Utilities is very expensive in other parts of the world. Im glad Nintendo tries to keep the energy footprint of their products as low as possible. It does not influence the quality their first/second party games.
When a company makes an "energy efficient" product, it rarely actually benefits the user individually. When 10 million WiiUs are in use, that power saving becomes significant and thats why people are bothered about "being green". We aren't making a difference on our own, but collectively & every company has a responsibility to make their products as efficient as possible.
So Nintendo can claim their product is "energy saving" or whatever - but its not going to benefit you beyond a few quid a year unless you leave it on 24/7. They can make that claim though and the company/product looks good. Job done
I don't know that the UK's prices are particularly low, but when PS360 launched there was a Gadget Show investigation into the cost to run them, and it was all of £30ish a year on ~200 watt machines. The savings from energy footprint should be close to nothing, ten quid a year tops.
Well it aint cheap
Also remember the cost of electricity has gone up exponentially since 2005 (ie not in line with inflation) so its likely not a straight line down between ~200w and ~50w to calculate the yearly cost based on those figures.
But as I said above, and you have touched upon -the benefit is never to the consumer (unless its a 24/7 device like a fridge or something), the benefit is to the company - in this case Nintendo - as it comes accross as caring and enviro friendly. This perception in turn helps market the product as the consumer feels all warm inside for saving the planet. And I suppose when its used on mass it does make a difference for the planet too (not that the company care about this part).
This party is over as soon as Xbox 3/ps4 hit
This was gonna be the case anyway unless they were also GPU heavy. It seems Nintnedo was/is banking on the industry shifting to GPGPU biased games, where the GPU takes over alot of the physics etc. They would have still been "down ports" (less assets, lower res etc) but similar architecture might have made it easier. I fear they've gone a bit too far thought with gimping their CPU and as soon as the first wave of Next Gen games are over, WiiU likely won't be seeing any straight ports. Doesn't mean it wont see it's own versions of games (al la Wii) and that depends entirely on the size of WiiUs market by then. This is a numbers game not a popularity contest, after all.
Right now WiiU's only saving grace is that not too many companies look like they'll have the capital to compete in a high-budget "AAAA" game market, so intially it might not be too much of an issue as many devs (publishers) will see the benefit in making cheaper games for the established WiiU audience over spending big on loss-leading projects. It also seems set to become a bit of an Indie haven as the eShop is very friendly to smaller devs (some even comparing it to Steam in its cost effectivness, simplicity and openness) so that might add to its longevity too.