Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re :OT photo frames (was: OT A one-milion dollar photographic p

Subject: Re: [OM] Re :OT photo frames (was: OT A one-milion dollar photographic print)
From: Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:38:42 +0000
Chuck

I wasn't referring to the cost to you, but to the planet.  That's 117w more 
than a picture uses (after allowing for its manufacture, of course).

Chris

On 17 Jan 2011, at 12:21, Chuck Norcutt wrote:

> I just bought a 32" set which draws 117 watts.  My incremental cost for 
> electricity is about 10 US cents per KWH or 1.17 cents/hour.  Hardly 
> seems an excessive waste to me.
> 
> Chuck Norcutt
> 
> 
> On 1/16/2011 3:58 PM, Wiliam Wagenaar wrote:
>> You are probably quite right about that. Energy efficiency had no part in
>> this option. Large screens still cost more energy than smaller ones,
>> although the LED's are already much better than the LCD's and those are
>> better than Plasma. Maybe in the near future the screens like the ones found
>> in e-books will be large enough and good enough to display photos, at least
>> in B&W. They only cost energy when displaying something else.
>> 
>> Wiliam
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chris Barker [mailto:ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: zondag 16 januari 2011 21:33
>> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
>> Subject: Re: [OM] Re :OT photo frames (was: OT A one-milion dollar
>> photographic print)
>> 
>> I'm sure that they would look good, but what a waste of energy.
> 

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz