Television Outlaw: Are you one?

[3db]

What I can say about this is that I was glad to learn the plasmas and LCDs use more power than good ol' CRTs (like I'm stuck with for the moment). I had no idea. I think maybe I assumed the last used more power than the LCDs at least -- I guess actually thinking decades ago when CRTs had a dozen tubes or more, of which the actual CRT was only one.

Anyway, although spreading the knowledge is a good thing, I think legislating which TVs people can have is idiodic. If you want to reduce power usage, increase the per watt usage price, don't legislate appliance by appliance.

according to this article, LCD uses the least and Plasma uses the most:

"A recent issue of "Real Simple" magazine listed some annual power consumption statistics for a variety of electronics equipment. The ones that interested me were the kW hours and annual cost estimates for each type of TV (plasma, LCD, CRT). The results are summarized below (for TVs smaller than 40"):

ITEM Annual Energy Use Annual Cost
Plasma TV 441 kWH $48.25
CRT TV 123 kWH $13.46
LCD TV 77 kWH $8.42


"CRT vs. LCD: Power Consumption
# According to an article by Alan Hedge at Cornell University, LCDs use less power and save more energy than comparable CRT displays. When comparing a 15" LCD monitor with a 17" CRT monitor (which has an equal amount of viewing area), the LCD monitor used 55 watts less when operational (25 vs. 80) and 2 watts less when in standby (3 vs. 5). LCD screens also consume less power when returning from standby mode than CRTs.

LCDs will use less power than CRT televisions, which means a little less money spent on power. That's also better for the environment, if you're into the green movement.

[Woochifer]

according to this article, LCD uses the least and Plasma uses the most:

"A recent issue of "Real Simple" magazine listed some annual power consumption statistics for a variety of electronics equipment. The ones that interested me were the kW hours and annual cost estimates for each type of TV (plasma, LCD, CRT). The results are summarized below (for TVs smaller than 40"):

ITEM Annual Energy Use Annual Cost
Plasma TV 441 kWH $48.25
CRT TV 123 kWH $13.46
LCD TV 77 kWH $8.42


"CRT vs. LCD: Power Consumption
# According to an article by Alan Hedge at Cornell University, LCDs use less power and save more energy than comparable CRT displays. When comparing a 15" LCD monitor with a 17" CRT monitor (which has an equal amount of viewing area), the LCD monitor used 55 watts less when operational (25 vs. 80) and 2 watts less when in standby (3 vs. 5). LCD screens also consume less power when returning from standby mode than CRTs.

LCDs will use less power than CRT televisions, which means a little less money spent on power. That's also better for the environment, if you're into the green movement.

Problem with this generalization is that both CRT and plasma will vary the power consumption depending on the signal source -- i.e., a bright signal will consume more power than a dark signal. The power consumption will also vary based on whether the TV is calibrated -- the high contrast and high brightness settings in the torch modes will use more power than the settings closer to calibrated standards. LCDs' power consumption varies only on the lamp level -- doesn't matter what signals or calibration settings are used. An article published in Home Theater magazine three years ago found that when running a grayscale test signal using out-of-the-box settings, the plasma TVs in their test already used less power than the LCDs did.

I would also question how old the data cited in the article is. The fact that they limited the findings to TVs 40" and under is a red flag that the information is either way outdated or irrelevant, given that 32" plasma panels (that was the only plasma panel size less than 42") are no longer made and were never imported into the U.S. in large quantities to begin with

Just over the last two years, the peak power consumption on the plasma panels made by Samsung and Panasonic (which together control more than 80% of the plasma production) has dropped by about 2/3. Going to LED backlighting will also drop the power consumption on a LCD by close to 50% compared to CCFLs. I get the impression that the article didn't mention that either.

As I stated earlier, the power consumption issue with TVs has more to do with how big the screens have gotten. Anyone who wants to maximize the green factor in their TV decision should just go with a small screen, regardless of the display technology.

[3db]

Problem with this generalization is that both CRT and plasma will vary the power consumption depending on the signal source -- i.e., a bright signal will consume more power than a dark signal. The power consumption will also vary based on whether the TV is calibrated -- the high contrast and high brightness settings in the torch modes will use more power than the settings closer to calibrated standards. LCDs' power consumption varies only on the lamp level -- doesn't matter what signals or calibration settings are used. An article published in Home Theater magazine three years ago found that when running a grayscale test signal using out-of-the-box settings, the plasma TVs in their test already used less power than the LCDs did.

I would also question how old the data cited in the article is. The fact that they limited the findings to TVs 40" and under is a red flag that the information is either way outdated or irrelevant, given that 32" plasma panels (that was the only plasma panel size less than 42") are no longer made and were never imported into the U.S. in large quantities to begin with

Just over the last two years, the peak power consumption on the plasma panels made by Samsung and Panasonic (which together control more than 80% of the plasma production) has dropped by about 2/3. Going to LED backlighting will also drop the power consumption on a LCD by close to 50% compared to CCFLs. I get the impression that the article didn't mention that either.

As I stated earlier, the power consumption issue with TVs has more to do with how big the screens have gotten. Anyone who wants to maximize the green factor in their TV decision should just go with a small screen, regardless of the display technology.

You raised some good points. I chose these articles because they were trying to keep the sizes of the displays roughly the same. They are probably out of date. Home Theater Magazine should run another power consumption test and include LED TVs. Out of curioisty, when Home Theater Mag ran that test, did they have the back light set too full power? I would think that if the backlighting was set to low that the power consumption would drop substantially.Also, what did the article say about everyday/normal use? That's the real test as people don't sit and watch test patterns on their screen. Watching a test pattern gets kidna boring after the 2nd day. )

[Mr Peabody]

I guess the big concern is the kilowatts but $48.00 a year to run your TV don't seem so bad. Then again, when you compare to getting it for $8.00. But what's the difference if you prefer plasma.

[pixelthis]

I hate plasma with a pink and purple passion, but I AGREE that buying a display
because of its power usage is dumb.
Of course so is buying a plasma......