So to-day in the news Cameron wants to ban Plasma screens because they use to much energy, what a plonker.What are your views?
2007-09-08 23:07:02 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Consumer Electronics ➔ TVs
Oh boy, more misinformed stupidity from Mr. Cameron!
My 37" plasma TV is rated at 250w energy consumption.
An equivalent LCD screen will consume 150w.
My old 32" CRT television was rated at 400w consumption.
So why are people moaning on about the alleged high energy consumption of plasma TVs, when they use HALF the energy of the CRT televisions that were around for decades? No-one ever said we should ban them, did they?
As I said, it's just misinformed stupidity...
2007-09-09 07:16:57 · answer #1 · answered by Nightworks 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the wattage of a plasma rating is the top end ( ie white screen ) because all the pixels are " open ". That is one of the reasons why plasma have a higher contrast ratio then lcd!!.
BUT how many plasma owners watch just a white screen....mmmmmm NONE.
Therefore in reality the plasma consumes just the same ( or there abouts as a lcd ). If this motion is carried then eventaully lcds will be targeted as well.
It is to do with the mindset of lazy poeple to " turn-off " all electrical items when not in use.
How many poeple use a tumble dyrer ( when there is no need, or can not be bother to hang the clothes on the line ).
this use more electric then a plasma been on for a week!!!
2007-09-09 06:04:16 · answer #2 · answered by wondergeezer 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i will inform you that plasmas won't final as long (nevertheless they final a protracted time) as liquid crystal reveal and liquid crystal reveal contraptions could have ineffective pixels (maximum warranties enable for numerous until now the set is seen fallacious) proper outta the field and get extra as time is going on (it sounds worse than that's). I desire liquid crystal reveal over plasmas.
2016-12-13 04:01:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They do use a lot of energy, but also you can't leave a dvd paused for too long or anything because it'll burn into the screen and won't go away, so they're not that great anyway. I have one and everything is much better on an LCD tv.
2007-09-08 23:16:25 · answer #4 · answered by mercurymaniacal 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Anyone who aspires to be a politician should be barred from being a politician. They are only intereted in their own gains, at the expense of all else...
Quick way of helping global warming... put ALL the worlds politicians in a coal fired powerstation, and replace the coal with them...
2007-09-08 23:11:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Good on her for taking the initiative. I admire her for speaking up and I think a ban is appropriate and long over due. After all I can`t afford one so why should anyone else have one
2007-09-08 23:14:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
yes plasma screens do utilise a lot of energy whereas LCD screens consume a smaller fraction of that power.but nothing beats an LCD in aesthetics & picture quality.Banning Plasmas is a step too far.AS YOU POINTED ,I AGREE
2007-09-08 23:14:16 · answer #7 · answered by rohit 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I agree with whoever this Cameron is because our environment is suffering a time where global warming is a true and serious threat that we ALL must fight. In order to do this, we must conserve as much energy as possible so please do your share and either use a projector or a normal flat screen television.
2007-09-08 23:11:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
i think it all depends on my how much tv you watch. you could have a tv that eats up a nuclear silo worth of power, but if you only watch 3 hours a day or less, then its not at all expensive.
2007-09-08 23:17:13 · answer #9 · answered by THE GOOD NIGHT 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have one, find it ok never checked about the energy
2007-09-08 23:11:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋