any suggestions for a low power draw... laser printer?

[danny burstein]

I've been helping out with some computing, and associated printing,
in off-grid locations. Generally we've managed by using a couple
of regular 12 V car batteries [a] and modest priced inverters
on a roll-around cart.

The problem is that we have to use a dot matrix printer, since
laser types use a lot of power, and have pretty high, make
that pretty damn high, starting surges.

(They also might be less tolerant of the modified square wave
these inverters generate).

Anyway, we'd much prefer to use a laser printer for the
better quality, performance, and print options.

Anyone have experience with hooking one up in this type
of environment?

(Yes, I know I can use a ridiculously heavy and expensive
commercial grade multi-kw BMFUPS . But that would weigh
more than my car. Ok, I'm exaggerating a bit, but just a little).

Thanks

[a] we're not deep-discharging, so don't have
to get the specialized batteries. In fact, we're
using marginal almost-thrown-our car ones...

The "B" stands for "big".

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
[email protected]
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

 

[Vaughn Simon]

The problem is that we have to use a dot matrix printer, since
laser types use a lot of power, and have pretty high, make
that pretty damn high, starting surges.

Why have you not included ink jet printers in your consideration?

Vaughn
Nothing personal, but if you are posting through Google Groups I may not receive
your message. Google refuses to control the flood of spam messages originating
in their system, so on any given day I may or may not have Google blocked. Try
a real NNTP server & news reader program and you will never go back. All you
need is access to an NNTP server (AKA "news server") and a news reader program.
You probably already have a news reader program in your computer (Hint: Outlook
Express). Assuming that your Usenet needs are modest, use
http://news.aioe.org/ for free and/or http://www.teranews.com/ for a one-time
$3.95 setup fee.
Will poofread for food.

 

[[email protected]]

The problem is that we have to use a dot matrix printer, since
laser types use a lot of power, and have pretty high, make
that pretty damn high, starting surges.

All the off grid types I know use ink jet strictly
cause of low power draw. Can run them off inverter etc.

Some reason you cant use ink jet?

 

[danny burstein]

All the off grid types I know use ink jet strictly
cause of low power draw. Can run them off inverter etc.

Some reason you cant use ink jet?

No particular reason, and that might be
a notch better than dot matrix (maybe...)
but we'd still rather have the faster speed
and much higher quality, including iamges...
that we can get from lasers.

THanks.

 

[[email protected]]

No particular reason, and that might be
a notch better than dot matrix (maybe...)
but we'd still rather have the faster speed
and much higher quality, including iamges...
that we can get from lasers.

OK

Well I don't know exact current draw from an inkjet but
I do know several people who live in their vans and
RV's full time and use ink jet cause it must have very
low power requirement

 

[Vaughn Simon]

No particular reason, and that might be
a notch better than dot matrix (maybe...)

A "notch" better? Your average cheap Ink jet printer is many notches better
than any dot matrix printer I have ever owned, in every respect except for
(possibly) per-page operating cost.

Vaughn
Nothing personal, but if you are posting through Google Groups I may not receive
your message. Google refuses to control the flood of spam messages originating
in their system, so on any given day I may or may not have Google blocked. Try
a real NNTP server & news reader program and you will never go back. All you
need is access to an NNTP server (AKA "news server") and a news reader program.
You probably already have a news reader program in your computer (Hint: Outlook
Express). Assuming that your Usenet needs are modest, use
http://news.aioe.org/ for free and/or http://www.teranews.com/ for a one-time
$3.95 setup fee.
Will poofread for food.

 

[stu]

Yep, the amateur strikes again. The information is pretty useless with
out knowing how long it took to do the printing.

Umm 34 watt-hrs is 34 watt-hr, about 5 times as much energy as NJ's printer
used. Whats the print time got to do with it?.

 

[[email protected]]

Well it is a large difference between 34Wh over the space of an hour
as opposed to 34Wh over the space of 10 minutes.

Oh sure, readers can hardly blame you for thinking of those 20 page
per hour laser printers. Latest ghinius pearl of wisdumb added to
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm

Time is important.

Not as important as reading comprehension or being smart enough to own
up to a blunder. Ever think of writing "oops" or "d'oh" instead of
another quackish excuse?

Wayne

 

[daestrom]

Ok, look at it this way.

200+ pages not 20, so Johns laser might do this in 6.5min while his
inkjet took many minutes lets say 5min to print 20pages (50min for
200P).

Laser - 5.3Wh to print 20 pages - 53Wh to print 200 pages(not
including warm up)

Inkjet - 6Wh to print 20 pages - 60Wh to print 200 pages

To Ron's

Inkjet - 34Wh to print 20 pages - 340Wh to print 200 pages.

Time is important when using Watts.

Too bad you failed to notice that we're talking Watt-hours, not Watts.

Neon started out by comparing the POWER of the two types of printers with
the ENERGY used to print the same document. Ron pointed out his printer
uses *more energy* to print a 20 page document compared to Neon John's 20
page document.

Learn to look for those little 'h's after the big 'W's

daestrom

 

[stu]

Ron just gave a totally useless figure not related to the time taken
to do the job. His information is not of any use in comparisons
because it is incomplete.
No he didn't. He said

 

[[email protected]]

Ron just gave a totally useless figure not related to the time taken
to do the job.
His information is not of any use in comparisons because it is incomplete.

BS. He gave the two most important numbers needed - total energy and
peak power. Besides, considering the context (a 20 page run on a laser
printer), the time variation couldn't be more than a few minutes, not
the ridiculous hour you argued. The facts are:

1. You failed to comprehend the energy number, same old same-old.
2. You won't admit the error, and instead penned one of your classic
moronic excuses: 10X1=10.
3. You don't have an energy meter, have argued against their use and
purpose, and therefore can't properly measure or discuss the energy
consumption of any variable-power appliance such as a laser printer.
4. You can't contribute anything useful to this or any other thread
because you're too busy pigheadedly pretending to be something you're
not.

http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
http://www.lowexpecations.com/

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

Of course, you can't explain why this makes a difference in determining
energy use for a laser printer doing a 20 page job. That's because you are
still confused about energy, as well as power, volts and amps, to name just
a few areas.

How *does* a "power consultant", who believes that appliance labels
can be used to estimate energy consumption, measure the energy use of
a laser printer? He seems to be implying that if he knew the time, he
could deduce average power from a Wh number, which he would then
erroneously apply to a different print job. Which begs the question -
why not simply divide the 34Wh by the number of pages, and estimate
larger jobs using a crude per-page figure? I wonder if this nitwit has
ever calculated *anything* useful. Such as, how many hundreds of
KillaWatts he could have purchased if he'd invested his time flipping
burgers instead of wasting it on Usenet futilely arguing against the
concept of energy meters.

Wayne