<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PlayStation 4 Leads The Way In Video Game Console Energy Efficiency</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/playstation-4-leads-the-way-in-video-game-console-energy-efficiency/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/playstation-4-leads-the-way-in-video-game-console-energy-efficiency/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2014 08:17:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Miziolek</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/playstation-4-leads-the-way-in-video-game-console-energy-efficiency/#comment-196866</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Claire Miziolek]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2013 16:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54626#comment-196866</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I appreciate your blog’s focus on this issue, but wanted to bring up a potential point of confusion.  The “energy efficiency” you refer to for game consoles is at the product level, not at the market level.  As such, by scoring PS4 as more efficient than the Wii-U, this analysis neglects to acknowledge that the PS4 uses 9 times more energy than the Wii-U; while it may waste less of the energy it takes in,
it still takes in much more energy.  I work at an Energy Efficiency non-profit that works through these barriers, and from a consumer perspective this analysis could be misleading.  A consumer’s understanding of energy efficiency is that by using a device for the same hours per day, same days per year, the “more efficient” option would result in a lower utility bill.  From this analysis, however, if a consumer purchased the PlayStation over the Wii, they would end up with much higher utility bills in the end.  The Natural Resources Defense Council did a comprehensive analysis of this issue in 2009 with their report linked here: http://www.nrdc.org/energy/consoles/contents.asp

I’d be happy to discuss this issue further, but would appreciate if a disclaimer or comment could be made so that consumers do not read this article intending to make the efficient choice and end up using much more energy.  Thank you,
-Claire Miziolek, cmiziolek@neep.org, Residential Program Manager at Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I appreciate your blog’s focus on this issue, but wanted to bring up a potential point of confusion.  The “energy efficiency” you refer to for game consoles is at the product level, not at the market level.  As such, by scoring PS4 as more efficient than the Wii-U, this analysis neglects to acknowledge that the PS4 uses 9 times more energy than the Wii-U; while it may waste less of the energy it takes in,<br />
it still takes in much more energy.  I work at an Energy Efficiency non-profit that works through these barriers, and from a consumer perspective this analysis could be misleading.  A consumer’s understanding of energy efficiency is that by using a device for the same hours per day, same days per year, the “more efficient” option would result in a lower utility bill.  From this analysis, however, if a consumer purchased the PlayStation over the Wii, they would end up with much higher utility bills in the end.  The Natural Resources Defense Council did a comprehensive analysis of this issue in 2009 with their report linked here: <a href="http://www.nrdc.org/energy/consoles/contents.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.nrdc.org/energy/consoles/contents.asp</a></p>
<p>I’d be happy to discuss this issue further, but would appreciate if a disclaimer or comment could be made so that consumers do not read this article intending to make the efficient choice and end up using much more energy.  Thank you,<br />
-Claire Miziolek, <a href="mailto:cmiziolek@neep.org">cmiziolek@neep.org</a>, Residential Program Manager at Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/playstation-4-leads-the-way-in-video-game-console-energy-efficiency/#comment-195130</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54626#comment-195130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The fine print on the graphic reads, &quot; *The Playstation 4 and Xbox One energy consumption is estimated based on the current PS3 and Xbox 360 values&quot;. That doesn&#039;t seem like very strong evidence to support the title of this article.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fine print on the graphic reads, &#8221; *The Playstation 4 and Xbox One energy consumption is estimated based on the current PS3 and Xbox 360 values&#8221;. That doesn&#8217;t seem like very strong evidence to support the title of this article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
