20

Problem 2: Is there a significant difference in the electric bills if participants

invest in energy efficient appliances?

Graph 2. Lights Subcategory and Cost Liquidation

Graph 2 reflects the identified common types of light which are Fluorescent Lamp

and Incandescent bulb used by half of the respondents (25) who selected this option on

the survey and these are fluorescent light bulbs and Incandescent bulbs.

Table 1. Effects of Energy Utilization to Power Consumption on Light Energy

Light Energy M SD QD
1.   Wattage 1.00 14.57 LSE
2.   Number of hours Used 2.66 0.00 ME
3.   Cost per Unit 1.00 0.55 LSE
4.   Estimated Monthly Cost 1.00 0.00 LSE
Average 1.42 3.78 LSE
 21

Legend:
Scale Interval Qualitative Description Code
1 3.25 - 4.00 High Effect HE
2 2.50 - 3.24 Moderate Effect ME
3 1.75 - 2.49 Less Effect LE
4 1.00 - 1.74 Least Effect LSE

The table above shows that the number of hours used has a moderate effect on the

power consumption on light energy, as it has the highest mean at 2.66. Whereas wattage,

cost per unit, and estimated monthly cost all have the same least effect on power

consumption on light energy, with a mean of 1.00.

Source: The use of light at night continues to increase. Simply put, this is because

without light we are deprived of our premier sense, vision. By enabling vision, the use of

light at night delivers a number of benefits to people.

Problem 3. What recommendations did the researchers produce based on their

findings and results?

 22

Graph 3. Entertainment Subcategory and Cost Liquidation

Graph 3 reflects the identified common types of entertainment, which are TV sets

and gadgets, specifically cellphone and TV that are being used on daily basis.

Table 2. Effects of Energy Utilization to Power Consumption on Entertainment Energy

Entertainment Energy M SD QD
1.   Wattage 2.52 1.96 ME
2.   Number of hours Used 1.00 0.00 LSE
3.   Cost per Unit 1.00 0.00 LSE
4.   Estimated Monthly Cost 1.00 0.00 LSE
Average 1.38 0.49 LSE

Legend:
Scale Interval Qualitative Description Code
1 3.25 - 4.00 High Effect HE
2 2.50 - 3.24 Moderate Effect ME
3 1.75 - 2.49 Less Effect LE
4 1.00 - 1.74 Least Effect LSE

The table above shows that wattage has a moderate effect on the power

consumption on entertainment energy, as it has the highest mean at 2.52. Whereas the

number of hours used, cost per unit, and estimated monthly cost all have the same least

effect on power consumption on entertainment energy, with a mean of 1.00.

Source: The higher the wattage, the greater the amount of electrical energy that an

electrical appliance or piece of equipment uses over a period of time.

 23

Graph 4. Cooling Subcategory and Cost Liquidation

Graph 4 reflects the two most common types of cooling devices that are

commonly used in households, which are refrigerators and stand fans. 

Table 3. Effects of Energy Utilization to Power Consumption on Cooling Energy

Cooling Energy M SD QD

1. Wattage 3.62 1.51 HE

2. Number of hours Used 3.16 2.01 ME

3. Cost per Unit 3.08 2.01 ME

4. Estimated Monthly Cost 3.16 2.01 ME

Average 3.26 1.89 HE

 24

Legend:
Scale Interval Qualitative Description Code
1 3.25 - 4.00 High Effect HE
2 2.50 - 3.24 Moderate Effect ME
3 1.75 - 2.49 Less Effect LE
4 1.00 - 1.74 Least Effect LSE

The table above shows that wattage has a high effect on cooling energy

consumption, as it has the highest mean at 3.62. Whereas the cost per unit has the lowest

mean among the rest, garnering a moderate effect on the power consumption on cooling

energy, with a mean of 3.08.

Source: The higher the wattage, the greater the amount of electrical energy that an

electrical appliance or piece of equipment uses over a period of time.

Table 4. Summary Table on the Energy Utilization to Power Consumption as to Analysis

of Variance

Sum of df Mean F Sig Decision

Squares Square
Between .00 Reject
173.080 2 86.540 42.368
Groups 0 Ho
Wattage
Within Groups 300.260 147 2.043
Total 473.340 149
Between .00 Reject
127.853 2 63.927 43.925
Groups 0 Ho
Number of Hours Used
Within Groups 213.940 147 1.455
Total 341.793 149
Between .00 Reject
144.213 2 72.107 53.083
Groups 0 Ho
Cost per Unit
Within Groups 199.680 147 1.358
Total 343.893 149
Between .00 Reject
155.520 2 77.760 57.522
Estimated Monthly Groups 0 Ho
Cost Within Groups 198.720 147 1.352
Total 354.240 149
 25

This table shows the sum of squares, degrees of freedom, mean square, F-ratio

and significant level of between groups and within groups. This shows that the standard

significant level (0.05) is greater than the significant level of the three treatments.

As shown in Table 4, it has been established that there is a significant difference

in how the specified variables affect the electric bills in terms of wattage, number of

hours, cost per unit and estimated monthly cost. Moreover, it has been shown in the

overall comparison that the p-value for all the variables is less than 0.05. Therefore, it

has been decided that all of the variables will reject the null and accept the alternative

hypothesis.

Subsequently, the table also shows that wattage has the highest total in the sum of

squares garnering 473.340. While number of hours used has the lowest at 342.793 in

totality in the sum of squares, not too far from the cost per unit which all in all is 434.893.
 26

Table 5. Summary Table on the Energy Utilization to Power Consumption as to Multiple

Comparisons

Dependent (I) Lighting, (J) Lighting, Mean Std. Sig. Decision

Variable Entertainment & Cooling Entertainment & Cooling Difference (I-J) Error
Reject
EE -1.520* .286 .000
Ho
LE
Reject
CE -2.620* .286 .000 Ho
Reject
LE 1.520* .286 .000 Ho
Wattage EE
Reject
CE -1.100* .286 .001 Ho
Reject
LE 2.620* .286 .000 Ho
CE
Reject
EE 1.100* .286 .001
Ho
Reject
EE 1.660* .241 .000
Ho
LE
Accept
CE -.500 .241 .120
Ho
Reject
LE -1.660* .241 .000
Number of Ho
EE
Hours Used Reject
CE -2.160* .241 .000
Ho
Accept
LE .500 .241 .120
Ho
CE
Reject
EE 2.160* .241 .000
Ho
Accept
EE .000 .233 1.000
Ho
LE
Reject
CE -2.080* .233 .000 Ho
Accept
LE .000 .233 1.000 Ho
Cost per Unit EE
Reject
CE -2.080* .233 .000 Ho
Reject
LE 2.080* .233 .000 Ho
CE
Reject
EE 2.080* .233 .000
Ho
Estimated Accept
EE .000 .233 1.000
Month Cost Ho
LE
Reject
CE -2.160* .233 .000
Ho
Accept
LE .000 .233 1.000
Ho
EE
Reject
CE -2.160* .233 .000
Ho
CE LE 2.160* .233 .000 Reject
Ho
 27

Reject
EE 2.160* .233 .000
Ho

Legend:
Description Code
Light Energy LE
Entertainment Energy EE
Cooling Energy CE

The table above present the results of the multiple comparisons. It is already

shown in the previous table (table 4) that there is a significant difference in how the

specified variables affect the electric bills. Hence, in this table it will show the multiple

comparisons of each of the treatments in terms of wattage, number of hours, cost per unit

and estimated monthly cost and determine whether what to reject and what to accept.

These are the following explanation for each of the variable:

First is the multiple comparison for wattage. Since the p-value for all of them is

0.00, LE, EE and CE all have a significant difference with each other which leads to a

decision to reject the null and accept the alternative

Second is the multiple comparison for numbers of hours used. It is shown in the

table above that only two of the treatment have a significant difference and will be

accepting the alternative hypothesis, which is LE and EE, and CE and EE. As for LE and

CE they have no significant difference with each other and will be accepting the null

rather than the alternative hypothesis.

 28

Third is the multiple comparison for cost per unit. It is shown in the table above

that only two of the treatment have a significant difference and will be accepting the

alternative hypothesis, which is LE and CE, and CE and EE. As for LE and EE they have

no significant difference with each other and will be rejecting the alternative hypothesis.

Last is the multiple comparison for estimated monthly cost. Same with the third

the only two treatment that has a significant difference with each other and will be

accepting the alternative hypothesis is the LE and CE, and CE and EE. Thus, rejecting the

alternative and accepting the null hypothesis implies that LE and EE have no significant

differences.