Consumer Reports testing found that, size for size, plasma screens often used two to two and a half times the electricity that an LCD did.

Saving electricity, or any resource for that matter, is not just about dollar savings. Saving resources is an important goal in itself, as what you use or save is multiplied millions of times by other people doing the same.

Consumer reports must be basing this on older Plasma models or on the rating of the power supply. The Cnet table clearly shows that the latest Panasonic plasma (#1 selling plasma brand with 40% of market) uses the same amount of electricity as the most efficient LCD models.

Consumer Reports testing found that, size for size, plasma screens often used two to two and a half times the electricity that an LCD did.

Saving electricity, or any resource for that matter, is not just about dollar savings. Saving resources is an important goal in itself, as what you use or save is multiplied millions of times by other people doing the same.
I agree with you Alan. This all comes down to the big question of what you are personally willing to give up for the good of the planet.

I know we are talking about Plasma vs LCD power consumption, but what about 7.1 Receivers most of us have to go along with the HDTV? Most are over 500 watts. Should we spend $$$ on a high-efficiency Receiver or settle for the built in Plasma speakers instead because we don't want to use up valuable resources? It seems silly to me comparing the two sets over small energy differences.

It's probably more wise to convert all your appliances including the furnace, air conditioner, windows, etc. to high-efficiency models.

Receivers...Most are over 500 watts.Again, please realize that at most listening levels AVRs use under 100 Watts, typically 20-60 Watts total. Please hook up a Watt-meter and see the actual power consumption under normal listening before commenting without backup. You'd be amazed at how loud 1 W/ch is - typically about 85 dB - the threshold of hearing damage.

Let's get back to the topic of this thread, which is LCD and Plasma Power consumption, preferably actual consumption and not some number in the spec or back of the TV.


As an FYI, here's a thread on power consumption and parasitic draws:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=35430

It seems silly to me comparing the two sets over small energy differences. It's not silly at all. Small energy savings add up to huge savings when multiplied by millions of consumers.

Good point, I should not assumed AVRs consumed so much energy.

Still, I feel the energy consumption between Plasma & LCD should not be the deciding factor when purchasing a HDTV. Let your eyes decide.

If it bothers a Plasma owner enough, I suppose they could always watch less TV and read a book instead. I'm lucky to watch 2 hours of TV a night, so what if I use up more energy?

I feel the energy consumption between Plasma & LCD should not be the deciding factor when purchasing a HDTV. Let your eyes decide.

Bingo. End of discussion :p

Still, I feel the energy consumption between Plasma & LCD should not be the deciding factor when purchasing a HDTV. Let your eyes decide.


Exactly, if LCD buyers are buying LCD because "it's more energy efficient", then they should just walk (not drive) to movie theatres because it saves even more energy.
.
.
.
.
.
... or read (and make sure the book is printed on recycled paper, uses soy-based ink, preferably bought used from a 2nd hand bookstore)

The attitudes being expressed here regarding the need for energy efficiency show that the environmentalist message has a long way to go.

Sure you want the best picture but at what cost to the planet? I'd willingly sacrifice a bit of PQ and choose the lower power consumption product for the greater good. The high standard of consumption has a lot to do with the state the world is in. Everyone has to lower their use of resources.

the problem with LCD is that their performance is well below my minimum level of acceptability. The ones that I'll buy in-a-heart-beat to replace my plasma costs more than double than my plasma.

$5,000 for Pioneer 50" plasma or $12,000 for Sharp 52" LCD which to me STILL is below plasma in terms of performance... or go down in size to merely 42" for a Sony XBR8

If the price is about the same (say $5,500), then I'd probably buy the LCD to save the environment. Besides, I have lower my use of resources by car-pooling extensively, use CFL light bulbs since 11 years ago for my entire house, etc etc.

If one wants to save resources, it's easy. Lower the volume of your receivers (most people don't even get what reference level is), switch off your TV when you don't actually watch them. Those two activities above save a lot more energy than the energy saving by sacrificing performance for mediocrity by buying LCD as opposed to plasma (of the similar price).

Another thing, have one TV in the house as opposed to having 3 TVs, all running different shows, and nobody is watching any of them ;)

The easiest way to save energy is to buy a smaller TV and move the furniture closer to it. At one time 20" was the standard. If anyone is so concerned about the environment then they shouldn't even be looking at a 42"+ TV.

There was a whole thread a few days ago about power consumption of electronic devices and the only time to be concerned with the current draw is during the summer. In the winter 100% of the power is contributing to the overall heating of your house at 100% efficiency.

If you're THAT concerned with the environment then you wouldn't use A/C so you wouldn't be paying to remove that extra heat anyways.

In the winter 100% of the power is contributing to the overall heating of your house at 100% efficiency. This is not true. While it is true that electricity is converted to heat at 100% efficiency, the creation of that electricity is at nowhere near 100% efficiency. Since a large chuni of American and Canadian electricity is produced from coal, it is very inefficient and unclean. It is important to conserve electricity at all times of the year, not just in summer.

And we can all give up everything and go live in caves. I think we are getting a little off-topic here! :)

We got this plasma unit (TH-C46FD18) in December 2008. It is our second HDTV; the other one is a 32-in Sharp LCD purchased in late 2006. With HD signal (paid service), this TV is simply amazing. Its picture quality is far superior than that of the LCD set, especially when handling dark/shady images. I will concentrate my remaining comments on energy consumption, which has rarely been addressed.

With the power rating of 628W, we had a long pause before buying it. The worry turned out to be largely unwarranted. Unlike LCD TV, which consumes energy at a constant level (the 32-in LCD run at 134W regardless), power consumption of plasma TV is dependent on (1) the type of program one is watching and (2) how bright the screen is set. The actual power consumption is usually way below the rated value unless one is watching nothing but a bright white screen. The power consumption of this TV is affected most by the settings of “picture mode” (standard-cinema-game-vivid, etc) and “picture” adjustment (range 0-100, actually controls brightness). Both are accessible by pressing the menu button (on remote control) followed by selecting the “picture” icon (on screen). Other settings, such as brightness and color temperature, will also affect power consumption but the difference is rather small. By feeding steady Wii Sport startup page (mostly white background), we measured the power consumption in different picture modes and adjustments using the “Kill a Watt” from P3 International (brightness and color temperature were set at +50 and normal, respectively, throughout):

(Table 1)
------------------Standard Mode (W) ------- Cinema Mode (W)
Picture Adj.
+30------------------not done------------------------374
+40------------------not done------------------------440
+50---------------------353---------------------------508
+60---------------------401---------------------------508
+70---------------------468---------------------------509
+80---------------------501---------------------------508
+90---------------------501---------------------------509

After numerous trials, we settled on the “standard mode” with “+60” picture adjustment for routine use. These settings provide enjoyable watching experience during the daytime in a room with partially open window blind (no direct sunlight). We then took several real world power consumption measurements.

(Table 2)
Program Watched ------Duration (Hour)------Total (KWH)------KW
Syriana--------------------------2.16--------------------0.44-----------0.20
Shawshank Redemption -------2.40--------------------0.46-----------0.19
Golden Compass----------------1.90--------------------0.35-----------0.18
CNN------------------------------1.00 -------------------0.22-----------0.22
Science Channel-----------------1.00-------------------0.26-----------0.26
NBA------------------------------1.40--------------------0.35-----------0.25
Nat. Geography-----------------1.55--------------------0.39-----------0.25
Wii Bowling----------------------1.00--------------------0.31-----------0.31

With the stated settings, this TV uses power ranging from 190W to 310W under several different testing conditions. None of them comes close to the rated value. Our measurements also show that, except for playing video games, this plasma TV regularly consumes less energy than the 32-in LCD TV on the basis of per unit screen area (The screen area of 46-in TV is 2.06x as large as that of 32-in TV; therefore, the 32-in LCD TV is projected to consume 0.27 KW with the equivalent of 46-in screen). Big screen TV is an energy hog, but at least the impact can be managed somewhat with plasma TV. This is a long post, thank you for your patience.

Gee, that is a lot of electricity consumed.

As for LCD, perhaps your unit is less sophisticated than current models. My Samsung LCD's power consumption does indeed vary depending upon settings and program content displayed.

I believe that LCD power consumption varies with the backlight setting, but doesn't vary (significantly) with the programming shown, like it does on Plasma (& CRT) - for example, the brighter the picture/programme, the higher the power consumption.

My watt meter shows a decrease in power consumption when, for example, programming switches from HD to SD with black bars.

It's possible that you have one of the "auto" settings on, which varies the backlight.

Of course, some of the new LED LCDs have local dimming, so that would also account for variable power consumption on those (LED) LCDs.

The problem with "sit closer to the tv" argument, for a 20" 4:3 TV and to get an image impact equivalent to what I'm currently using, I have to sit about 12" away from the TV when I'm watcjing a 21:9 movies