HDTV...Does energy bill go up much?

[Evan]

I know Plasma uses more energy vs LCD but is the difference that great?

Whats the bottom line here? A few extra dollars a month for a 42 inch TV?

http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.ca/S-7...er.html?page=2

I saw this thing on the news that claimed $20 to $80 a month and that seems like a typical over dramatic comment.

[Mixability]

At least it doesn't run on gas.

But seriously, I would go with Crutchfield on it. Their results compare with a few others that have done testing.

[robino2001]

I added a 47" LCD, powerful sound system including a large sub, wireless rear speaker system... I think that was all that was added. My electric bill went up $8 that month and I'd be willing to bet a considerable amount of that was temperature increase from April bill to May bill last year. My new home theater all plugged in the day my meter was read - so it's a pretty accurate relation.

[remingtonbo2001]

I could see a slight rise in the electric bill.

A nicer TV would equate to more time watching TV.

[Evan]

Thanks for the responses.

I am not too worried about it as long as its only a bump which I am sure it will be. That segment I saw on the news just made me raise an eyebrow and I thought I would toss it out and see what you folks thought.

I have been looking stuff up for the past 2 weeks and I am certainly at the point of overanalyzing this.

[CubanMustGo]

Check how many watts your new system will draw; compare to the old one. I looked at a couple of systems: 42" LCD: 300W; 42" Plasma: 573W

So the difference, per hour, is 273W. Say you watch TV six hours per day, ~1.6kWh per day. Times 30 days ... ~50 kWh/month. Times whatever you pay for electricity (9 cents for me): $4.50 per month.

Add to this any other fancy electronics (sound) that you add to the new system that the old one didn't have.

[Michael Scott]

I was going to get a 42 inch Plasma, but settled on a 19" for that reason. I don't want to waste energy.

[Evan]

Check how many watts your new system will draw; compare to the old one. I looked at a couple of systems: 42" LCD: 300W; 42" Plasma: 573W

So the difference, per hour, is 273W. Say you watch TV six hours per day, ~1.6kWh per day. Times 30 days ... ~50 kWh/month. Times whatever you pay for electricity (9 cents for me): $4.50 per month.

Add to this any other fancy electronics (sound) that you add to the new system that the old one didn't have.

Damn good idea.

The one I am looking at consumes

Panasonic TH-42PX75U Plasma 42 264.95W at $4.85 per month

And my current regular TV consumes 150W (just a flat screen, not HD)

So...I won't notice a difference but it will be slightly higher.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

My friend just bought a 52" plasma that chews through 528W! OMG!

By comparison, I use a total (including hot water, cooking, lighting, fridge, TV, etc.) of 6kWh/day. So I could run his TV for 12 hours, or LIVE.

9c/kWh is cheap for electricity. We pay 13c/kWh here which is absurd given that it cost 3.5-4c/kWh to produce. Talk about freakin middleman markup!

[CubanMustGo]

SA has its own public utility so there are no shareholders and expensive CEO/execs to pay. Their rate is somewhere around 8c/kWh. SA also benefits from being one of the few utilities in the state to have a significant investment in nuclear power. In the rest of the state, where so-called "compe ive" market pricing is in effect, the average is much higher - plus the majority of power comes from coal and natural gas. Current "compe ive" rates in the Dallas area are 11-16 cents per kWh; My 9 cent rate will probably go away pretty soon. Don't forget that the US$ has plummeted over the last year, making everything here look pretty cheap.

As an aside, Texas is actually the leading state in the US in terms of wind power, but somehow the price for those consumers who choose that option is always just a little bit higher than the market rate for conventional power. When conventional rates go up, why so do the wind power rates even though their costs are fixed and the industry is heavily subsidised.

[Evan]

SA has its own public utility so there are no shareholders and expensive CEO/execs to pay. Their rate is somewhere around 8c/kWh. SA also benefits from being one of the few utilities in the state to have a significant investment in nuclear power. In the rest of the state, where so-called "compe ive" market pricing is in effect, the average is much higher - plus the majority of power comes from coal and natural gas. Current "compe ive" rates in the Dallas area are 11-16 cents per kWh; My 9 cent rate will probably go away pretty soon. Don't forget that the US$ has plummeted over the last year, making everything here look pretty cheap.

As an aside, Texas is actually the leading state in the US in terms of wind power, but somehow the price for those consumers who choose that option is always just a little bit higher than the market rate for conventional power. When conventional rates go up, why so do the wind power rates even though their costs are fixed and the industry is heavily subsidised.

We have coserv in Dallas for some areas and its much better than TXU which still holds a deathgrip over most of the area.

[TDMVPDPOY]

My friend just bought a 52" plasma that chews through 528W! OMG!

By comparison, I use a total (including hot water, cooking, lighting, fridge, TV, etc.) of 6kWh/day. So I could run his TV for 12 hours, or LIVE.

9c/kWh is cheap for electricity. We pay 13c/kWh here which is absurd given that it cost 3.5-4c/kWh to produce. Talk about freakin middleman markup!

theres a levy on it for clean coal BS they are implementing hahahahaha

[CubanMustGo]

We have coserv in Dallas for some areas and its much better than TXU which still holds a deathgrip over most of the area.

Lucky bas .

Yeah I oversimplified, there are a few other areas in Texas that have public utilities (Austin) or co-ops (hill country for one) but most of us get the big screw courtesy of Reliant and what used to be called TXU and the "market pricing" that followed their monopolies.