Apple's new iPad estimated to cost $1.36 per year to charge

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
It costs less to recharge a fully-drained Retina Display-toting iPad every other day for a year than it does to run a 60-watt-equivalent (13W) compact fluorescent light bulb continuously over the same period, a new study finds.

According to a study from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), an independent non-profit organization focusing on electricity research and development, Apple's new iPad and devices like it could help lower the high power consumption seen as a result of the Information Age, reports the Associated Press.

As smartphones and tablets become more popular and accessible, the EPRI wondered if the flood of new devices was having a negative impact on power consumption. What the group found was that charging a device once every other day from full discharge costs mere pennies per day, a dramatic reduction from large electronics like HDTVs and PCs.

Testing pitted a variety of Apple's mobile products including the overwhelmingly popular iPad, which has sold over 67 million copies as of April, against other household appliances to project energy use in a "post-PC" era.

?As information technologies continue to change rapidly we see important implications for energy consumption,? said EPRI Vice President of Power Delivery and Utilization Mark McGranaghan. ?These results raise important questions about how the shifting reliance from desktop to laptop to mobile devices will change energy use and electricity requirements for the information age. "

iPad Battery
The third-generation iPad's 11,560mAh battery. | Source: iFixit


Calculations show that the average energy load of all iPads in the market comes to about 590 gigawatt hours per year and if the number of iPads tripled over the next two years the electricity needed could be handled by two 250-megawatt power stations running at 50 percent.

The third-generation iPad, which sports a high-capacity 42.5-watt-hour battery, uses less 11.86 kilowatt hours of electricity over a one year period, a stark contrast to 42? plasma television which consumes 358 kWh. An average laptop consumes 72.3 kWh while a 60-watt CFL light bulb eats about 14 kWh, costing an average $8.31 and $1.61 a year, respectively. Cost will obviously vary by location but for reference the EPRI experiment was conducted in Knoxville, Tenn.

With a weak economy driving more people to energy-efficient devices, the U.S. government expects residential power demand to fall for the third straight year. As devices get smaller and the components more efficient, energy costs are likely to decrease in the coming years especially with more users moving away from PCs to more portable options like the iPad.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    dickprinterdickprinter Posts: 1,060member


    (*knock*knock*knock*)


     


    Hello?....Greenpeace? Where are ya, dudes?

  • Reply 2 of 34
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,236member
    Worlds most energy efficient lap warmer with built-in entertainment.
  • Reply 3 of 34
    ochymingochyming Posts: 474member


    A marvel.


    Innovation?


     


    image: Sure.

  • Reply 4 of 34
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post


    (*knock*knock*knock*)


     


    Hello?....Greenpeace? Where are ya, dudes?





    Hmmm, let me think, what did you say again.... your last name is "Printer", and you're a dick for a living?


     


    (Oh, come on, just being funny...)

  • Reply 5 of 34
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member


    That's outrageous!


     


    I'll be returning mine immediately and contacting my solicitor.

  • Reply 6 of 34
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member


    That's great, but even PCs use hardly any power. It's things like Clothes Dryers that put your power bill up.

  • Reply 7 of 34


    And it takes a study to find that out?


     


    All I need is to read: iPad power adapter, rated 10W. 60W equivalent CFL, rated 13W. Charging an iPad some of the time takes less power than running the other all the time? No shit, Sherlock!


     


    Next up: iPad display smaller than 42" TV, study finds.

  • Reply 8 of 34
    sirdirsirdir Posts: 114member
    whocares wrote: »
    And it takes a study to find that out?

    All I need is to read: iPad power adapter, rated 10W. 60W equivalent CFL, rated 13W. Charging an iPad some of the time takes less power than running the other all the time? No shit, Sherlock!

    That were my thoughts, too. How should a device that is charged with a maximum of 10W need more power than a device constantly needing more?
  • Reply 9 of 34
    nizzardnizzard Posts: 29member


    WHO GIVES A SHIT?

  • Reply 10 of 34
    irelandireland Posts: 17,547member
    nizzard wrote: »
    WHO GIVES A SHIT?
    Clearly you.
  • Reply 11 of 34
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 918member


    "the EPRI wondered if the flood of new devices was having a negative impact on power consumption."


     


    Talk about saying something that means nothing.  Anytime you "add" something to the power grid that consumes energy versus making electricity there is a negative impact.  Windmills included.  I think they better focus their concerns on all these electric cars the green weenies want every one to drive.  I think that'll have a considerably larger impact than a bunch of 10W iPads getting charged every few days...

  • Reply 12 of 34
    zandroszandros Posts: 537member


    So, my first reaction was "duh, of course the iPad doesn't draw anywhere near 60 watts". And then I realised the "60 W CFL light bulb" in reality was a 60 W incandescent-equivalent CFL lamp. Misusing the SI units in this way is probably way worse than the ridiculousness of the "horse power".

  • Reply 13 of 34
    rabbit_coachrabbit_coach Posts: 1,114member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NIZZARD View Post


    WHO GIVES A SHIT?



    If you pay for the shipping fees, I could send some to you. How much would you like? 

  • Reply 14 of 34
    applezillaapplezilla Posts: 941member


    Wow. I did not expect that. I've been being cheap and charging mine at the office, thinking I was getting away with something.

  • Reply 15 of 34
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by razorpit View Post

    I think they better focus their concerns on all these electric cars the green weenies want every one to drive.


    When you're driving one in 20 years, that's what I'll call you. :)


     


    BTW, a 60 watt equivalent CFL draws about 14 watts. I don't know why they don't just call them 14 watt bulbs.  ???

  • Reply 16 of 34
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 918member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post


    Wow. I did not expect that. I've been being cheap and charging mine at the office, thinking I was getting away with something.



     


    Shh I don't want my boss to catch on as to why I have my 60" plasma at work...

  • Reply 17 of 34
    jukesjukes Posts: 213member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    The third-generation iPad, which sports a high-capacity 42.5-watt-hour battery, uses less 11.86 kilowatt hours of electricity over a one year period, a stark contrast to 42? plasma television which consumes 358 kWh.


     


    An african or european plasma?


     


    Seriously, my 42" plasma is on for about 4 hours a week. It's not using 360kWh per year. What a useless factoid to include.

  • Reply 19 of 34
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,572member
    If my math is right, they are assuming 60% average depletion and you unplug the charger when not in use.
  • Reply 20 of 34
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    idave wrote: »
    When you're driving one in 20 years, that's what I'll call you. :)

    BTW, a 60 watt equivalent CFL draws about 14 watts. I don't know why they don't just call them 14 watt bulbs.  ???

    Because the average consumer thinks of 'watts' as a measure of light output, not power consumption. If they advertised them as 14 W, very few people would buy them.

    The industry is trying to educate people to look at lumens for light output, but it's a slow process.
Sign In or Register to comment.