Question about Comparing Energy Consumption

Hey everyone,

I have a question relating to the difference in energy consumption between a plasma and an lcd display flat panel t.v. As I am pretty much ignorant to all specs of such televisions I was hoping one of you guys could give me some advice. From what I have read lately (correct me if I'm wrong) plasma televisions seem to have several advantages over most lcd diplays (more accurate colours, better blacks, wider viewing angle etc.) as I would use this television mainly for hd movies the colour aspects seem fairly important -- also, I've read alot about lcd in the lower Hz range lagging. As I am looking to spend between 800-1000$ most lcd's come only in 60Hz refresh rate.

I've grabbed two Lg models that I am interested in, one plasma the other lcd.

the LCD's (LG 42" 1080p LCD HDTV** (42LH30) typical energy consumption is listed as 191W

The Plasma's (LG 42" Plasma HDTV** (42PQ12) typical energy consumption is listed as 320W

I suppose my condensed question is whether the 130W difference in consumption is substancial? I would prefer a more environmentally friendly t.v. If the plasma used as much energy as 300 african villages or something like that I'll go with the lcd if not then I'll go with the plasma. :) I guess it's a silly questions seeing as the number is not that significant but would still appreciate an answer.

Vincent

Actually, in real world use, both technologies use about the same amount of energy...

Thanks a lot. I have a few more questions. If I were to go with Lcds is the LG 42" 1080p LCD 42LH30 any good? It has a 60Hz refresh, does that mean I'll be experiencing a lot of Lag?

If I were to go with plasmas which would be better?
the LG 42" Plasma 42PQ12 or a Samsung 42" Plasma PN42B450?

And finally does a LG Blu-ray BD 350C player do a good job on hd as well as dvd upscaling?

Thanks a lot guys, it's a pretty big investment overall and I just don't want to make the wrong choice.

Vincent

I would not touch the LG displays myself after the multiple model issues I have had and a friend had with 3 LG plasmas. I would stick with the Samsung plasma unless you want to consider a Panasonic plasma that is rated the most reliable brand and an excelllent plasma with deeper blacks and more resistant to Image Retention (IR) than the Samsung plasmas. LG is likely the worst for IR as an FYI also.

Hmmmm, maybe I'll go with the Samsung then. I haven't heard about any problems with LG displays, what exactly was the issue?

There is a panasonic for 100$ more and I'm thinking about getting it just not sure if it's worth the extra 100$? Would the panasonic be better than the samsung?

Thanks,

Vincent

It's a good idea to avoid LG products.

Hmmmm, maybe I'll go with the Samsung then. I haven't heard about any problems with LG displays, what exactly was the issue?

There is a panasonic for 100$ more and I'm thinking about getting it just not sure if it's worth the extra 100$? Would the panasonic be better than the samsung?

Thanks,

Vincent

Paying $100.00 for a Panasonic over an LG would be a easy choice for me and well worth it. My friend had varying issues with his 3 LG plasmas including HDCP (copy protection handshake issues), multiple stuck pixels that blinked red constantly after 8 months of owning it, and overall poor PQ especially with noise and a pruplish color in the black areas on the screen.

I have even worse issues with their DLPs and tried 5 of the same model and the degree of the issues were different with each one so that shows me a quality control issue.

Avoid LG is my advice based on my friends & my own experiences. :hithere:

Hmmmm, maybe I'll go with the Samsung then. I haven't heard about any problems with LG displays, what exactly was the issue?

There is a panasonic for 100$ more and I'm thinking about getting it just not sure if it's worth the extra 100$? Would the panasonic be better than the samsung?

Thanks,

Vincent

http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-consumption-chart/

It looks the the 42 inch panasonic s1 is listed as "good" on this chart running about 200 watts. They didn't include your Samsung

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_305PN42450/Samsung-PN42B450.html?tp=161&tab=features_and_specs

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_133P42S1/Panasonic-TC-P42S1.html?search=panasonic+42s1&ssi=0&tp=161&tab=features_and_specs

Crutchfield lists the S1 as consuming slightly more than your Samsung, estimated about $2.60/month vs $3.10/month. Keep in mind I'm comparing a 720P Samsung to a 1080P Panasonic. The TC-P42x1 is listed $2.45.

Economically it's hard to justify more money for energy savings. There are other areas that will yield a better return on your investment. CFL, or T-8s in the kitchen, a blanket for your water heater, that sort of thing.

There have been sets that are trully energy efficient, but nothing with real decent PQ.