Did you know the average American spends about $100 per month on our electric bills, with a good portion of that amount going to power the myriad of electronics and gadgets that we've incorporated into our lives. Whether it is a 19" CRT or a 60" LCD, we've all become accustomed to living with technology in the home, but we always don't realize which technologies are the most efficient and least polluting. In the most recent issue of Body+Soul, writer Elizabeth Kemper French illustrates the variance of how much power and pollution our choices in home electronics can make...
We previously reported that Australia could consider banning Plasma TVs as a result of failing energy efficiency tests.
Here are some figures from Save Money+ Energy in the December issue of Body+Soul:
Home Stereo vs Mp3 Player
- 120 kilowatt hours vs. 6 kilowatt hours
- $13.20/year vs. $0.66/year
- 206 lbs. of carbon dioxide vs. 10 lbs. carbon dioxide
Digital Cable vs. Digital Satellite
- 239 kilowatt hours vs. 124 kilowatt hours
- $26.29/year vs. $13.64/year
- 410 lbs. of carbon dioxide vs. 213 lbs. carbon dioxide
Cordless landline vs Cellular
- 26 kilowatt hours vs. 3 kilowatt hours
- $12.86/year vs. $0.33/year
- 45 lbs. of carbon dioxide vs. 5 lbs. carbon dioxide
Plasma TV vs. LCD TV
- 441 kilowatt hours vs. 77 kilowatt hours
- $48.51/year vs. $8.47/year
- 756 lbs. of carbon dioxide vs. 132 lbs. carbon dioxide
Besides keeping our landline, it looks like we've chosen all the more energy efficient options. We do have a home stereo system but it's kept unplugged when not in use, but we were a bit surprised with the difference between digital cable and digital satellite services.

Here are some other tips to help reduce your energy bills in the home tech department:
$100/mo on electricity? Really? I might believe that the average family of four in a suburban house has that tab, but my electric bill solo is usually $15 - $20.
I also have a social life too though.
view kvh's profile
Yes, as one might assume coming for a magazine aimed at an age/sex demographic of young-middle aged women, these are likely figures derived from the average family sized home, not apartments or single person dwellings. Though I'd argue there are plenty of socially active people who might have a lot of tech in their households, and it all depends on what sort of tech they use that might result in the total monthly bill as illustrated above.
view gregory's profile
I have 1 tower running 24/7, 2 monitors, 3 laptops, and 1 home theater... I'm getting about $70/mo. So it sounds about right.
view ekoshyun's profile
The laptop vs. desktop comparison doesn't really work very well. One has a larger screen and very likely has better specs across the board (particularly the video processor and hard disk size). Notebooks don't have enough horsepower for some users. Also, there are material waste factors at issue. Laptops are notoriously more fragile than desktops if they are used as intended. Most people with desktops use them longer and reuse the display and possibly the keyboard after purchasing a new machine. I think that a better comparison is energy efficiency between one laptop and another and the same between two desktops.
Unlike cable service, phone service, and televisions, there are pretty fair usability differences between desktops and laptops when making a choice.
view Orchid64's profile
Few home users need more power than a laptop can provide. I run Logic Studio on my Macbook Pro all the time as well as other audio software and have no problems at all. So, unless you're doing high end video or audio production a laptop is just fine.
Agreed on the larger screen, though.
view mscot's profile
Energy consumption varies from set to set. Some of the newer large LCD screens consume a lot more power than a large plasma set.
view sunspot42's profile