Panasonic is advertising its Viera Plasma TVs as "environmentally friendly". We think that’s a bit of a stretch.
Plasma TVs generally use more power than similar sized LCD models. In a recently published test by the Australian consumer organisation Choice, a Panasonic Viera model used 48 percent more power than the average of the nine LCD models in the test. Compared with the best LCD, it was a whopping 134 percent more.
You could run a large fridge-freezer on the extra 500 kWh needed to run the Panasonic for a year. This level of energy use is clearly not so good for the environment.
The company’s ads also say its plasmas are lead- and mercury-free, “which reduces the impact on the environment when the time comes to recycle or dispose of your TV”. But it doesn’t mention that TVs can contain other substances that may be harmful to the environment. We might be more impressed if the company was providing recycling services for old TVs. It’s not.
Any company making “green” claims – about electronic appliances or any other product – needs to tread carefully. Companies which go too far risk falling foul of the Fair Trading Act.
The Commerce Commission’s guidelines on green marketing caution against using claims such as “environmentally friendly” or “environmentally safe”. These claims, says the Commission, are vague and could potentially mislead consumers into thinking that the product causes no harm to the environment in its production, usage and disposal – few, if any products, could legitimately make this claim.
More from consumer.org.nz
- Plasma and LCD televisions - buying guide and test results
- New green marketing guidelines - our March news item about the Commerce Commission's green marketing guidelines
Member Comments
Got a question or comment on this topic? Share your views and experiences with other Consumer members...
To add a comment you need to be a member of consumer.org.nz. Login or Join.
Read what our members have to say close
To save money on essentials and make buying decisions easy, you can't go past Consumer. We're proud to have over 65,000 members all enjoying our independent information online or in Consumer magazine.
Here's what some of them say...
"Just wanted to let you know that I find your site excellent! Easy to find my way around, everything at my fingertips - just a click away.
I only took out a 3 month membership as I wasn't sure but it is actually really easy to use and if I want it on paper I can print the
reports. Thanks again".
Denise Watkinson - Waitakere
"My mother (74) got a renewal letter from her insurance company for her car insurance, wanting $570. After reading
your article on car insurance, I contacted one of the companies you recommended, who quoted her $318 for the same
level of cover. I just wanted to stay thank you very much for your article, as it has saved my mother a substantial amount of money".
Adrian Lane - Kapiti Coast
"I've been a member to the magazine since 1997 and enjoy reading it a lot. I've found lots of helpful information on different issues...
Thank you for being so helpful".
Peter Kovalenko - Porirua
"I have been a member of the Consumer NZ for 20 or more years and have enjoyed much reliable advice.
I turn to their tests before making significant purchases".
Lyndal Print – Auckland
Join Consumer now and make your decisions easy on a huge range of products and services
- Over 500 reports, plus interactive tools and calculators
- Independent advice from NZ's trusted source of information
- Join over 65,000 members who help us get all NZers a fairer deal
from just $28
Again, Consumer seems to be out of step with reality when it comes to the plasma vs LCD situation. The latest new Panasonic plasmas have been proven to use less power than the previous generations in independant tests overseas, yet also produce greater brightness levels due to higher efficencies and newer technology. However, there's more to it than the maximum power consumption specs printed on the labels. Actual plasma power consumption levels fluctuate considerably, as the power consumption depends on the actual brightness of a scene at a given time. The average levels are far below this. An LCD panel (forgetting the latest modulated LED backlight models) uses similar power levels, even in dark scenes as the backlight lamp remains on at all times. It may come as a surprise, but most videophiles and professionals prefer plasma panels for their more natural pictures, often better blacks, and lack of motion blur. LCD panels often look better in bright showrooms, and "look impressive" but fall short in the home. Along with other comments I've read here, I feel your test results on 42" sets are flawed. How could you rate the HD ready Panasonic just behind the Full HD model? The difference in real life is huge. BTW, I don't have any connection to any company selling or distributing TVs, nor any financial interest in this area.
Hi David,
Thanks for your comments.
Our figures are not based simply on the rated power. For the 46" Panasonic comparison the data was taken from a Choice test, using the test method used for Energy Label consumption measurements.
This is the data used to calculate the star ratings for energy labels, and it requires the use of an IEC2807 PAL test disk which is designed to simulate typical viewing. The disk has a 10 minute track, and is played through a Blu-ray player to each TV set to "out of the box" settings.
In the Choice test, the 46" Panasonic model used 914kWh. The Energy Label says it uses 915kWh. By comparison, a Samsung 46" LCD/LED model used 387kWh.
When we test TV’s in our own test facility, we check energy use on a similar test disc at "out of the box", a “movie” setting or similar, a “vivid” setting or similar (what we call shop mode), and at the most energy optimised setting we can find. Our conclusion: You can make Plasmas use less energy than the typical out of the box setting, but LCD’s still use a lot less at comparable settings. Equally, an LCD set to a vivid mode can use almost as much power as a plasma set to an optimal setting.
Energy use of TV sets has increased dramatically with the advent of flat panel screens, and energy conservation authorities around the world are very concerned at the trend.
How could we rate the HD ready Panasonic just behind the Full HD model?
We had the sets side by side, with all model ID covered, in dimmed light, running the same DVD sequences in SD and full HD, rated by a panel of viewers of varying levels of experience. The entire test is run by an engineer with many years of experience in broadcast television. His technical tests identified picture problems that supported the verdict of the panel.
Overall, the panel rated the two Panasonic sets as very close together in picture quality, and noted a surprising number of picture problems with the full HD model when showing a full HD picture.
Kind regards,
Hamish Wilson
Testing Manager
I had to laugh at this. I'm sure it is just a typo, and you mean 500 kWh. 500 kW ishe capacity of a largispply about 125 homes.
The annual extra energy used by the Panasonic plasma TV compared to an LCD model should be stated as 500 kilowatt hours. The kilowatt is a unit of power.