Which Display Causes The Least Co2 To Be Produced

[alanh]

All,

It is not the cost of electricity, which is the concern for global warming but the amount of carbon dioxide produced.

So to calculate this follow the following;

Divide the mumber of watts by 1000 to convert watts to kW

Multiply the average number of hours per day by 365.25 This will give you the number of hours/year

For the interconnected electricity grid gives the following conversion factors

ACT & NSW 9.3799 tonnes/kW

Vic 11.6591

Qld 9.2046

SA 9.1169

WA 8.2403

Tas 0.5360

NT 6.3117

See ClimateChange.gov.au

So multiply the number of kW by the number of hours by the conversion factor.

As an example

The TV uses 250 W

It is running on average 3 hours/day

It is located in Victoria

= 0.250 x 3 x 365.25 x 11.6591 = 3,194 tonnes of CO2/year

If this was in Tasmania it would be 147 tonnes/year

Please post what type and model of TV you are using. Diarise the duration of watching TV over a fortnight and divide the total hours by 14 and calculate the amount of CO₂ produced

Please post here the value for 1 hour per day for a whole year and your average for a whole year.

We can then see the best and the worst.

AlanH

[ssschen]

All,

It is not the cost of electricity, which is the concern for global warming but the amount of carbon dioxide produced.

So to calculate this follow the following;

Divide the mumber of watts by 1000 to convert watts to kW

Multiply the average number of hours per day by 365.25 This will give you the number of hours/year

For the interconnected electricity grid gives the following conversion factors

ACT & NSW 9.3799 tonnes/kW

Vic 11.6591

Qld 9.2046

SA 9.1169

WA 8.2403

Tas 0.5360

NT 6.3117

See ClimateChange.gov.au

So multiply the number of kW by the number of hours by the conversion factor.

As an example

The TV uses 250 W

It is running on average 3 hours/day

It is located in Victoria

= 0.250 x 3 x 365.25 x 11.6591 = 3,194 tonnes of CO2/year

If this was in Tasmania it would be 147 tonnes/year

Please post what type and model of TV you are using. Diarise the duration of watching TV over a fortnight and divide the total hours by 14 and calculate the amount of CO₂ produced

Please post here the value for 1 hour per day for a whole year and your average for a whole year.

We can then see the best and the worst.

AlanH

where did the conversion factor figures come from? is the value for Tas a typo?? Why is it so much lower?

[MrQuade]

All,

It is not the cost of electricity, which is the concern for global warming but the amount of carbon dioxide produced.

So to calculate this follow the following;

Divide the mumber of watts by 1000 to convert watts to kW

Multiply the average number of hours per day by 365.25 This will give you the number of hours/year

For the interconnected electricity grid gives the following conversion factors

ACT & NSW 9.3799 tonnes/kW

Vic 11.6591

Qld 9.2046

SA 9.1169

WA 8.2403

Tas 0.5360

NT 6.3117

See ClimateChange.gov.au

So multiply the number of kW by the number of hours by the conversion factor.

As an example

The TV uses 250 W

It is running on average 3 hours/day

It is located in Victoria

= 0.250 x 3 x 365.25 x 11.6591 = 3,194 tonnes of CO2/year

If this was in Tasmania it would be 147 tonnes/year

Please post what type and model of TV you are using. Diarise the duration of watching TV over a fortnight and divide the total hours by 14 and calculate the amount of CO₂ produced

Please post here the value for 1 hour per day for a whole year and your average for a whole year.

We can then see the best and the worst.

AlanH

Shouldn't the title of this thread be "Whose Display Causes the Least CO2 To Be Produced"?

If you are after "Which" meaning "Which brand/model" then its just down to the Watts.

Edited May 8, 2008 by MrQuade

[Shonky*]

where did the conversion factor figures come from? is the value for Tas a typo?? Why is it so much lower?

Majority of Tasmanian power comes from hydro which doesn't produce CO2 emissions. Not sure the exact figure is correct, but it makes sense.

[DrP]

Don't forget that running a power hungry TV during winter will offset the amount of heating required thereby lowering the CO2 emissions caused by heating devices. IIRC this is called Carbon Trading.

Of course we should not discount the amount of energy spent by the TV when it is in standby mode. If the TV is 'on' for only 3 hours a night, its in standby for 21 hours chomping away at 5 to 20 watts. Want to make a real dent in energy consumption? Get that standby figure down to 1 watt. There's no reason for a PDP or LCD to consume more than 1 watt in standby. CRT based displays burn quite a few watts keeping the heaters glowing a nice dull red to allow for 'instant' picture when the set is turned 'on'.

[spacetime]

Of course we should not discount the amount of energy spent by the TV when it is in standby mode. If the TV is 'on' for only 3 hours a night, its in standby for 21 hours chomping away at 5 to 20 watts. Want to make a real dent in energy consumption? Get that standby figure down to 1 watt. There's no reason for a PDP or LCD to consume more than 1 watt in standby. CRT based displays burn quite a few watts keeping the heaters glowing a nice dull red to allow for 'instant' picture when the set is turned 'on'.

Want to make a real dent in energy consumption? Then switch off the power socket when you don't watch TV. There's no reason for a PDP or LCD or anything else to be in standby mode at night or when no one is at home.

[DrP]

Its far more achievable to reduce the standby consumption than it is to get everyone to turn the devices off at the wall.

[kulfi]

I'm one of the few people who switches everything off but people are notoriously bad in terms of consumption. I had been to see one of my friends and he had his PC on all the time, plus the heating in that room (even though no one was there), a dozen lights were on in the loungeroom etc. Did he care about his power bill ? Of course not. And yes, his plasma was in standby too.

We all need to get into the habit of switching things off but who is going to set an example ? In the cities, all buildings are lit up like Christmas trees all the time, so everyone thinks it's OK to do the same at home. As Australians, we need to wake up to our massive carbon footprint and change our lifestyle if our lucky country has to remain lucky for the next century.

[diesel]

Majority of Tasmanian power comes from hydro which doesn't produce CO2 emissions. Not sure the exact figure is correct, but it makes sense.

This is true. Vic is the worst as they use brown coal (which has high water content), NSW/Qld use black coal which is slighty better and the majority of SA's electricity is produced from gas which has lower CO₂ emmisions than coal.

Though we have the massive Snowy Hydro scheme in the NSW/Vic Alps, they are used more for peak generation and of late, not much at all because of the drought.

If you really wanted to be a carbon cop about all this then you would look at the whole life cycle when carbon footprinting, to include the emmisions from the mining of the raw materials, to the transport to/from the factory, the production line emissions, etc etc. Pretty scary stuff when you look at it that way.

[Ajax9000]

Don't forget that running a power hungry TV during winter will offset the amount of heating required thereby lowering the CO2 emissions caused by heating devices. IIRC this is called Carbon Trading.

LOL

Pity about summer & air conditioning ...

[DrP]

Build a duct over the set. As we all know warm air rises so it will rise up the duct and out of the house. Open a window to let some cool fresh air in to replace the departing warm and and there you go. Hot TVs are good in summer too.

[Mr Flibble]

.....For the interconnected electricity grid gives the following conversion factors

ACT & NSW 9.3799 tonnes/kW

Vic 11.6591

Qld 9.2046

SA 9.1169

WA 8.2403

Tas 0.5360

NT 6.3117

See ClimateChange.gov.au......

An interesting idea but where are those CO2 figures coming from?(typical government site, can't find a bl00dy thing on there). They sound slightly high to me (I think you might have a decimal place out of position or these are not CO2/kWh figures).

Following is an exceprt from this site.

All forms of energy generation emit some carbon dioxide. Coal and gas power stations emit considerable amounts, but nuclear power plants emit virtually zero. However, a true comparison should look at the whole life cycle from mining of the material through manufacture of the fuel and burning in a power station. The table below shows a comparison of the various fuel types for the whole cycle using grams of carbon dioxide emitted per kilowatt hour. Nuclear, for the whole lifecycle, is about 1% of the emissions from coal, 2% of emissions from gas and 10% of those from solar (due to the process for making solar cells).

Grams of CO2/kWh

Coal 970-1245 grams

Gas 450-660 grams

Solar 100-280 grams

Wind 6-29 grams

Nuclear 9-21 grams

Hydro 3-11 grams

This gives your example TV an output of around 340kg as opposed to 3,194 tonnes of CO2/year.

As a comparison this is about the same as what the average adult human exhales (about 1kg/day)

Edited May 9, 2008 by Mr Flibble

[coffee78]

An interesting idea but where are those CO2 figures coming from?(typical government site, can't find a bl00dy thing on there). They sound slightly high to me (I think you might have a decimal place out of position or these are not CO2/kWh figures).

Following is an exceprt from this site.

This gives your example TV an output of around 340kg as opposed to 3,194 tonnes of CO2/year.

As a comparison this is about the same as what the average adult human exhales (about 1kg/day)

Much closer to the numbers. Vic is about 1.4kg of CO2 per 1 kWh of fossil fuel fired electricity.

Want to reduce your home carbon footprint, buy dark green power.

Humans will only use less when it costs more. Any other approach is just kidding.

[ford]

With a 5kw air con pumping away why would I worry about the tv.

If you can afford it USE it.

HDrocks:

[alanh]

Coffee78,

Workbook page 16. My figures are multiplied by 1000 so that you get tonnes rather than kg

All,

All remember this not only includes the production of CO2 from your appliance but also the line losses to bring you the electricity from the power station.

The figures in this publication change from year to year.

Shonky,

There is a cable across Bass Strait feeding coal fired power when your hydro is inadequate.

AlanH

[DrP]

Line and associated equipment losses can be quite horrendous. I remember being told, many moons ago, that if the 'load' was unplugged from the Snowy scheme they (the generators) would still be sinking 200 amps (@ 200Kv? can't remember) into the lines. Thats a lot!

[Mr Flibble]

Coffee78,

Workbook page 16. My figures are multiplied by 1000 so that you get tonnes rather than kg

All,

All remember this not only includes the production of CO2 from your appliance but also the line losses to bring you the electricity from the power station.

The figures in this publication change from year to year......

Alan,

Is this the table you are referring to?

Division by 1000 converts kg to tonnes.

Table 5: Indirect emission factors for consumption of purchased electricity from the grid—for end users (not distributors)

NSW and ACT 0.89 0.17 1.06

VIC 1.22 0.08 1.31

QLD 0.91 0.13 1.04

SA 0.84 0.14 0.98

WA (SWIS) 0.87 0.10 0.98

TAS 0.12 0.01 0.13

NT 0.69 0.11 0.79

Source: Department of Climate Change 2007.

I've done some re-formatting as it wouldn't cut & paste any good but the columns are as follows (all are kg of CO₂/kWh of electricity purchased).....

Column 1 - emissions from burning the fuel

Column 2 - emissions from mining, refining & transporting the fuel, transmission loss etc

Column 3 - total emissions (column 1 + column 2)

As stated, to convert to tonnes these figures should be divided by 1000. Yours seem to be multiplied by about 10 which makes them too high by a factor of around 10,000

These give your example TV emissions of 359kg/yr or 0.359 tonnes/yr for Victoria & 36kg/yr or 0.036 tonnes/yr for Tasmania.

To answer your initial question, my 200W CRT display, running about 3hrs/day is responsible for about 230kg of CO₂/yr here in Qld.

[diesel]

Line and associated equipment losses can be quite horrendous. I remember being told, many moons ago, that if the 'load' was unplugged from the Snowy scheme they (the generators) would still be sinking 200 amps (@ 200Kv? can't remember) into the lines. Thats a lot!

Transmission Loss factors (TLF) are generally low due to the high volatges involved (unless you are in regional areas and FNQ is quite bad)

Distribution Loss factors (DLF) are generally higher because of lower voltages

In Sydney TLF is around 1-2% (negative in the central coast/Hunter region because you are located next to the power stations)

DLF for Energy Australia's patch is ~6-7%

Regional Qld can be as highj as 20-25% loss factors because of the huge distances between supply and delivery points.

Alan,

Is this the table you are referring to?

These give your example TV emissions of 359kg/yr or 0.359 tonnes/yr for Victoria & 36kg/yr or 0.036 tonnes/yr for Tasmania.

To answer your initial question, my 200W CRT display, running about 3hrs/day is responsible for about 230kg of CO₂/yr here in Qld.

Correct!

[alanh]

All,

Apologies,

The figures I quoted are t/kw-year not t/kWh worked out for continuous use.

I have been doing a lot of calculations for continuous use lately.

So

Divide the mumber of watts by 1000 to convert watts to kW

Multiply the average number of hours per day by 365.25 This will give you the number of hours/year

Victoria

= 0.250 x 3 x 365.25 x 1.31 = 359 kg

Tasmania

= 0.250 x 3 x 365.25 x 0.13 = 36 kg

So for continuous use

Victoria

=.25 x 11.6591 = 2.9 t

= .25 x 24 x 365.25 x 1.31 = 2.9 t

So apologies again

AlanH

[foovo]

deleted - I see you've corrected your calcs!

Edited May 9, 2008 by foovo

[cowabungadude]

i'm going to crank up the bar radiator heater after reading this

[diesel]

i'm going to crank up the bar radiator heater after reading this

What the?

To produce more CO₂ so your TV isn't so bad (BTW gas heating is far more efficient) or to speed up greenhouse effect?

[alanh]

All,

Consider the difference when you multiply the TV consumption upto atleast 7 million times. This is the number of dwellings in Australia.

AlanH

[LukeF1503559517]

Not too sure why were talking about tv consumptions tho. The rest of the home theatre for starters the amp chews up alot more power.

Btw, Tasmania's hydro sheme produces alot of their power which is good in greenhouse gas terms, but for the project to be completed, a whole ecosystem was lost. Forget the name of the lake, had lots of endemic species though.

Personally i think we need to spend more money on solar development, being able to produce them cheaply, and make them as effiecient as possible. When people can afford to supply they own power by solar means, then you can chew as much power as you want. Even pay the same amount to your power company for the leasing of them to stop the economists from having a whinge.

How about we talk about our water consumption too? We use the most per person in the world, and we live in the driest inhabitable continent on the planet.. cool.

[primalstatik]

I like to keep my TV and 3 electric fan heaters on 24 hours a day because my cat likes it.