Energy efficient TV?

grizzly1911

tonyh66 wrote: »

and in reality there is only about £5 per year difference in power consumption so it takes 6 years before buying the more expensive one economical.

Very true for all the green initiatives they want us to jump into.

The way energy costs are going that 5 years will shorten and just think of the ongoing savings;)

Avoriaz

I know how you could save £145.50 in TV annual running costs.

mardatha

Yea I can agree with that one but unfortunately the OH won'!

Avoriaz

Get a new OH instead of, or as well as, a new TV.

buglawton

Best way to reduce TV power consumption is to wear a thick jumper & turn down the central heating by 1 or 2 degrees, as sitting still watching TV for long periods does make you cold.

The saving will completely pay for the TV's energy consumption.

mardatha

Heating here is coal!

paulmapp8306

Sharon87 wrote: »

Well comparing a Samsung 32in LCD and LED TV on Argos that stats are:

LCD http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/5298549.htm
Energy efficiency information:

Energy efficiency rating: B.
On mode power consumption 58 watts.
Off mode power consumption 0.3 watt.
Standby power consumption 0.3 watt.
Annual power consumption 85kWh.
Energy Saving Trust recommended.

LED http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/5299926.htm#pdpFullProductInformation
Energy efficiency information:

Energy efficiency rating: A.
On mode power consumption 35 watts.
Annual power consumption 51kWh.
Standby power consumption 0.3 watt.

Same TV, just the difference is LED and LCD. So LED seems cheaper when turned on and the same when they're left on standby

£30 difference in price - LED being more expensive.

Hope this helps.

Quite how they work out annual power consumption without knowing how many hours the TV wil be on ????

Also LED TVs are still LCD displays. Its the backlighting thats different.

Even so - the difference between those TVs (taken that fairly made up annual useage) is 34KW - but its that KW/h or just KW? That makes a difference. Even taking it as KW/h, at 15p/unit (more Than Im currently paying) thats a whopping £5.10 less per year to run the less efficent TV. If the new price difference is £30 - it will take 6 years to make that £30 back in useage.

People can really overthink this. If yo uwant to save money - just get the smallest screen you can live with - then choose the best picture/manufacturer you can afford and dont worry about the rest - it makes practically no difference.

paulmapp8306

Oh - as for heating being coal - that doesnt matter. The TV being on will heat the room a little, meaning you dont have to use as much coal.

Plasma TVs are the most expensive to run, but generate the most heat. Its actually more cost effective to heat out bedroom to the temperature we like using the plasma TV, than it is to use the central heating and watch an LED TV.

buglawton

mardatha wrote: »

Heating here is coal!

Let's put it another way then. using 5% less coal by having the air flow closed off a bit more, or 'banking' the fire half an hour earlier in the evening for the overnight, might lower the average temperature by a few deg C on average. That 5% saving in fuel will power 3 large screen TVs for 24 hours per day (cost comparison).