Are these facts?

Question

1. Appliances that are more expensive (refs, TVs and anything else) are better than cheaps ones because they do not possess some risks to the environment (like less carbon)

2. Being cheap all the time. For me, it's a wrong practice because it's the quality that matters, not the price. Some things that are cheap easily get broken or have a poor quality.

3. HDTVs consume less electricity than standard LCD TVs and the conventional ones.

Answer 1

Agreed with the first poster...

okay 1. in the first question, one hint is the use of the word "some", and in reference to all cheaper TV.

second point to note here is to beware of what you are stating as fact. Now it not very scientific in the first example to compair "quality" because (in this case) that is down to the users perception.

Answer 2

No, i think the first 2 are opinions and maybe the last is a fact

Answer 3

1. Not true, take an SUV for example, we all know they are expensive and produce lots of carbon, but compare that to a small car, they would be much cheeper and more full efficient. There might be cases where it is true, but not always.

2. Cheap usualy implies less quality, but it doesn't mean it has to be. In general I'd say the cheeper of two similar products would be less reliable, but that certainly it's always true either and it'd depened a lot on the perticular product. So it's not a "fact" but more of a "Rule of Thumb".

3. Depends on the type of HDTV I suppose. I know for a fact that an LCD will use less power than a conventional CRT T.V. or monitor. For HDTV's you'd have to compare the LCD TV to  Projection ( or DLP) and Plasma TV's. My guess would be an LCD would have the lowest energy uses, plasma might be a close second, and I'd say a projection would have the wose. That is just a guess though, because I can't seem to find any info on power usage for these TVs.

Answer 4

1.  Not true all the time.  Expensive ones may have some additional features that consume more energy.  Or they may have features which save energy (like high efficiency gas furnaces).

Major appliances have a sticker which shows their energy consumption directly, you can easily see which are more efficient.

2.  Depends on what you mean by cheap.  The very cheapest things may be false economy, but there's usually a sweet spot where you spend just enough money to get decent quality.

3.  See #1 above.  Some do, some don't.

So everything you said is not a fact, because they're only partly true.

Answer 5

You can´t answer so easily such questions.

You need a complete benchmarking from independant institutes  for the products.

Beeing cheap can also reflect low production costs, including low energy expenses. It is nevertheless not right since the cheap use of coal in developping countries does not take into account its environmental impact.

But you are still somehow right since several studies show that appliances are not at their maximum technico-economical level since their consumption need to be adjusted to higher energy costs.

Another problem is the learning curve: is it viable to buy for a lot of money now the most efficient device while then if there is a major breakthrough you could have spent your money more efficiently later ?

Moreover, saving electricity does not have the same impact everywhere. For example, in Brazil, 1kWh emitts around 0.050 Kg CO2 while in China and India, the carbon intensity of the electricity mix is around 0.85 Kg CO2 /kWh