“Standby” appliances waste of energy

The BBC carries a story on the energy waste represented by household appliances kept on standby mode instead of being switched off. The UK alone wastes enough energy to send the population of Glasgow on a return flight to New York. The problem is that contrary to what most people (including me) believed, keeping an appliance on standby mode doesn’t save that much energy. From the article, some television sets run at about two-thirds consumption when on standby mode, rather than at just a fraction.

We’ve seen a similar problem in our lab. One of our printers, a Xerox Phaser 8200, used to be left on standby over the evenings and the weekends. Out of curiosity we once measured the printer’s consumption when under standby and found about 150 W, about the same amount of energy needed to keep two lightbulbs glowing. Let’s say nobody uses the printer between 6 pm and 8 am (14 hours), and you are left with a daily bill for about 2 kWh wasted. Under very optimistic assumptions, this is about the energy produced by two square meters of solar panels in Lausanne on a sunny day. Or to put it another way, at 11 swiss centimes per kWh during non-peak hours (roughly what we pay at our place in Geneva), it translates to 73 swiss francs per year.

Sure it irritates me to have to wait for warm-up when I send a print job to the printer in the morning. But if it were “my” money, would I pay that amount per year because I cannot wait for five minutes? Or because I cannot bring myself to remember to switch on the printer on when I arrive in the office? (The printer sits precisely on the way to my office.)

Update: I learned from some educational flyers in our institute that Europe requires the equivalent of six nuclear reactors just to keep devices on standby, or even switched off because of the inefficiency of some transformers.

Tools that anyone can use

I heard once a senior researcher criticize a doctoral student for having chosen a particular software tool to do his data analysis.

I was sitting on an International Energy Agency task meeting and the student (let’s call him Sam) was showing results from his analysis. Someone from the audience asked him what tool he had used for some of his intermediate results; when he replied awk, the senior researcher (let’s call him Max) went into a tirade against the use of anything else than Microsoft Excel when analyzing, saving and sending around data.

I would have had some respect for his opinion, if only he had not then given the main reason for his preference: “Everyone should use Excel, because it’s a program that secretaries know how to use.”

I firmly believe that in any craft, a good craftman will be defined by his choice and use of good tools. Excel, as a tool for scientific analysis, may in some restricted cases be doing a good job but suffers from several well-known deficiencies for me to use it on a daily basis.

But that is beside the point here. Max was not saying we should use Excel because it was good for the job; he said we should use it so that secretaries could open our files, display our results and include them in reports.

Has our profession grown so complacent that our work is now done by our support staff? What then is the work we, and we alone, as experts, are qualified to do? And whatever that work is, are we not free to evaluate and select the best tools for doing it, instead of allowing marketing pressures to guide our choices?

I hope this incident is an isolated one and that it does not reflect on our profession’s current best practices. Let us make sure it remains so.

Building Energy Software Tools Directory

The U.S. Department of Energy maintains on their website a fairly comprehensive directory of building energy software tools. From their website: “The energy tools listed in this directory include databases, spreadsheets, component and systems analyses, and whole-building energy performance simulation programs. A short description is provided for each tool along with other information including expertise required, users, audience, input, output, computer platforms, programming language, strengths, weaknesses, technical contact, and availability.” The directory can be found here
and includes, at the time of writing, information on 301 different software packages.