Home audio & video: Concerns over Plasma panel heating room
Concerns over Plasma panel heating room
by Dan Filice - 8/20/08 1:05 PMIt looks like I will finally be able to purchase a replacement TV for the bedroom and I will probably purchase the 42" 1080p Panasonic Plasma from Costco for $1099. For those Plasma owners out there, does anyone have any feedback on the very warm display heating up a small room? The 42" Plasma uses 573 watts, which if it were a light bulb wouldn't be a concern (except for blindness from such wattage), but a 42" display is much larger than a light bulb and my bedroom isn't all that large. I can't imagine having a 58" Plasma as those consume 743 watts.
/
by jonnybones - 8/20/08 8:39 PM In reply to: Concerns over Plasma panel heating room by Dan FiliceI have a 50" Panasonic Plasma. Its great, I don't have to turn the heater on as much during the winter. As for problems, all the pannys have fans built in so as long as you give them ample breathing room they are fine.
If you want to test it, leave an iron on in the room for an hour at a med-low setting. That puts out probably the same amount of heat as a plasma would.
Thanks
by Dan Filice - 8/20/08 11:02 PM In reply to: / by jonnybonesOK, I might try the iron, but can I watch TV on it while I'm testing it?
Well, you could catch up on some ironing.
by NM_Bill - 8/21/08 7:51 AM In reply to: Thanks by Dan FiliceYes, plasmas use more power than other techs. I still wouldn't regard them as supplemental room heaters. As to the guilt factor of using those extra watts, ordinary peoples lives have sufficient other outlets of energy conservation to compensate.
For instance, I usually fill my smaller recycling bin to overflowing, but I can easily see lots of neighbors don't do much any recycling (it is currently voluntary here.) Yes, I am retired & they are not, but they have a big gap they could close by participation if they would only do it. On an ordinary week, I feel I recycle over half my trash volume. If others would pitch in, a lot of landfill volume could be avoided.
This from one who is writing this on a computer with LCD screen & I our secondary set is an LCD. From personal observation, it is obvious to me that overall satisfaction is highest, for a primary set, with a plasma.
/
by jonnybones - 8/21/08 11:54 PM In reply to: Well, you could catch up on some ironing. by NM_BillOf course your computer screen in LCD. Unless you went loco and got a 37" screen which would be tight, but overkill. Comps use LCD's because of Burn-In. Maybe now that we have pixel shift and anti-image retention we will start to see plasma monitors??? I sure wouldn't mind it
As a side note: One who does not own a plasma should not speak to their heating capabilities, they are quite the little space heater if confined to a small room or apartment; of this I am sure.
Not significant
by 3rdalbum - 8/23/08 11:33 PM In reply to: / by jonnybonesLet's do some maths.
A tiny 1,000 watt heater can heat around 10 square metres. The plasma uses about 580 odd watts. That means that, if that amount of power were going into heat production, it would heat a very small room of two metres by three metres.
But that power is being used to run the digital tuner, image processing chips, embedded computer, amplifier, and finally the panel which is intended to spit out visible light. If you think a 500 watt heater is barely a heater at all, just imagine how little power is really going to be wasted as heat in your plasma.
As an aside, we're not likely to see plasma computer monitors any time soon. The smallest plasma TVs are 32 inches, typically with 480 lines of resolution. Monitors are typically smaller than TVs; let's say 24 inches; so even if you managed to reduce the pixel size, you're still looking at a resolution of maybe 600 lines.
Nobody wants a 24 inch computer monitor that can only display 800x600 
=
by jonnybones - 8/24/08 8:38 PM In reply to: Not significant by 3rdalbumCURRENTLY thats the smallest size, but as you probably know, the TV technology is getting better every year. I dont think a plasma computer screen is valid now, but in 2-4 years or so, I could totally see it as a possibility (provided TV's evolve at the same rate they are now). If you think about it, HDMI was popularized 2 years ago, 120hz, this year. Who knows what breakthrough will come in the next few years?
If you think about the possibilities, plasmas have caught up to LCD's in contract ratio for a computer monitor (not so much for a tv), and they have ridiculous refresh rates compared to LCD's. All they lack is the technology to make them small; like all electronics that will come in time.
+
by jonnybones - 8/24/08 8:42 PM In reply to: Not significant by 3rdalbumResponding to first part of your post; "just imagine how little power is really going to be wasted as heat in your plasma"
Obviously you don't own one. I point you to my side note to NM_Bill
I hope not all that 573 watts are use for heating the room,
by ahtoi - 8/21/08 10:32 AM In reply to: Concerns over Plasma panel heating room by Dan FiliceSome of that must have been used as light energy or we might have a blank screen. So hopefully more are use for light then heat.
Light becomes heat, eventually...
by wlo555 - 8/23/08 3:07 AM In reply to: I hope not all that 573 watts are use for heating the room, by ahtoi"So hopefully more are used for light than heat".
Actually all light energy from the plasma (or any light bulb) turns to heat. i.e. it warms the dust in the air and walls of the room. So a 500W plasma will heat the room exactly the same as a 500W heater.
So, I guess if you live in Alaska - get a plasma. But if you live in an apartment in Singapore without air conditioning - maybe an LCD might be a better choice. Generally I prefer the picture on a plasma, but I must admit the latest 100hz LCD screens are so good they must be the way of the future - despite what Panasonic (who are concentrating on plasmas) say in their advertising.
(NT) Double uses of energy...that's very nice.
by ahtoi - 8/23/08 9:46 AM In reply to: Light becomes heat, eventually... by wlo555Hot plasma / screen size
by rmf - 8/23/08 5:51 AM In reply to: Concerns over Plasma panel heating room by Dan FiliceIsn't 42" too big for a small room?
Two comments for this thread so far
by jostenmeat - 8/23/08 11:25 AM In reply to: Hot plasma / screen size by rmfIm surprised Nick (ns) has not seen this, one of the resident display gurus.
If I remember reading his posts correctly, the wattage on a plasma is basically MAXIMUM. But, who watches a blazingly bright white screen for entertainment?
The differences in energy consumption are not THAT great when you consider how much better performance you get, at lower cost as well.
If I was looking for a performance car, I wouldn't be buying a hybrid. But in this case, the energy consumption is much more comparable, than a hybrid vs normal combustion would be.
as for rmf:
its not the size of the room, its far you sit from it.
viewing distance calculator
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html
distance VS resolution
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v471/tha_trixta/resolution2.png
Heat dissapation
by dinox64 - 8/23/08 11:46 AM In reply to: Hot plasma / screen size by rmfI just grabbed a thermometer ( kids ear type)and hit my display with it. 97% on the screen and 98% on the top rear,and it's been on all morning. The sides, bottom and rear center all were too low to register. But were all cool to the touch. I don't mean in comparison to the heated areas. I mean like cool steel, the kind it's made of.
My laptop gets hotter than my Tv ever does. Damn near cook eggs on the thing. I'm sure you've been to the stores. Just walk up and touch the things.
(NT) No, not particularly. 42 is a nice size, how small a room?
by NM_Bill - 8/23/08 12:01 PM In reply to: Hot plasma / screen size by rmf
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
