Should You Shut Down Your Computer or Put It to Sleep?

Flickr/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/deerwooduk/682390157/sizes/z/in/photostream/" target="_blank">dougwoods</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Phew! You’ve made it through another day at the office. You’re just about to don your coat and head out into the evening—but your computer’s still on. Should you turn it off, or leave it in “sleep” mode? Some say it’s better to shut down, since that way it won’t be using any power while you’re not around. But others say that the process of shutting down and starting up again uses more power than letting your machine sleep. Who’s right?

First things first: Turning your computer off, then on again does not use more power than leaving it on in “sleep” mode. “That’s a myth,” says Bruce Nordman, an energy efficiency researcher at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Another myth: Turning your computer on and off is bad for the machine. “In order to do any real damage, you’d have to turn it on and off far more frequently than anyone would ever want to,” says Nordman. That said, trying to remember to shut down your machine every night isn’t necessarily the most effective energy-savings strategy. Here’s why.

Fifteen years ago, when computer manufacturers first experimented with sleep mode (it used to be called “standby”), the energy savings weren’t very dramatic. Today things are different: According to energy efficiency expert Michael Bluejay, while in use, the average laptop requires 15-60 watts, while desktops use 65-250 watts, plus an additional 15-70 for the monitor. In sleep mode, however, most laptops use a measly two watts, and desktops with monitors use 5-10 watts, says Nordman. (“Hibernate” modes on some computers use even less energy—for a good rundown on the difference between various power management modes, check out Michael Bluejay’s guide.) Because sleep settings use so little energy, Nordman believes that it isn’t really worth making a big production out of remembering to shut down your computer every day: “Much more important to make sure that your computer is set to go into power-saving mode after a certain period of idle time.”

The EPA’s Energy Star program agrees with Nordman—sort of. Using power-management settings (like sleep mode) is the best way to reduce your energy use, says Katharine Kaplan, who leads the EPA team that develops Energy Star requirements. Nevertheless, Energy Star still recommends unplugging computers—and most other electronics—at night. “If it were just computers, leaving them in sleep mode wouldn’t be a problem,” says Kaplan. “But people have so many devices these days that it really starts to add up.” When you do shut down devices, cautions Kaplan, be sure to unplug them completely, lest they become energy vampires. One solution: Smart Strips allow you to plug in several devices, with one designated as a “master.” When the master is turned off, the other devices shut down, too. (Just be careful not to accidentally turn something off that other machines in your house depend on, such as the WiFi.)

One last tip: Skip the screensaver. “Screensavers actually use more energy than a static image, since they require the computer to do calculations,” says Nordman. And they don’t even save your screen: Back in the days of the flying toasters, screensavers prolonged the life of your monitor, but that technology isn’t applicable to newer screens.

The bottom line: Before you obsess over unplugging your computer every night, first make sure your computer is set to go into a power-saving mode after a short amount of idle time. (The EPA recommends 15 minutes for your monitor and 30 minutes for your computer.) Then, if you remember to unplug at night, give yourself an extra pat on the back.

Thanks to the computer gurus at TechSoup for helping me research this post.

Got a burning eco-quandary? Submit it to econundrums@motherjones.com. Get all your green questions answered by visiting Econundrums on Facebook here.

Correction: An earlier version of this article described computer energy use in terms of “watts per hour,” when it should be simply “watts.” We regret the error.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate