Any recommendations for the most energy efficient TV that won't cost the earth up-front?

MoneyMon555

facade said:

I can't help with which one- the size and features affect power consumption,

But

First go round the back of yours and look for the label that gives the power consumption, it will have the model number and something like

200-240V AC 50/60Hz 200W       the 200W is the power consumption 200 watts. (If you divide 1000 by this number, it is how many hours the TV will take to use 1 kWh {1 unit = 1000W hours}) So this TV takes 1000/200 = 5 hours to use 1 unit, you can work out the cost in pence per hour.

Then compare this with what you want to buy. On the Currys site, if you pull up the page for the TV, rather than the quick listings you see this

The G is some sort of meaningless* energy efficiency, but if you click on the "product fiche" you get a data sheet with the watts

HDR will be for 4k bluray and 4k streaming Netfix etc.

So this TV takes 106W, and will be near enough half the cost of the first one to run.

The last figure standby power demand of 2.0 W means when it is plugged in, but turned off, it takes 2W, so 500hours or 21 days to use a unit. You want this as low as possible, unless you keep switching it off at the mains

An example, the

PANASONIC TX-32G310B 

is 33W on, and 0.5W on standby.

How long it would take to pay for a new TV with the energy saved compared to the old one though- you will have to work it out, I expect it is several years

*meaningless, as in they all seem to be G. :;

Thank you for comprehensive answer! But as you say, if they are all G rated then nothing much to compare

wild666

MoneyMon555 said:

Looking to make some savings on electric bill (aren't we all?) and the only one I I have left (other than not use any at all) is to get a more efficient TV, as this one is 10 years old.

Any recommendations please?

I would happily do this myself on suppliers web sites (AO, Currys, Amazon etc) but they do not make it easy to do usage comparison and in many cases just don't provide it on the spec.

The larger the screen size the more energy it will use, though some larger size screens are more efficient than the smaller sizes. My 65" Philips is G rated but it's only used twice a week for either gaming or Netflix. 
Amazon have a 43" Hisense that's class G rated and a Samsung 75" that's class G rated so it seems screen size doesn't make for more energy usage as I first said.

BikingBud

We have dumped other methods of watching tv and now only use a firestick, turn telly off when finished also isolates small amount of power for USB feed. No sky+ or DVD boxes with power always on etc.

whirlyhead

And don't wall mount your TV with the socket right behind it so you can't reach it to turn it off, as has been done with 2 of mine, neither of which have physical on/off switches. Irritating!!

Rodders53

First make, model and screen size of your current TV current TV? Then we can find out how much it uses.  Then, and only then, can you work out if an alternative TV would save any electricity at all!

New energy labelling has been introduced so that most TVs are now G
https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1614946171 
but they actually consume a varying amount of electricity and you need to look at the numbers in detail to identify savings.

Note a 1000 hours time = a little under 3 hours a day for one year in normal use?  

My lounge Plasma TV has a C rating (but on the old scheme) so maxes out at 400W, average 185W - 257 kWh per annum according to the maker.
My bedroom set is A and consumes 100W on the old spec - but is G rated today, and has two figures: 58 kWh/1000 hours for normal and 68 kWh/1000 h for HDR use under the new enery rating label.
My plasma might be 185 kWh per 1000 hours but would still be a G on the new rating system?

Ignore the letters and look at the precise kiloWatt-hours / 1000 hours of use numbers from the specification sheets / energy labels!

NB 0.5 W standby on a TV is 4.4 kWh per annum or 3.9 kWh extra (<4  units of electricity) if you watch 1000 hours of TV, so how important it is to turn off when not in use is a matter of personal choice.

I've just replaced one of my central heating pumps with a model that consumes 33 Watt max and the old one used 90 W...  Even that "large" saving will take many years to pay back the £105 it cost me (ignoring my labour costs).  It's better environmentally to use the extra electricity rather than chuck a working TV into landfill? (discuss)

Coffeekup

ProDave said:

My only suggestion is you do NOT want any form of "smart" tv, that basically has a little computer running all the time.

You want a basic, LED tv that has a proper physical on / off switch that is accessible, preferably on the front but second best one that is easy to reach on the back, so when not in use it is properly off, not just in standby.

True.... But on the other hand you'll need separate appliances running using power.... I.e. freview box, PC/laptop so you can stream Netflix, prime whatever else.. then some may use console platforms to access content, then there is DVD players.

So a smart tv may be more beneficial, getting rid of one or more of the above will be a bigger reduction in energy usage.

ChaunceyGardiner

ProDave said:

My only suggestion is you do NOT want any form of "smart" tv, that basically has a little computer running all the time.

The only non-smart TVs still available are small and, judging by their brands, cheap rubbish. Buying such a set would almost certainly be a false economy.

Grumpy_chap

MoneyMon555 said:

Looking to make some savings on electric bill (aren't we all?) and the only one I I have left (other than not use any at all) is to get a more efficient TV, as this one is 10 years old.

Any recommendations please?

I would happily do this myself on suppliers web sites (AO, Currys, Amazon etc) but they do not make it easy to do usage comparison and in many cases just don't provide it on the spec.

Are you buying a new TV because you want to buy a new TV, or to save energy?

I just bought a new TV last week and the power rating is 60W.

If I leave that on all year it is 60W x 24 hours x 365 days / 1000 = 525 kWh per year.
At 25 pence / kWh = £130 per year.

Very few people have the TV on all the time.  Let's assume average 2 hours per day, so (2 / 24) x £130 = £11 per year.

Even a cheap TV is £200, so 18 years to recover the cost assuming you could get the energy use to nil.

Coffeekup

MWT said:

Unless you are currently using a plasma TV the odds are you do not have enough to save to make replacing a working TV worthwhile.

I thought the same last year or two, however if electric prices settle at around 28p/u.
After running some numbers I was surprised.

My situation current TV is 49" and 11 years old. When it's on it uses 140 watts p/h, with my main source of viewing coming from a  oldish sky hd box. The sky box averages out over the day at 25w p/h.
Having the tv on 6 hours a day over the month and going into standby, uses 25kw/h a month and 300 a year.
The sky box averages with a 6 hour on time 15.5kw/h a month or 200 a year. (Note if you record or playback alot from hard drive this number will increase quite a chunk.

So my current electric unit price is 16.92 
So tv and sky box will cost me £51+£30 =£83 a year.
If the prices went up to 28p p/unit the above will cost a total of £137 a year £84 a year extra.

So back to me I've been looking at smaller led sets 43" is the spot for me not to big not too small. Ones I have been looking at have an energy usage of 50-75w p/hour. Say I went for the 65w version and the price was at 28p per unit for electric I'd save £40-45 a year. Then if I got one with freeview and a few streaming platforms I'd have no need for the sky box and save another £50-55 a year on top of the that.

  

Carrot007

ProDave said:

My only suggestion is you do NOT want any form of "smart" tv, that basically has a little computer running all the time.

You want a basic, LED tv that has a proper physical on / off switch that is accessible, preferably on the front but second best one that is easy to reach on the back, so when not in use it is properly off, not just in standby.

Yes a little computer usually less power than a pi. Neither here nor there regarding power useage. (and you will find non smart tv's also have then anyway these days because something has to provide the UI).

Any modern TV is also neither here nor ther on power usage.

The display is the main power usage. 4K need more than 1080P. OLED needs more than LED. HDR uses more than not (and is on most 1080P sets also these days). But other than OLED it is minimal.

TV's no not use a lot of power really anymore.

Random power thinking)

CRT     (++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++)

Plasma(+++++++++++++)

LED     (++++)

OLED   (+++++++)

Or something like.

Replacing anything more than a CRT is going to not save you anything for at least 6 years.

As to OP's question. Get an LG. They are nice in most cases. They have cheap options. Do pay attention to the sound quality though since they moved from back facing to downward it is a lot better! They moved from front facign becuase people "not not want bezels", they want to pay for a soundbar on top????.

My 50 inch LG replaced an old 40inch LG and takes up the same space dues to the change. So also take note of bezels and your available space.