Azara Blog: Electrical gadgets becoming a way of life in Britain

Blog home page | Blog archive

Google   Bookmark and Share

Date published: 2006/12/19

The BBC says:

British consumers will buy about 30 million electrical and electronic items over the coming six months, according to the Energy Saving Trust (EST).

Its research shows many Britons regard items such as cordless phones and electric toothbrushes as "essential".

Electrical consumption by consumer gadgets is expected almost to double over the next five years.

The trust is calling for gadgets to carry labels warning shoppers how much they will cost to run.

It believes labelling might persuade shoppers either to buy less or to choose more energy-efficient models.

"On televisions, for example, we would like to see labels saying 'if you watch it, it will cost x pence per hour, if you leave it on standby, it will cost y pence'. Then you can present the environmental cost in monetary terms," he told BBC News.

It would indeed be useful to know how much it costs per hour (although of course it depends on the exact price of electricity, which varies from supplier to supplier, and on some contracts by time of day, and from month to month).

The so-called environmentalists always love to say that airplane traffic is the largest growing contributor to carbon emissions (because airplane traffic as a whole is insignificant, which does not lead to great scare stories in the media). Needless to say you can cut the pie up into as many pieces you want, and it's fairly easy to find a cut which makes your pet hatred the largest growing contributor. So here we have a cut which is such that airplane traffic is not the largest growing contributor, because the electrical consumption from gadgets is growing much more quickly. Well, the so-called environmentalists hate gadgets as well (they live in the 18th century), but perhaps the lazy media will haul them up the next time they harp on about the growth of airplane emissions being the "largest". It's not only irrelevant, it's based on some arbitrary cut of the pie, and there are others where it is not true.

All material not included from other sources is copyright For further information or questions email: info [at] cambridge2000 [dot] com (replace "[at]" with "@" and "[dot]" with ".").