Comments for Slimming Down Flat-Screen TV Power Use at http://www.ecogeek.org , comment 1 to 16 out of 16 comments http://www.ecogeek.org Sat, 25 May 2013 23:01:29 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-46243 We recently bought a 50-inch flatscreen TV, just 5 inches thick. It looks great at our small flat, but I miss the warm colors and the zapping speed of our old boxy television. - gadgetfreak Mon, 02 Apr 2012 02:36:22 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-23120 saw a power strip on Amazon.com that lets you plug your electronics in so that you are easily able to power them all off at once to save against standby loss. Look up "smart strip energy saving power strip" and it will come up. - Kelly Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:25:35 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-23026 Everyone has missed something here. When they rate these TV's they look at Maximum power output. LCDs traditionally draw a continuous wattage as their backlight is always on(around 190-200W for a 42")where as a Plasma type TV (max draw around 400W for a good one) will only draw what it needs to light its pixels. Under normal viewing over time they even out. - Rob Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:14:01 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-20163 Why does EcoGeek have to write their weekly updates in such a long narrow strip that requires so much scanning to be able to follow and read it? If they want to be clever why not write it in expanding interest sentences, like I do here? Bud - Bud Rinker Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:43:07 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19793 Here's a dilemma for you: I have a small black-and-white 1980 TV in my bedroom. I move it to the foot of my bed to watch. (Most of my TV watching is done on the cable TV in our common living room.) Come February 2009, what do I do? Buy a box, making it awkward to move, and not sure to work without a new antenna (I'm a tenant, so that's out)? Buy a new TV? My room is 10 x 13; I already have a full-size comuter monitor and a roomfull of furniture. The smallest LCD TV I have found is 15 inches, too wide for the hamper my current TV sits on when not in use. Why don't they cut energy use by making smaller TVs for people like me? ( I guess I could get a cellphone with displaya, but that's too far toward the other extreme. - Sally G Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:15:36 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19760 Steve, what we do is plug our tv, receiver, home theater, etc. into a power strip/surge protector. When we are finished watching we simply switch there 'Off'. Correction: we leave the cable/satellite box powered in standby mode since it takes about 3-5 minutes to warm up. - bWs Sun, 12 Oct 2008 07:07:55 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19720 Energy Star standards for televisions take effect next month. I have been waiting for that before getting a new flat screen. - Mark H. Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:18:23 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19704 Like with CAFE standards, the government needs to take a stronger role. The Energy Star program needs to be updated and expanded. Anything electric should have a standard with progressive improvements mandated over a perion of years. Carbon taxes for inefficiency and incentives for efficiency. It would be nice to have no bad options in 15 years. - KevinA Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:06:10 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19650 We recently bought a 50-inch flatscreen TV, just 5 inches thick. It looks great at our small flat, but I miss the warm colors and the zapping speed of our old boxy television. - Harry Kuperus Wed, 08 Oct 2008 14:23:23 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19568 about that 42inch Sony @ only 57Watt, all their models from 2008 is around 200W. W4500 and so forth. - Kim Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:40:37 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19432 This is a step in the right direction but lets not forget about the mountains of TVs that grow in other countries as we all rush out to buy our new energy efficient flat screen tv. The one TV in my house will not be replaced until it dies. Manufacturers need to be responsible for the entire product lifecyle and the impact of the chemicals they choose to put in their products. Some of the coolness in these products has very nasty origins in toxic chemicals that are hazardous to the people who build them and the people who recycle them. If you get a chance, take a look at the documentary called Manufactured Landscapes - it will make you rethink your wallet. Here is an intro on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZiKBKnesnU - Lindsay Joseph Fri, 03 Oct 2008 10:06:12 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19336 I think its great news if manufacturers r looking into means which could reduce the usage of power.It would take the major load off. Annie Bankss Save Our Planet - Annie Bankss Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:51:06 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19334 It's about time manufacturers started getting wise to the need to produce more efficient electrical equipment. I have an LCD tv. It's only one year old. And it's literally the WORST electronic purchase I ever made. Why? You literally cannot turn it off without phyisically unpluging it. It eats electricity all the time as it's either 'on' or on standby, there is no 'off' setting. I couldn't believe it when I'd bought it and discovered this. Most days we unplug it when not in use. A pain, but you have to try, don't you. And get this - my Sky satellite system is exactly the same. 'On' or standby - no 'off'. What's wrong with these people!? So, yes, these consumption stats are very impressive and most welcome. I hope this creates real market competition and we see all manufacturers battling to achieve the best power consumption stats to beat the rivals. Not only will it help save the environment but it will help us all to save money. Great stuff. Steve N. Lee author of eco-blog http://www.lionsledbysheep.com and suspense thriller 'What if...?' - Steve N. Lee Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:59:36 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19331 OLEDs are the real future of efficient TVs. It might take a while (a few years still) - but eventually we'll get cheap, thin, brilliant and efficient OLED TVs - http://www.oled-info.com/oledTV Ron - Ron Mertens Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:45:01 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19327 My school has recently recieved HD projectors that hook up to not only TVs but computers and other devices as well. They seem a lot more practical and compact than Plasma or Projection TVs and the quality doesn't seem to diminish even when images are projected at a great distance. Granted, there are some flaws in projectors (you get better quality in darkness, you have to have a screen or empty wall, etc.) but they do seem like a potentially better option in terms of power usage and perhaps picture quality and versitility. - Karl Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:18:14 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/efficiency/2169#comment-19323 57 watts? That's amazing. That's less than ONE incandescent lightbulb to power an entire tv? Impressive. Considering the amount of tv people watch and play video games on these days, a 100 watts a tv makes a pretty enourmous difference. About as awesome my 2004 vcr that at max consumes a whopping 7 watts :) - jake3988 Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:21:13 +0100