Power Naps for Energy Efficiency

Another part of the power problem, which has no easy remedy, are devices that waste electricity whether on or off because of poor design or construction.

Older electronics tend to be the worst in this aspect, but even new products can waste power for no reason. I saw examples of both in tests with a power meter loaned by an official at the Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star program office. This program identifies products that have passed efficiency tests. It is about to be expanded to cover many more computing and electronics accessories.

For instance, an old cathode-ray-tube TV used 7 watts even when off, and a new Dish Network digital video recorder used about 30 watts on or off. The EPA's figures show that some desktop computers can draw as much as 212 watts -- more than some big-screen, flat-panel TVs -- while others with slightly less powerful components need only half as much current.

Much of the blame has to be directed at an old problem in the electronics business: Vendors' instincts to use the cheapest commodity parts.

My desk at work is an unplanned exhibit of this. It's littered with nearly identical black power adapters for a variety of devices, most of which don't feature the make or model of the product they're supposed to charge.

If a company can't even be bothered to put its name on a power brick, is it going to waste much time looking for the most efficient model available? Probably not.

This is what economists call an "externality" and non-economists call "somebody else's problem." That is, the manufacturer isn't stuck paying the costs of its inefficient design.

Fixing either of these problems wouldn't make an individual household that much richer over one year, nor would it eliminate the usefulness of other energy-conservation measures, like replacing incandescent lights with far thriftier compact-fluorescent bulbs.

Just getting a single computer to sleep properly may only save enough to buy a six-pack over 12 months. But over a few years, you would have some real money.

Living with technology, or trying to? E-mail Rob Pegoraro atrobp@washpost.com.