Oh God, this has been gone over ad nauseum but I must. I don't know how I can refute powerful assertions made in bold
ALL CAPS italics
, but I will try, with some data and logic.
The smallest electric space heater you can buy uses 1,500 watts. A typical 50" plasma uses 250-325 watts per CNet and Crutchfield. So, despite the fact that these sets use 5 to 6 times less energy (and thus produce 5 to 6 times less heat) than an actual space heater, it's not nonsense to equate them? I'm all for good metaphors but they should at least make sense.
As for the difference with LCD, a typical CCFL 52" set uses in the 130-180 watt range. LEDs look to use 100-130 watts.
As I said, the plasmas generally use more power. No shock or argument there. The question is, how much more and what's the consequence? Looks to me like it's about 100-150 watts more than CCFL and 150-200 watts more than LED. 100 watts is a common, medium brightness light bulb size. ergo, my comment that the difference amounts to a couple of light bulb's worth.
But you're going to save a lot of money on electricity with that LED set right? Let's say you use it 8 hours a day and pay 10 cents per kW-hr. At 200 watts less than the plasma, you'll save $58 a year - less than $5 a month.
But, you have to pay a lot more upfront for those savings. Using the G10 and UN6000 for comparison's sake, it looks like the LED will run you an extra $750 for a 46" and $900 for a 55". Your ROI window is 13+ years!