. The higher voltages such as 18v make Boom quite warm which makes it probable that some power consumption is wasted as heat.

Production units are supplied with 12v psu which make Boom run cooler with no loss in performance.

Matt Wise
2008-08-29, 08:07
Boom power consumption has been an open bug since the first units were hand built here in Mtn View. At the end of the day, Boom "should" use no more power than a SB3 at Idle/off. Really, our players do not have a true "off" mode because if they did, the WiFi signal would shut down and they would not be able to turn on remotely. Turning a SB3 or Receiver off really doesnt change its power state, only its software state.

That beign said, there is still some room for improvement with Boom. Currently the amps do not shut off (Caleb, please correct me if I'm wrong!). There is an open bug on that issue, but it just did not make it into the time schedule for shipping. In reality, it may only bring us from ~7 watts at idle down to 5 (at best).

By the way, you should check your TV with an actual Watt meter to see what its idle/off consumption really is. There have been alot of reports of TV's using 20-80 watts when "off" due to poor firmwares/design. Even when they advertised lower than that..

(PS, the 18v vs 12v power supply shouldn't really change the power usage. The lower voltage PSU was selected because Boom runs just fine off of it, and it generates a little less heat in the unit with them.)

max.spicer
2008-08-29, 08:14
(PS, the 18v vs 12v power supply shouldn't really change the power usage. The lower voltage PSU was selected because Boom runs just fine off of it, and it generates a little less heat in the unit with them.)

So what's creating the heat then? ;-)

Max

dean
2008-08-29, 09:34
On Aug 29, 2008, at 8:14 AM, max.spicer wrote:

>
> Matt Wise;333784 Wrote:
>> (PS, the 18v vs 12v power supply shouldn't really change the power
>> usage. The lower voltage PSU was selected because Boom runs just fine
>> off of it, and it generates a little less heat in the unit with
>> them.)
>
> So what's creating the heat then? ;-)

Remember, the display is a vacuum tube, with filaments and
everything. So there's some heat there.

But it's half the size of the one in SB3 so draws less power.

Mark Miksis
2008-08-29, 09:37
I think Max's point was that if the power usage doesn't change, then the amount of generated heat shouldn't change.

ccrome2
2008-08-29, 13:28
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 2:59 PM, peterw <
peterw.3ewntz1220014802 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> ThomP;333696 Wrote:
> > I agree that it's important to be able to turn it on from the web/a
> > controller/the remote, so of course there must be some power
> > consumption. But keeping things like DSP and amp on when they are not
> > needed is not exactly in line with the "eco-friendly" trends of
> > hardware design - not to mention user demands! I guess we'll just have
> > to wait and see the specs for the final design.
>
> Caleb & the other engineers have looked at all these components, and I
> think their intention is to shut those circuits down when possible,
> even though I think turning off the amps will only save about 0.5
> watts. If they don't, it's probably because they couldn't avoid a
> speaker thump or something like that.
>
>
Hi All,
So yes peterw is correct. We still need to write a little software to
shut the power amps down. This is fairly trivial software to write, and
will have no audible pops or clicks. We just haven't gotten to it. It's
actually a little more complex than you think because of all the different
use-cases (line-in during not connected to SC, connected to SC line-in,
music paused, music stopped, etc.).

Shutting off the amps will save less than a watt. We can throttle back the
DSP clock, or even put it into another power state. This will save a little
more. The biggest savings you get is by making the screen go dark -- it's
those glowing red filaments that take about 1 watt.

Counterintuatively to somebody familiar with class-D amps, there is actually
higher quiecent current at 18V than 12V, thus some extra heat is generated.
We only officicially support our 12V power brick. (Remember dean's pox on
your house post...)

It's late in Berlin and my brain's a little fried now, but as I recall, it
gets down to 5-6 Watts currently with the display off. Matt, do you have an
exact number on that (remember use a PQP3 or later hardware with 12V wall
wart).

-Caleb



>
>
> --
> peterw
>
> http://www.tux.org/~peterw/ <http://www.tux.org/%7Epeterw/>
> free plugins: http://www.tux.org/~peterw/#slim<http://www.tux.org/%7Epeterw/#slim>
> AllQuiet BlankSaver ContextMenu FuzzyTime PlayLog
> PowerCenter/BottleRocket
> SaverSwitcher SettingsManager SleepFade StatusFirst SyncOptions
> VolumeLock
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> peterw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2107
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51657
>
>

Dogberry2
2008-08-29, 13:40
So we're looking at an "off power" improvement from 7 down to 5 watts "at best"? I don't understand the problem. A difference of 2 watts over the course of a month amounts to about ten cents U.S. (give or take a bit, depending on electrical rates in the area). Actually less, since we can assume the unit won't be off the whole month, but will actually get some use. Can't see a dime a month being something to make a big whoop-te-do about, personally. Surely there are more important things to focus on. If the monthly savings won't even buy a stick of gum, I'd put it way down on the priority list.

pfarrell
2008-08-29, 14:01
Dogberry2 wrote:
> So we're looking at an "off power" improvement from 7 down to 5 watts
> "at best"? I don't understand the problem. A difference of 2 watts over
> the course of a month amounts to about ten cents U.S.

What?!?! You are bringing economic sense into this argument? Next you
will do something really irrational like point out the the batteries in
electric cars contain really bad chemicals that may poison the earth
more than burning gasoline, or that the cost difference between a Prius
and another Toyota is never recovered in the five years that is about as
long as anyone wants.

At least tube amplifiers can double as space heaters in winter.


--
-- toc
toc (AT) curmudgeon4 (DOT) us
http://www.curmudgeon4.us/

Letten
2008-08-29, 14:10
So we're looking at an "off power" improvement from 7 down to 5 watts "at best"? I don't understand the problem. A difference of 2 watts over the course of a month amounts to about ten cents U.S. (give or take a bit, depending on electrical rates in the area). Actually less, since we can assume the unit won't be off the whole month, but will actually get some use. Can't see a dime a month being something to make a big whoop-te-do about, personally. Surely there are more important things to focus on. If the monthly savings won't even buy a stick of gum, I'd put it way down on the priority list.


Maybe it's not about the money, but a general concern about the sum of energy wasted on standby power consumption in households. Every little improvement counts :-)

Michaelwagner
2008-08-29, 19:32
Maybe it's not about the money, but a general concern about the sum of energy wasted on standby power consumption in households. Every little improvement counts :-)

This seems to come up every few months. Perhaps, for some reason, focusing on the grasshopper on the road in front of us allows us to ignore the steamroller that's coming down the road and will be here in 15 seconds.

God, or at least the gods of electrical consumption (or global warming - pick your god), doesn't care if your power is consumed by a Boom or a nightlight.

I recently replaced my 7 watt tungsten nightlight with a 0.7 watt led-based nightlight, saving 6.3 watts for approximately 8 hours a night. In fact, I tripled my savings, because I did it in 2 bathrooms and the kitchen. I saved roughly 19 watts, and it cost me about $5 a nightlight.

Leaving aside how long it will take me to recoup those $5 nightlights (forever, since I live in an apartment and my electricity is free (to me)), I have now created "headroom" for a 6watt boom in standby mode.

All of this is dwarfed by turning on the shower, or the stove, or the fridge. I know it's tempting to pick at a pimple, because it's visible, but if you've got cancer, the pimple is the least of your problems. So it is with quiescent power requirements on trivial devices. Slim has already gone a long way, with supporting wakeup for the server, dimming the lights on SBs and Booms, all that stuff. The last few watts would take a total rearchitecting and likely not be worth the effort.

And in the end, most of us can do so much more outside of our life with Boom. Move 5 minutes closer to work, buy and drive a smaller car, car pool once a week, telecommute one day a week, bicycle one day a week, work 10 hoursx4days a week and drop one complete commute a week ... all of these things dwarf a 2 watt improvement in quiescent power consumption in a boom.

Mnyb
2008-08-29, 22:20
Yea but that 2 watt comes for "free" as is it software and I don't have to think about it.

For the coder i can be worth it, hmm we sell 100000 BOOM 2 watt each, 2 days of work for me...

Every little effort counts, as this 2w require no additional investment or thinking for us.

I think led lights is the future, do the light come in a broader warmer spectrum now.

A normal led flashlight has the perfect color temperature for autopsy of an alien in a horror movie, but for reading or house decor nah :)

pfarrell
2008-08-29, 22:33
Mnyb wrote:
> For the coder i can be worth it, hmm we sell 100000 BOOM 2 watt each, 2
> days of work for me...

I'm sorry, this thread has lost all value. Its off in lala land. If it
was just two days of work, you really think it wouldn't have been done
already?

How about if I agree to turn off a 100watt lamp for five minutes a day,
and we will save the same energy. Or check the air pressure in the tires
of your car

And not waste any more electrons with this silly thread.

There is no news here, nothing has been added since about the fifth
post. Close it, I say.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

Letten
2008-08-29, 22:58
This seems to come up every few months. Perhaps, for some reason, focusing on the grasshopper on the road in front of us allows us to ignore the steamroller that's coming down the road and will be here in 15 seconds.

Well it's not strange that it comes up when a new product is released, especially a product thats designed to be powered on 24/365.



God, or at least the gods of electrical consumption (or global warming - pick your god), doesn't care if your power is consumed by a Boom or a nightlight.

I agree.



I recently replaced my 7 watt tungsten nightlight with a 0.7 watt led-based nightlight, saving 6.3 watts for approximately 8 hours a night. In fact, I tripled my savings, because I did it in 2 bathrooms and the kitchen. I saved roughly 19 watts, and it cost me about $5 a nightlight.

Leaving aside how long it will take me to recoup those $5 nightlights (forever, since I live in an apartment and my electricity is free (to me)), I have now created "headroom" for a 6watt boom in standby mode.


So it's two steps foreward and one step back, better that nothing ;-)



All of this is dwarfed by turning on the shower, or the stove, or the fridge. I know it's tempting to pick at a pimple, because it's visible, but if you've got cancer, the pimple is the least of your problems.

I don't think this is a fair comparison since standby consumption defenately is part of the problem.

It's more like if you're overweight (and want to loose weight), now that butter you eat on your bread every morning might not be your biggest concern but it's definetely part of your problem.



So it is with quiescent power requirements on trivial devices. Slim has already gone a long way, with supporting wakeup for the server, dimming the lights on SBs and Booms, all that stuff. The last few watts would take a total rearchitecting and likely not be worth the effort.

I agree it might not be worth the effort, and I'm not requesting a complete redesign. I'm reacting to the "stick of gum" argument to what maybe can be improved with a software tweak.



And in the end, most of us can do so much more outside of our life with Boom. Move 5 minutes closer to work, buy and drive a smaller car, car pool once a week, telecommute one day a week, bicycle one day a week, work 10 hoursx4days a week and drop one complete commute a week ... all of these things dwarf a 2 watt improvement in quiescent power consumption in a boom.

I agree, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't cut back on the butter in the morning as well, no matter how overweight you are ;-)

pfarrell
2008-08-29, 23:09
Letten wrote:
> Michaelwagner;334081 Wrote:
>> work 10 hoursx4days a week and drop one complete commute a week ... all
>> of these things dwarf a 2 watt improvement in quiescent power
>> consumption in a boom.
>
> I agree, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't cut back on the butter in
> the morning as well, no matter how overweight you are ;-)

I strongly disagree. Its my decision if I want butter or something
better for me than it on my toast. I may decide that the taste of butter
is better than the trivial shortening of my lifespan, quality of life
and all that.

Or in the case of this long beaten to death thread, the trivial amount
of power wasted by any non-optimal power setting.

How about replacing the 140 watt CPU in your music server with one that
uses 80 watts, so you have have 6 or 8 booms in your house?

This "every bit is equally important" meme is silly. See this past
Sunday's CBS Sunday show for a clip comparing a new Toyota Prius against
a two year old Honda Civic. Hint, buying the Honda is better for the planet.

Mnyb
2008-08-29, 23:58
Actually one of the greenest things you can do is NOT buying new stuff all the time. but ooh i want it :) Manufacturing really wastes a lot of energy.
As most physical object these day are made in china, so what are they doing to get more green power/energy savings to their factories ?
I'm working with the paper and steel industries they come a long way with their energy saving and waste management.
The VSD's i commissioned in some places have probably saved more energy than I would use in my whole life.

Now I'm off trowing away perfectly functional clothes, because I don't like the look anymore ;-) (bad me )

But i will ride my bike today, going to the gym in my car really beats the purpose. I live in a relatively small town so walking and biking is an option when the weather allows it.

Yeas I have a via C7 mobo and WD green disks in my server.
And i'm really trying to beat that audiophile habit of leaving everything powered up for better sound, thats silly.
IS there an AA (Anonymous Audiophiles ) chapter I can visit to help me.
The goal is to power of during weekdays and warm it up during weekends for fine listening.

But I still want them to implement more power saving in the boom because its possible, ok 2 days maybe to little 20 days work then ;-)

Btw
Why not ? theres a lot things not implemented in these products due to time constraints and so, look at the duet now with 7.2 things start to look good, rigth where it should have bin from day one.
Every modern product I own is rushed out 6 to 8 months before fully functioning software, its the curse of the flash prom :) who the .. told sales department about that. It's not only logitech who does that my own company is doing it to, as a service and support person I got my view of it.

Letten
2008-08-30, 02:40
Letten wrote:
> Michaelwagner;334081 Wrote:
>> work 10 hoursx4days a week and drop one complete commute a week ... all
>> of these things dwarf a 2 watt improvement in quiescent power
>> consumption in a boom.
>
> I agree, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't cut back on the butter in
> the morning as well, no matter how overweight you are ;-)

I strongly disagree. Its my decision if I want butter or something
better for me than it on my toast. I may decide that the taste of butter
is better than the trivial shortening of my lifespan, quality of life
and all that.


Please read what I write, my premise was that you "want to loose weight", if some choose differently, fine by me, but don't tell me it doesn't matter because they're gonna die fat anyway.



Or in the case of this long beaten to death thread, the trivial amount
of power wasted by any non-optimal power setting.

How about replacing the 140 watt CPU in your music server with one that
uses 80 watts, so you have have 6 or 8 booms in your house?

This "every bit is equally important" meme is silly. See this past
Sunday's CBS Sunday show for a clip comparing a new Toyota Prius against
a two year old Honda Civic. Hint, buying the Honda is better for the planet.

In my view this "we have bigger problems, so why care about this" is equally silly.

Logitech produces millions of electronic devices each year, so they do have impact, and I guess thats why they do care. I'm not saying they don't. I'm just disagreing with people that say it dosn't matter.

PS. SC runs on my laptop during daytime only and my car does >50 mpg ;-)

Michaelwagner
2008-08-30, 04:25
Yea but that 2 watt comes for "free" as is it software and I don't have to think about it.
True. It's the work after 2 watts I was talking about.

The reason I (and I presume Pat) gets riled up about this is that it's nitpicking, and it's repetitious.

Boom isn't suddenly a new product that's on 24/7. Every squeezebox since the company started is on 24/7. We're aware of the problem, Slim is aware of the problem, now that they're a part of Logitech, I'm sure Logitech is aware of the problem. We've talked it to death on this forum.

Some things are easy to do. They've been done.

Some things are harder to do (waking the server up only when needed, etc). They've been done for most boxes, not yet for the Boom, but it's coming.

The boom uses a bit more power than it theoretically should, and there's a bug report in to get that bug found and fixed.

Shortly after that, you reach the point of vanishing returns. If you want to be environmentally conscious, you need to turn to some other aspect of your life. Is the server running SC an energy star server? Do you have the settings right so it does, in fact, spin down the disks and eventually power itself down? Could you power down the screen more aggressively. If your screens are like mine, they're 100Watts each.

But, as Pat said, you may need to look at other areas of your life. Worrying about fuel efficiency while we still all buy new cars every 3 years is naval-gazing. There's far more environmental damage in the manufacturing process making a new one every 3 years than there is in running a slightly older car with slightly lower fuel efficiency.

Polishing the 1% you can easily talk about and leaving the 99% may be fun, but it isn't effective.

dsdreamer
2008-08-30, 13:12
I don't think this thread is a waste of anything. People clearly care about this and so they should.

I used to be dismissive about any power consumption that was a fraction of a 100W light bulb, but with tiered electricity pricing, multiplying all my quiescent electronic devices by 24x365 can add up to real money. Each Watt of quiescent load costs me over $3 per year, and if I can't get my whole house quiescent load below 250W, that is $750 a year I didn't need to spend. Or to put it differently, it's $750 I choose to spend for the convenience of instantly responsive electronics.

$750 is non-negligible, if you ask me. (But I guess less than 10% of that is down to Slimdevices related usage).

Your cost may be less; I live in a large household that is constantly occupied. This has its economies of scale, but not when it comes to 3-tier electricity pricing.

Dogberry2
2008-09-01, 10:01
I don't think this thread is a waste of anything. People clearly care about this and so they should.

I used to be dismissive about any power consumption that was a fraction of a 100W light bulb, but with tiered electricity pricing, multiplying all my quiescent electronic devices by 24x365 can add up to real money. Each Watt of quiescent load costs me over $3 per year, and if I can't get my whole house quiescent load below 250W, that is $750 a year I didn't need to spend. Or to put it differently, it's $750 I choose to spend for the convenience of instantly responsive electronics.

$750 is non-negligible, if you ask me. (But I guess less than 10% of that is down to Slimdevices related usage).

Your cost may be less; I live in a large household that is constantly occupied. This has its economies of scale, but not when it comes to 3-tier electricity pricing.
"Over $3 per year" for a watt? Really? Just out of curiosity, where do you live that your electrical rate is almost $0.35 per KWH? According to the Energy Information Administration, the highest rate in the U.S. is in (not surprisingly) Hawaii, where it's just under $0.27; the national average is just over $0.09 (which is less than $0.79 per year for each watt). Since you quote prices in dollars, I assumed you were living in the U.S., so I'm wondering where there's a rate so far above Hawaii's. Or are we talking about dollars AUS or something somewhere else in the world?

Throwing a figure of "$750 a year" out there is really off the track. The subject here is the Boom, and its 2 watts above theoretical quiescent optimum. At the national average electrical rate, a single Boom which is in use only two hours a day (and sitting quiescent 22 hours every day), using the stated 2 watts above the theoretical best quiescent consumption, would cost less than $0.75 (that's seventy-five CENTS, not dollars) over the course of an entire year. So for that $750 dollars to have any bearing on the discussion of the Boom, a person would have to have 1000 of them sitting in his house.

There's no doubt that every trickle of current, every micro-milliwatt flowing through one's house costs money. That's not the point. The point is that in any typical modern house, two watts is a minuscule fraction of the total electrical power consumption. In a house that's using 1500 to 2000KW per month, that .002KW is about one ten-thousandth of a percent (.000001). Regardless of whether one is paying $0.06 in Nebraska or $0.35 per KWH (wherever that may be), .000001 is a very small fraction of the total. By contrast, by just bothering to post in this thread a person uses as much power as about 130 quiescent Booms do over their theoretical optimum.

pippin
2008-09-01, 10:17
the national average is just over $0.09

:cry:
Have to move to the US. Cheap houses, cheap cars, cheap gas, now this. I'm above your Hawaii value...

Goodsounds
2008-09-01, 11:04
Sorry to interrupt your rant, Dogberry, but the numbers you cite are average numbers for all types of services (residential, industrial, etc). When you turn something off, the savings is at the top marginal rate, not the average rate.

As an example, your source shows the "average" California rate as 11.59 cents. Per my last bill (from the main supplier for Nor Cal), for example, usage in the roughly 500-1000 KW hour tier (200-300 percent of "baseline") was roughly 30 cents. Yes, below that were ranges at 11, 13, and 21 cents. Someone in a middle class house with 3+ occupants would easily be above 500, or even above 1000 (air conditioning), and even higher rates would apply. The savings comes at the top rate.

The numbers used by dsdreamer, that you are disputing, are indeed very plausible to me.

PS to Pippin - Housing where I am is anything but cheap, but you're welcome here anytime.

MrC
2008-09-01, 12:15
"Over $3 per year" for a watt? Really? Just out of curiosity, where do you live that your electrical rate is almost $0.35 per KWH? According to the Energy Information Administration, the highest rate in the U.S. is in (not surprisingly) Hawaii, where it's just under $0.27; the national average is just over $0.09 (which is less than $0.79 per year for each watt). Since you quote prices in dollars, I assumed you were living in the U.S., so I'm wondering where there's a rate so far above Hawaii's. Or are we talking about dollars AUS or something somewhere else in the world?


FYI: electricity is getting very expensive in the S.F. Bay area. Here are the electricity charges for last month's electric bill.

[ Edit: added a more expensive bill from two months ago ]

pippin
2008-09-01, 12:25
OK, from 200% on it's even more expensive than my "green" power here in Berlin. Was hoping for the 9ct...

surly
2008-09-01, 13:56
Hey pippin wich supplier did you choose? I just switched to Naturstrom (Nature Electricity) for 0.19 Euro per Kwh.

Greetz surly

pippin
2008-09-01, 14:09
Hey pippin wich supplier did you choose? I just switched to Naturstrom (Nature Electricity) for 0.19 Euro per Kwh.


To drive another thread completely OT: Vattenfall, don't know how their green power is being called. Roughly the same 18.9something ct (Euro-Cent, that is).

ThomP
2008-09-02, 00:36
I accept and respect it if Logitech/Slim don't "fix" this issue because it turns out to be too expensive, but the claims about this being petty seem a little narrow minded to me! "There are bigger issues, so let us ignore the small ones even if they are easy to fix" just doesn't do it.

Matt Wise
2008-09-02, 07:52
FYI: electricity is getting very expensive in the S.F. Bay area. Here are the electricity charges for last month's electric bill.

[ Edit: added a more expensive bill from two months ago ]

Wow! I live down in Redwood City and my prices arent nearly THAT bad. They're rough, no doubt though. I usually sit in the 200-300% of Baseline area and pay about $150-180/month for electricity. No air conditioning in our house either. I tend to average 650-750 KWh/month.

Doesn't help much though that just to watch TV in my living room runs us about 600 watts (Sony STR 5300 ES receiver, big lcd, tivo s3, etc)... but I pick and choose my battles. The whole house has CFLs, we chose not to install AC when we put the two furnaces in, and I have spent alot of time getting my entire 'server setup' down to 120watts or less.

(120 watts gets me a Mac Mini Core Duo, 4 drive Drobo, gig e switch, cable modem, airport, squeezebox receiver, and our whole-house-audio system that uses less than 2 watts when everything is off).

That being said, I still care about the 2 watts the Boom uses at idle that it doesn't NEED To use. It may not be my top priority, but its something I think about...

Mark Lanctot
2008-09-02, 11:26
we chose not to install AC when we put the two furnaces in

Err, TWO furnaces? I only had one when I lived in northern Ontario, and there were Jan - Feb mornings when it was -35 C.

In regards to power consumption, sure, if a simple software change can save a little, good. But IMHO no need to redesign everything or go to extremes...this is seriously splitting hairs.

I saw a fantastic post on this forum, wish I remember who posted it. But essentially the power production system is composed of base + peak. Most power production methods cannot be throttled back, so you are always producing a base amount of power. During the day and on especially hot/cold periods there's an increased demand which is met by "peak" power - additional power plants which are brought online for the sole purpose of meeting the peak power demand. Around here they are called "peaker" plants and there are power plants specifically built for this purpose. But on offpeak times the base production is generated and it's quite fixed.

This means on offpeak times a few watts here and there doesn't matter with respect to greenhouse gas emissions - the power is produced anyway, the GHGs are produced too, whether you use those watts or not.

So thinking that saving a few watts will save the planet doesn't match with how power is produced, at least not on offpeak times anyway.

As for power rates, here in Ontario we have some of the lowest rates in North America - $0.05/kWh base. MrC, you have my sympathies - wow! My last bill covered two months and it was for 980 kWh. That's 490 kWh/month. (This is a smallish house.) The cost for 980 kWh including transmission, delivery, etc. was $100.90.

MrC
2008-09-02, 11:48
With our two A/Cs running + full time waterfall/stream/pond setup, the bills are pretty hefty. Be glad you don't have this one (the worst so far):

Mark Lanctot
2008-09-02, 12:03
With our two A/Cs running + full time waterfall/stream/pond setup, the bills are pretty hefty. Be glad you don't have this one (the worst so far):

:-O

Flabbergasted!

Oh and incidentally the lowest rate I've ever heard of in North America was an industrial user in Quebec who was paying $0.025/kWh. That's what lots of hydroelectricity gets you, they're reaping the benefits of such huge infrastructure projects now.

Matt Wise
2008-09-02, 12:12
Err, TWO furnaces? I only had one when I lived in northern Ontario, and there were Jan - Feb mornings when it was -35 C.

One furnace for upstairs, one for down... when we designed our house, we didn't make it easy to run a single system for the whole place. It actually works out well because we generally only have to heat the downstairs (cement floors/slab) during the winter. The upstairs system is used very rarely for heating. In the long term we may put an AC unit in, but would only put it in the upstairs furnace system.

gharris999
2008-09-02, 12:34
Totally OT, but I feel a need to share this:

I bought my house back in 97 and immediately set up my electrical bills for auto-debit. I then went on a conservation crusade: worked on tightening up windows, spent a month underneath the house in the crawl spaces redoing the radiant heating system and super-insulating, installed a used wood stove, replaced all the bulbs in the house with CFs, etc, etc.

With all this work, my electrical bill NEVER got below $100 per month, which was really, really frustrating. Finally, a while back I figured out that I had been paying for the wrong electrical meter for 9 years. The electric utility had screwed up and swapped my meter's billing address with the meter of the folks I bought the house from, who lived a couple of miles away. OCD type person that I am, I had saved every electrical bill. It was like pulling teeth, but I finally got my real records from the utility. Over those 9 years, I had overpaid by more than $5000. The utility was very reluctant to admit their mistake and give me the refund I had coming. It took calls to the public regulation commission to convince them otherwise.

Anyway, the 5-grand and the new knowledge that I had been much more energy-virtuous than I realized was very nice. The knowledge that I'd been a fool for 9 years was a little harder to swallow.

Thanks for allowing this thread to turn into energy-saving group therapy.

PS: Last month's bill was 295kWh for a total of $22.16.

Letten
2008-09-02, 14:43
And if you live in Denmark those 300kWh would cost you $100!!!

Mostly taxes by the way.

So now you see why I care about idle power consumption :-)

Matt Wise
2008-09-03, 07:43
Totally OT, but I feel a need to share this:

I bought my house back in 97 and immediately set up my electrical bills for auto-debit. I then went on a conservation crusade: worked on tightening up windows, spent a month underneath the house in the crawl spaces redoing the radiant heating system and super-insulating, installed a used wood stove, replaced all the bulbs in the house with CFs, etc, etc.

With all this work, my electrical bill NEVER got below $100 per month, which was really, really frustrating. Finally, a while back I figured out that I had been paying for the wrong electrical meter for 9 years. The electric utility had screwed up and swapped my meter's billing address with the meter of the folks I bought the house from, who lived a couple of miles away. OCD type person that I am, I had saved every electrical bill. It was like pulling teeth, but I finally got my real records from the utility. Over those 9 years, I had overpaid by more than $5000. The utility was very reluctant to admit their mistake and give me the refund I had coming. It took calls to the public regulation commission to convince them otherwise.

Anyway, the 5-grand and the new knowledge that I had been much more energy-virtuous than I realized was very nice. The knowledge that I'd been a fool for 9 years was a little harder to swallow.

Thanks for allowing this thread to turn into energy-saving group therapy.

PS: Last month's bill was 295kWh for a total of $22.16.

Thats a good thing to think about... I'm still stunned that your electric bill can come in at 295kWh per month. I'd have to give up way too much to get down that low...

About a year ago we tore down our 950sq/ft house but the average bill in that house was actually around 750kWh. I attribute that to our entertainment center (something I still have, and will not compromise on), and the need to run very high wattage bulbs in our lamps because there were no can lights anywhere in the house. We also had 2 refrigerators (one in the garage for drinks). Additionally, 150-200kWh of that has to be our 20+ year old HotSprings hot tub...

Our new house is around 2750 sq/ft, but the average electric bill is still about 750kWh or less. The new house is all CFL lightbulbs (but we must have 50 can lights, 6 wall sconces, etc, etc..). Every light in the house is a CFL though. Most of the bulbs average 6-13 watts. We still have 2 fridges, the hot tub, and the entertainment center. We have added two furnaces (gas) as mentioned above, but they don't run a whole lot and they're very high efficiency.

Its interesting to me that our bill ended up the same... I really think people under-estimate regular lightbulbs and their wattage consumption. I think I could get down to 500-550kWh if we gave up the hot tub (never happening), and maybe another 50kWh if we got rid of our second fridge (also never happening). Beyond that, the big expense has got to be our entertainment center -- and dont you dare touch that! :)

Goodsounds
2008-09-03, 10:05
Interesting post, Matt.

I've come to a somewhat different conclusion with a similar situation. I think once you've spread CFL bulbs around the house, the lighting component of the electricity bill becomes minor. Sure, we try to turn lights off when we leave a room, but unless you've got 20 CFLs on needlessly here and 20 there, it doesn't amount to much. What does add up, is old refrigerators/freezers (especially those in a hot garage), pool and hot tub pumps, electic water heaters and clothes dryers, etc. And, as you said, there are lifestyle choices - these are probably the most important issues of all.

We got new fridge/freezer when we remodeled, have reasonably maximized fluorescent use, got a gas clothes dryer, put PCs on hibernate settings, unplug unnecessary things, etc. After that, I figured I've done enough to minimize waste, the rest we use because we choose to, and I've stopped worrying about it.

Michaelwagner
2008-09-03, 12:48
I accept and respect it if Logitech/Slim don't "fix" this issue because it turns out to be too expensive, but the claims about this being petty seem a little narrow minded to me! "There are bigger issues, so let us ignore the small ones even if they are easy to fix" just doesn't do it.

That's not what was being said.

The easy to fix bug has already been reported, which means it'll get fixed when someone can figure it out.

But there is some consumption that is harder to fix without re=architecting the product (power loss in the wall wart, the fact that some electronics needs to stay on in order to power up again in an orderly fashion, be an alarm clock, etc) and that harder to fix stuff may or may not be worth it.

But the bigger point is something else: there are many more places to save electricity than the 5 watts remaining in a quiescent Boom. Higher efficiency refrigerators, homes with cold cellars so you don't need to refrigerate as much food, better insulation, time shifting your dishwasher, clothes washer, etc to late evening, all of these things will make more significant differences than removing any significant part of the remaining 5 watts of hard-to-erase consumption of a boom.

Letten
2008-09-04, 01:36
Our avarage is about 290kWh/month.

Our house is approx. 2150sq/feet, quite large for danish standards, and we are a family of four (kids 2 and 7 years).

We dont have heated pool or hot tubs, but we do have, what we call, an "american fridge/freezer" - nice invention, thank you america ;-)
Actually it uses less electricity than our old seperate fridge and freezer did, and we didn't put those in the garage :-)

We only use CFL bulbs outdoors (it's dark here during winter), I think the quality of the light is terrible so we don't use them indoors.

ThomP
2008-09-04, 03:21
That's not what was being said.

The way I read it somebody was basically saying that it was stupid and hysteric to put *any* work into a 2W saving or even talk about it.
I'm glad I was wrong!

Like I said, I understand and have no problem with idle power that serves a purpose (I want to be able to turn my Boom on with the controller etc.).