Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Monitor Draws Zero Power In Standby

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu Nov 08, 2007 09:42 PM
from the green-screens dept.
fifthace writes "A new range of Fujitsu Siemens monitors don't draw power during standby. The technology uses capacitors and relays to avoid drawing power when no video signal is present. With political parties all over Europe calling for a ban on standby, this small development could end up as one of the most significant advances in recent times. The British Government estimates eight percent of all domestic electricity is consumed by devices in standby."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by kcbanner (929309) * on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:44PM (#21289801) Homepage Journal
    ...when I see CRTs at work lighting up the room when they render "black".
      • by InvalidError (771317) on Thursday November 08 2007, @11:05PM (#21290421)
        Most of the power in a CRT goes into the H/V beam deflection electromagnets, not the electron gun. The H/V scanning electronics operate regardless of which color is being rendered. The filament heater also uses about 6W whenever the CRT is turned on. Between displaying 100% white at the highest brightness and the blackest black at the lowest brightness, there is only a 5-10% difference depending on resolution and refresh rates.

        As for Fujitsu's 0W-standby monitor, they conveniently omit the fact that this extra relay's coil and related components will be drawing an extra 1W or so while the monitor/TV is on. I would prefer that they perfected ultra-low-power standby like 1W as the current typical appliance has 4-10W standby power: having standby rely on capacitors means standby would not work as expected every now and then if it's been too long since the previous power-up.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Between displaying 100% white at the highest brightness and the blackest black at the lowest brightness, there is only a 5-10% difference depending on resolution and refresh rates.

          Blackle [blackle.com] seems to say differently. And people have done the math [blogspot.com].
          • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Friday November 09 2007, @02:07AM (#21291607)
            For one, their math is not based in reality. These are numbers pulled out of their asses, with no backing as to if they are correct. However even if there is some truth, you run in to the fact that most people are using LCDs (and more convert all the time) and most LCDs are backwards. All LCDs run their backlights on full (or rather at the full level the user sets) at all times they are displaying. They work by blocking light. Well, the most common form of LCDs, the Twisted Nematic, are open by default. That is to say when there's no current across the junction, they pass the maximum amount of light. As such to turn black they need full power applied to the junction. They actually use more power to do black then white. There are LCDs that do not work this way (IPS and VA variants) but they are by far the minority on computer displays.

            So a "Blackle" would increase power usage on LCD systems, which needs to be factored in.

            If these people really care about saving energy, maybe they'd look to things like old, inefficient air conditioning units. ACs use power like no other appliance in a normal home. However there are many different quality levels out there. Good modern ones can move a lot more heat per unit of energy input. This is generally measured in a term called SEER, which means how many Btus of cooling a unit does per watt-hour of energy input. For old units SEER values of 9 or less are common. These days, you can't get less than 13 (by law) and you can get them over 20 SEER. That means that you'll be talking about a unit roughly twice as efficient at cooling. That is some major, major energy savings right there. Doesn't take a lot of that to equal their theoretical Google numbers, and this is backed up by reality.
        • "As for Fujitsu's 0W-standby monitor, they conveniently omit the fact that this extra relay's coil and related components will be drawing an extra 1W or so while the monitor/TV is on."

          I'm sure that design could be improved either by using a solid-state switch or a bi-polar relay that only needs a pulse to change state rather than to hold a state. What Fujitsu have done is a good start.

          How long is a monitor on compared to off for most people anyway? In an average work place one would hope that most peo
          • by Zaffle (13798) on Friday November 09 2007, @02:28AM (#21291721) Homepage Journal

            "As for Fujitsu's 0W-standby monitor, they conveniently omit the fact that this extra relay's coil and related components will be drawing an extra 1W or so while the monitor/TV is on."


            1 Watt??? I built a circuit that used a relay for precisely this. I just called it from the other point of view, it turned itself off. There is no way you need 1 Watt of power to hold anything but the largest relays.

            Btw - this 0W standby only works when its a relatively simple thing to monitor for to come out of standby, a line level. Try making a TV that is 0W standby, yet I can boot it with just my remote. Actually, its quite simple, you use a rechargeable battery to power a IR monitoring circuit, but thats cheating :)
        • by nmg196 (184961) * on Friday November 09 2007, @05:13AM (#21292501)
          > As for Fujitsu's 0W-standby monitor, they conveniently omit the fact that this extra relay's coil
          > and related components will be drawing an extra 1W or so while the monitor/TV is on

          Can you please post a link to the datasheet or page where you read that. I strongly suspect that you made that up because I've never come across a relay that requires 1 *WATT* to work. A relay only requires a few milliamps to work. A 1 watt relay would be a brick sized device that might be used to turn on some stadium lights or or several miles of highway lighting or something - not an LCD screen sat on your desk.

          I doubt it adds any significant power consumption wattsoever (geddit?).
  • power isnt free (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Gothmolly (148874) on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:46PM (#21289819)
    Then it just draws EXTRA power while running, to charge the capacitors. Electricity can't be produced from nothing.

    A more useful version would be one that used solar cells on the top of the LCD to absorb the already expended energy of ambient lighting.
    • Re:power isnt free (Score:5, Informative)

      by CaptainPatent (1087643) on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:49PM (#21289839) Journal

      Then it just draws EXTRA power while running, to charge the capacitors. Electricity can't be produced from nothing.
      Yes, but it only draws enough electricity to fill the capacitors instead of constantly drawing enough power to bring the monitor out of standby.

      Sure you're going to use some extra electricity to come out of standby, but this does cut down on that amount in a vast manner.
      • by EmbeddedJanitor (597831) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:04PM (#21289987)
        You don't need much power to run a very small 8-bit micro, enough to wake a sleeping monitor. We're talking about nano Amps here. A cheap capacitor can keep that going for months.

        The biggest wastage in taditional designs is that they use switch mode power supplies designed to run at full power. They don't operate very efficiently at very low (standby) power. It is far better to completely turn off the power supply and just use a local capacitor to keep the micro going.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            You would just need an RF diode coupled to the video input to be rectified and bias on the gate of a MOSFET that inturn drives a relay to connect mains power to the switchmode PSU.

            The crazy thing is, what took me 10 seconds to design in my head will probably be patented, and used to extort millions!!


            I'm not sure this would work anyway: in order to power the MOSFET, wouldn't you need a power supply of some sort? Maybe if you used a triac instead, something like this might work.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              I'm not sure this would work anyway: in order to power the MOSFET, wouldn't you need a power supply of some sort? Maybe if you used a triac instead, something like this might work.

              VGA gets you 1V peak-to-peak at 75 ohms impedance (13 milliamps, probably per color). DVI gives you 5VDC @ 50mA through pins 14 and 15. The latter can drive a relay directly, the former would probably need a voltage multiplier circuit (which at those low voltages could probably be embedded on an IC, in fact you'd probably have

      • And yet according to TFA this monitor still draws power when you press the standby / power button. It's only when the video signal ceases that the power usage drops to zero.

        If I press the "off" button and have to press it again to turn it on, why is the monitor still drawing power?

        • Re:power isnt free (Score:4, Informative)

          by Zekasu (1059298) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:02PM (#21289965)

          A relay cuts off the mains power whenever the video stream stops; capacitors store enough charge to flick the relay back when the signal returns. Solar panels provide enough power to maintain zero consumption mode for up to five days, after which you have to press a regular power button to bring the machine out of standby.

          There's a difference here, and that is that this new monitor will draw enough power to wake itself out of standby, and then not draw anymore power. Normal monitors generally go into standby, and then continue consuming power, which is less wpoer than an idle screen, but still more than just enough to charge some capacitors.

          I don't see it as winning a prize for groundbreaking-innovation, though.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              The key to this is the solar panels they mention,

              Congratulations. You may well be the first non-idiot to post a reply to this story. It's been a painful read to see so much ignorance and stupidity getting points.

              The key to this is the solar panels they mention, which keep the caps topped off against leakage current.

              Indeed... Solar panels aren't cheap, though, and I thought of something else. A computer monitor has no point in turning on when there's no signal, so why not power the relay from the VGA/DVI

            • Re:power isnt free (Score:5, Insightful)

              by iamacat (583406) on Friday November 09 2007, @03:35AM (#21291995)
              Nope, it's the absolutely worst use of solar panels. They could just draw mains power for one second every 6 hours. As it is, there is pollution created by manufacturing the panels, added cost for a component that does not add functionality and serious cases of remote control rage. And let's not get started on ceiling-mounted TVs.
        • Re:power isnt free (Score:5, Insightful)

          by JonathanR (852748) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:05PM (#21289995)
          Dude... Think about it. They're using capacitors and relays in order to detect a video signal and respond to it. Think of it like a mousetrap. It can remain armed for a long time without using any of the stored energy. The mousetrap is not powered while on standby mode, nor does it draw-down the energy from the spring.
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              After months or years, the spring will lose tension strength and wait a longer time (if nothing trips it) and it will eventually be all the way back to it's beginning.

              This is not true. Your symptoms might occur after repeated cycles of energising/de-energising the spring, but at normal ambient temperatures, creep does not occur (in metallic materials).

              Capacitors (to return to the monitor standby topic) will lose their charge over time, which is presumably what the solar cells are to mitigate in this application.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Yes, but the relay is now basically acting like a latch and is drawing power continuously to keep itself closed until the appropriate hardware cuts off the control voltage. Now I'm not saying that the relay might not have been there anyway, but if this is an additional relay, you have an efficiency problem. Also, when the capacitor bleeds down, there has to be another way to cause the relay to latch. So why not just use a pushbutton to latch the relay and be done with it. After all, you're sitting at th

            • Re:power isnt free (Score:4, Insightful)

              by Kadin2048 (468275) * <slashdot@kadin.xoxy@net> on Friday November 09 2007, @02:03AM (#21291585) Homepage Journal
              I agree with you wrt the uselessness of soft-power settings on computer monitors. I habitually hit the "real" power switch on my (circa 1998 or so, so it has both) monitor when I'm going to leave for a while, rather than just leaving it to go into standby. Mostly because it tends to come out of 'sleep' at the slightest whim.

              But the real reason for all those soft-power settings I think has less to do with powering on than it does with powering off. Most devices don't like to be daisy-chained and controlled by a remote source, like lots of analog electronics were, because they can't stand having their power cut abruptly.

              In other words, it's the "shut down" procedure that's the killer, not the "start up" one. Lots of devices perform little rituals when you turn them off, writing settings to non-volatile memory for instance, that analog electronics just don't have to do. Because of this, you need to make sure that the user doesn't really have control over the device's whole power. So instead of a real switch, the user gets a soft-power button. That way, they can press it, and the device can start shutting down, and do its thing. But this basically necessitates 'standby' rather than 'off,' in order to be able to start up from the soft power button.

              Remote controls are the other driving force, but there are lots of devices that do 'standby' now, that don't have remotes. I think it's often because they have a power-off procedure; if you designed devices so that they could be unplugged at any time without consequence, then you could go back to centrally-controlled, daisy-chained power supplies.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          What bothers me is they are worried about all these half watt drains and meanwhile most of the electricity used in a house goes into heating, appliances, hot water and lights.

          The big offenders need nailing first so they should be banning hot water tanks (instant on hot water uses 50% less energy) before they start regulating standby mode.
    • A more useful version would be one that used solar cells

      *AHEM* From TFA:

      A relay cuts off the mains power whenever the video stream stops; capacitors store enough charge to flick the relay back when the signal returns. Solar panels provide enough power to maintain zero consumption mode for up to five days, after which you have to press a regular power button to bring the machine out of standby.


  • by thatskinnyguy (1129515) on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:52PM (#21289861)
    I believe the proper term is "hibernate". When my laptop is in standby, it still draws power. But when I close the lid on my laptop, and it goes into hibernation mode, it draws no power until I open the lid again. The same could be said of these monitors. They draw no power until a user does something analogous to me opening the lid on my laptop.
    • Most use some sort of supervisory micro or other electronics to sense you pressing the power switch etc. It might draw very little power, but it isn't nothing.
    • by tknd (979052) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:16PM (#21290081)
      They're referring to the electronics standby not computer OS standby. Nearly all electronic devices (TVs, monitors, computers, etc) are on standby unless they're unplugged. This allows you to turn on the device with an electronic switch or a remote rather than a physical switch because part of the electronics are still "on". The surprising thing is some electronics are incredibly inefficient at standby. I tested some PSUs which would use 4 watts while the computer was "off". If you start adding up the number of electronic gadgets in your home, the watts start adding up all while your stuff is doing absolutely nothing.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        ... I wish Apple would get with it and implement hibernation.

        Safe Sleep [apple.com] is your friend. (May or may not be supported by your particular PB G4, depending on its vintage.)

        -Ster

  • by User 956 (568564) on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:59PM (#21289927) Homepage
    A new range of Fujitsu Siemens monitors don't draw power during standby.

    The monitor might not, but what about the power brick? those things consume power even if no monitor is attached.
  • by HeyBob! (111243) on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:59PM (#21289931)
    I just want an Off switch on my printers and scanners! Or if they do have one, put it in the front. I use my scanner once a month, it's crazy to leave it plugged in all the time (no power switch). My printer's power switch is way around at the back, hard to reach - I only print once or twice a week. At least my LCD has an off button on the front, but it is never really off.
  • by Wonko the Sane (25252) * <wts42@yahoo.com> on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:12PM (#21290047) Homepage Journal
    I like this trend. If a device wants to consume 0 power on standby then it finally means that they'll stop putting those damn blue LEDs on everything electronic. Then I could have a dark bedroom at night without the use of electrical tape.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      How'd that get modded funny? I tape over mine too. Some blue LEDs literally hurt even glancing at them in a dark room. Then you have the night vision loss.
  • Pull the plug (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Drakin020 (980931) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:17PM (#21290093)
    So does that mean I can pull the plug and have the monitor remain in standby mode?
  • by thogard (43403) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:22PM (#21290151) Homepage
    Most very low power modern devices have nasty power factors. PC power supplies tend to be .6 to .8. CFLs run from about .2 to .6 while many phone charges are about .2. That means for every watt delivered to the phone, there line losses in the grid are at least 3 W if not more. There are also losses in the generator so getting 1 Watt into your phone (or CFL) may require more power than putting 5W into a resistive load.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I wonder what would happen if the electric company billed for the volt-amps consumed, instead of the watts, and then reported both numbers (together with your power factor) on the bill. I also wonder what would be required to do whole-house power factor correction? How much cost would it add if you were going to install a grid-tie solar system or something similar? How do these numbers compare to the added cost of power factor corrected power supplies in consumer electronics?
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I wonder what would happen if the electric company billed for the volt-amps consumed,

        That happens for companies already, and I believe even homes in parts of Europe.

        I also wonder what would be required to do whole-house power factor correction?

        Some big-ass capacitors, just like the power companies do already to keep from being overwhelmed.

        How much cost would it add if you were going to install a grid-tie solar system or something similar?

        Funny you should mention it.

        Over the past few months, I've been notici

  • by TheLink (130905) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:34PM (#21290229) Journal
    Yes it's still a good thing, but meanwhile has anyone invented an airconditioner/heater or car that's much more efficient but at the same time as practical and as affordable as the conventional stuff?

    My airconditioner uses at least 1kW. 1 hour of airconditioning = 20 days of monitor standby.

    For those of you who live in countries that need central heating, the standby power isn't going to hurt as much during winter since you want stuff warmer anyway.

    I need a better designed house (to reduce cooling bills etc), but I can't afford one... An "Energy Star" legislation for houses here might be good, but I'm worried the builders will just use it as a way to make a lot more money.

  • by Animats (122034) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:49PM (#21290333) Homepage

    This is more of a stunt. It's relatively straightforward to design the control electronics for a display such that the electronics draws under a milliwatt in standby. The problem is how to get 1mW at 5V or so from the power line. Low-end switching power supplies don't even work right with no load, and better ones still draw a few percent of full-load current when unloaded. So you can't use the main power supply. Transformers have the same problem.

    What's really needed are low-cost power supplies for obtaining something like a milliwatt from the power line without wasting more power than they deliver. But they have to be attached to the power line, and need the the protection circuitry and isolation for that. It's not something that can be done with a single IC.

    One could power the standby electronics from an ultracapacitor, and when it gets low, bring up the main power supply for a few seconds for a recharge.

  • Remote Conservation (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Friday November 09 2007, @12:10AM (#21290905) Homepage Journal
    Is there a really cheap remote power control for appliances that I can control via PC/Linux, which will shut off all power, and drain the minimum while watching for the powerup signal? Bluetooth or other wireless, or even over the electric wires in the wall.

    It seems to me like some kind of RFID type passive tech could do this with only the power from a RF signal itself to flip the transistors gating the appliance power on/off.
    • Re:instead (Score:5, Insightful)

      by evanbd (210358) on Thursday November 08 2007, @09:59PM (#21289929)
      Empirically, they can't. It does not matter why, unless with that answer comes some insight into how to change it. It would appear that simply telling them to do better has no impact. If *you* want to save power, then that method has some hope of success. If a large organization or society wants to save power, that method is almost hopeless. So, given that you can't just tell people to conserve energy and expect it to work, what can you do? Incentives or mandates for more efficient standby modes is one solution that might actually have an impact.
      • Re:instead (Score:4, Insightful)

        by famebait (450028) on Friday November 09 2007, @05:47AM (#21292653)
        Damn I wish I had points. That was the clearest rebuttal I've seen to date to date of the sort of numbskulled responses you see all the time on slashdot these days: "why can't people just take responsibility blah blah blah".

        It seems a lot of people simply can't tell the difference between "not my problem" and "not a problem" - between placing responsibility for a problem and actually seeing it solved. You wouldn't expect the same people to argue "Why can't all world leaders just sit down and hold hands and sort it all out peacefully", but it's exactly the same sort of worthless argument. Well, I don't know why, but your rhetorical question doesn't mean whatever reasons there are suddenly disappear, and hurrah if they all did what you suggest, but I'm sure as hell not going to carry on with my life pretending "well that's solved, then".

        This mental dodo is especially mind-boggling when the negative impact is on a third party and not on the one identified as 'responsible'. "Damn regulations. Parents should take some responsibility and screen their children's toys for toxic chemicals". Implicitly: "if they don't then they deserve what they get". Errr, OK, let's just for the sake of argument assume that they did deserve it. Does that affect what their kids deserve?

        This last variant also incorporates another common logical gem: the scapegoat fallacy - the idea that responsibility for something is a constant amount. If you can blame someone, everybody else is off the hook. It's like saying that "the hit man was just doing his job", or "don't blame me, hire the hit man I hired". No. You are both fully responsible for all easily foreseeable consequences of your actions, including how you affect the actions of others, and a longer list of parties who share responsibility for the result does not lessen yours unless it lessens your control or predictive capability over what happened.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      > why can't people just be disciplined enough to switch off their monitors before leaving for home/office?

      Go ahead, push the button on the front if it makes you feel 'green' or something. But other than the LED on the front going off instead of blinking and/or changing colors you ain't done a goddamned thing. It is still wasting almost (less the couple of milliwatts for the LED) exactly as much power as if you hadn't pushed the button. Because the button on the front is just a 'soft button' on almost
      • Yup, and knowing plenty about the problem, I keep my power strip right between my tower and my amplifier, right where I can reach over the keyboard and KILL EVERYTHING AT ONCE.

        No sissy waiting for stuff to shut down. All my programs are closed, hard disk activity light not blinking *click* everything's off.

        Why wait for a solution when we've had one for decades and it works more reliably than some software-controlled switch?
      • Re:instead (Score:4, Insightful)

        by rmerry72 (934528) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:35PM (#21290235) Homepage

        If you switch the devices on/off all the time, then they don't last very long. One reason why modern electronic devices last for decades without failure, is due to not ever being really switched off.

        Oh crap. Maybe mechanical devices might have a problem - like spinning down and spinning up your hard drive - but not electrical devices. Modern electronic devices haven't been around for decades, maybe just over one. Most old fashioned electoronics - like old TVs and radios - did get turned on and off (they had no standby) and they did last decades.

        Modern devices barely last five years before needing replacing. Add the fact that they chew up power when they are in "stand-by" and I wonder what the definition of "progress" really is.

    • Re:8% sounds high (Score:4, Insightful)

      by thatskinnyguy (1129515) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:11PM (#21290039)
      No one is telling you to go out and buy one right away or we're all goners. It's just another option to consider when your current model fails. The same goes for the rest of that saving the planet stuff.
    • Re:patents?!?! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by OrangeTide (124937) on Thursday November 08 2007, @10:19PM (#21290113) Homepage Journal
      I built a relay and cap circuit when I was in highschool to turn AC circuits on and off with a standard momentary push button. The result, zero stand-by current. holding the momentary switch completed a circuit which would cascade and latch a larger relay. This relay would hold itself closed until you interrupted the power. Simple, and makes a satisfying click.

      I'm not sure how you can patent something that 1-2% of EE students discovered on their own.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      You are probably trolling, but just in case you actually mean it...

      Have you looked at the oil price lately? Even if you are irrational enough to ignore the mountain of evidence for human caused global warming, you might still want to cut down on your energy bill and/or make the remaining oil on this planet last a little longer.