I saw this article in my news feed this morning and it struck a chord as I have been thinking about smart plugs to switch off the kit that currently stays on standby overnight. I currently have the TP-Link system [which seem to be a bit dearer than others] but would rather expand that than start another system such as Humax.
Seems a bit of a delicate balance costwise as to how long it would take to recoup the cost of say 2/3 more smart switches versus the cost of standby.
Easy enough to work it out from the figures in the article but do we believe them? How else would I be able to check the true cost of standby per item?
Somehow managed to make my post a poll and submitted it before adding image. Could a moderator sort that please?
Not a mod but have moved the topic – hope this is the place you wanted to start the thread in?
The standby figures seem quite high to me.
I need to make time to go sort all our plugs out as I could switch the tv lot downstairs fully off as there’s two sockets with extensions anyway.
Same goes for his desk set up, he don’t need it on over night and it must be costing us a fortune.
I switch most other bits off that I can. Anything top level in the kitchen is a no.
Trouble is there are so many figures around, mostly lower than this article gives, that you don’t know who to trust.
The TV off argument is tricky with regard to recording schedule and software updates.
I think I already turn the biggest offenders off overnight: tv, smart speakers, games consoles etc. (only a couple of sockets to turn off). Just the microwave remains on standby but reprogramming the clock all the time would annoy me
Wouldn’t a smart plug just shift where the power drain comes from? It needs to be active and stay connected to a network in order to work properly so it will drain power even if it is “off”
Depends on how old the figures are. The EU changed the rules for standby power usage some time ago, so that newer devices (I’m not sure of the exact date) have to use considerably less energy when in standby. The big change was for TVs; they currently (no pun intended) use a small fraction of the energy when in standby mode than older models.
There was a radio programme debunking the figures produced by Which? some years ago. I don’t know if these figures are a rehash, or whether they have been updated.
That is true. I imagined a scenario where several items on an extension would be switched off thereby reducing several ‘drains” to one. R-
We only use on demand, Netflix, Prime and Disney, so doesn’t make difference to us.
Could also link tv recorder to another plug such as where router is set, and switch the majority off.
A quick win to find things that would save the most money when switched off rather than on standby - if it’s warm then it’s using a significant amount of power. Check devices and particularly any “brick” transformers plugged into sockets. Applies particularly to older devices with “dumb” chargers, I found a decade+ old Pure DAB radio transformer that was acting as a very inefficient room heater.
Just to add, that the Energy Savings Trust puts the average saving at £55 per year.
Thanks @Anarchist - that is helpful. Might forward that to our landlord. Might not! R-
That’s what I thought too. I don’t know what they are using to get these figures but I just thought it was too high for something like a modern TV or microwave.
Came home to find someone debunked the efficacy of turning off your standby devices last year:
It’s even been updated today, with the following Twitter thread:
tl;dr, vampire drain is highly exaggerated, and chances are you’ll actually make next to no savings.
This was always my understanding, that it’s a myth based on older technology.
Note it is something measured in the energy rating certificates, so a better approach is just to buy things with good energy ratings.
Not just older technology, but technology in California! That’s the part that really blows my mind.