Televisions and monitors

The bigger picture: ethical issues behind your screen

The average Briton spends the equivalent of almost ten years of their life watching TV, and over 95% of households own a television set.

Most of those TVs are smart TVs. Essentially, a smart television is a TV that has a connection to the internet so viewers can access streaming brands such as Netflix and Amazon through their TV set.

For computer monitors, whilst most people now have laptops rather than desktop computers, many people also use a computer monitor as an extra screen attached to their laptop.

TVs and monitors have become more energy efficient with time, so using them now burns through less electricity. But like all electronics, they require significant resources to manufacture and have a serious impact on the communities involved.

TV versus computer monitor

Rather than buying two screens, how practical is it to use your TV as a computer monitor or your monitor as a TV?

Using your TV as a monitor is very easy with the right cables joining it to your PC or laptop.

On the other hand, using your monitor as a TV is more difficult:

• you'll need to attach a set top box to receive a TV signal
• or just use streaming platforms from a connected PC or laptop
• you'll also need to attach speakers or a sound bar in some way

Monitors have greater 'pixel density' (more pixels per inch) than TVs so they are better for the sort of close up and detailed work you might do on a computer. They also tend to be smaller screens than TVs.

But TVs are generally more affordable when just considering screen size.

Toxic chemicals and screens

Many of the elements and compounds used in electronic devices are known to be toxic both to human health and the natural environment.

These include polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and brominated flame retardants, used in plastic parts, and phthalates, which are often used as a softener for PVC. These can release harmful by-products, including some carcinogens, particularly during disposal when burning releases chemicals directly into the air.

Tax avoidance by TV and monitor brands

The companies in this guide also did not do well in terms of likely use of tax avoidance strategies. In fact, all but two scored 0/100 for Tax Conduct. The exceptions were LG and Sharp who fared a little better scoring 20/100.

Energy costs of manufacture - embodied energy

When making purchasing decisions, we often focus on the amount of energy a product uses once bought. This is especially true for goods like TVs and monitors that have energy labels showing the efficiency and annual energy consumption through use.

But the biggest carbon component of a modern TV or monitor is its manufacture and transport to the consumer - its embodied energy.

For a 55 inch LED screen, it would take 16 years for its electricity-use carbon footprint to equal that of its manufacture. 

This is without even mentioning the other environmental impacts of production: the huge amount of natural resources that are used, including 30 different minerals and lots of petrochemical-based plastics, the reliance on toxic chemicals, and the many issues with disposal…

Energy efficient screens

Televisions are responsible for 4% of total electricity use in the home, and electricity use is itself only a fraction of home energy consumption overall, much more of which is heating. Still, energy efficiency is always worth considering if you are going to buy a TV (whether second-hand or new).

Screens are becoming more energy-efficient, helped in part by the introduction of the EU energy labelling scheme for 'electronic displays' updated in 2021. Displays are rated A to G. The Energy Label also shows resolution (pixels) and screen size (cm/inches diagonally).

TVs

The majority of TVs on sale in the EU have an energy class of E or worse! In this guide, most of the brands only made TVs rated as D energy class or below. 

• None made A or B rated TVs.
• Only two brands – Sony and Hisense – made C rated TVs. 
• Logik and Panasonic were the worst because they only made TVs rated E, F or G.

Monitors

The energy classes of monitors was a little better in that five brands made monitors rated A or B.

• A rated - HP
• B rated - LG, Acer, Dell, Asus
• C rated - Lenovo and Samsung
• E rated - Apple

With energy labels, it is tempting to read the headline energy efficiency class, the A or B rating, and then look no further. But the rating does not always correlate to how much energy your screen will actually use.

The overall energy use is affected by the size and features of the screen as well as its energy efficiency. As you might expect, the larger the screen the more energy required to power it.

Usefully, the EU energy label also shows the in-use power consumption in watts and the power consumption in kWh based on 1000 hours usage.

It is this that is the important figure for comparing brands and models. 

The European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL) offers more detailed information on models placed on the EU market. This can be accessed by scanning the QR code featured on the new energy labels. The database provides additional information such as the consumption in standby mode, panel technology, whether voice recognition, automatic brightness control and a room sensor are present, or the minimum duration of guarantee offered by the supplier.

TV screen resolutions

As screens become more energy-efficient, manufacturers are also racing to make them higher-res – undoing some of the good work when it comes to in-use energy consumption.

In recent years, TV manufacturers have moved from HD to Ultra-HD models. As a general rule, the higher resolution the TV (the more pixels used), the greater the energy consumption. 4K TVs – which have images nearly 4000 pixels wide – consumed an average of 33% more energy than their HD predecessors at the point at which they were launched.

Manufacturers also offer 8K models – meaning they have again doubled the number of pixels on offer and again hiked the energy required.

Which screen is best?

OLED screens use the least energy followed by the two backlit varieties – QLED and LCD which have extra bulbs. Plasma screens are no longer made.

LCDs are the most expensive and OLEDs the cheapest so you can save money and energy at the same time.

Is it ever worth replacing your TV for a more energy-efficient model?

LED TVs are more efficient than old plasma or CRT TVs but have a large embodied energy (from their manufacture) so replacing is only worth it if you watch a lot of telly i.e. the UK average of 4.5 hours a day, or more. If you only watch an hour a day, stick with your old one. Or buy secondhand and pass your old one on.

Standby power consumption

As the power consumption in on-mode drops, the power consumption in standby-mode becomes relatively more important. In 2020 10% of the overall energy consumption of displays was consumed in standby-mode, but this is expected to increase to 18% in 2030. Due to the EU regulations, the standby power consumption of smart TVs is expected to decrease from 6.4 W in 2015 to 4 W in 2030.

Ecodesign

Ecodesign EU rules mean that parts of a television or monitor that can easily break down have to be available to consumers and repairers within three weeks, for at least seven years after the date as of which a model is no longer in production. This also applies to repair instructions and software updates.

The new regulation further tightens the maximum allowed power consumption when the screen is off or in standby-mode. In addition, smart televisions must have the so called network standby disabled in their default configuration to better save energy when the television is not in use.

E-waste and disposal

Each year, discarded TVs and monitors add to the huge amount of e-waste we generate: 50 million tonnes annually. The complexity of electronic equipment makes disposal complicated. Yet, only 20% of this mountain is reported as properly collected and recycled.

If not recycled properly, TVs and monitors can join other electronic equipment often shipped to the global south, particularly Africa and Asia.

There, they will be sold on or sorted in informal recycling sites, where they are smashed and casings burnt, releasing toxic chemicals, before precious parts are sorted by hand. Workers on these sites face serious health issues as a result.

Some local authorities collect small electrical items as part of their kerbside collection. Otherwise you can recycle at some retailers and at Household Waste Recycling Centres. Recycle Now can be used to find your local recycling spots accepting screens.

Alternatives to TVs

Despite more and more of us also watching on our laptops, smartphones and other devices, TV ownership is again on the rise. Considering the costs of a new television, living TV-less is an option well worth considering.

In recent years, linking a laptop, tablet, smartphone or desktop PC to a monitor or projector and using a streaming service such as BBC iPlayer or Netflix has become a popular option. 

A modern laptop usually uses less energy than a TV and has a lower embodied energy. But if you stream or cast it onto your TV then you forgo these savings.

A more radical alternative to TVs

If you want a real alternative to the TV, then go 'old skool'. 

Turn the telly off and read a book, magazine, play a board game, and find your entertainment in less energy-intensive ways.

Conflicts minerals in TVs and monitors

Almost 30 different minerals are used in a TV. The extraction of these damages the land. Industrial mining permanently scars the Earth’s surface, leaving behind toxic wastewater and soil. Mining areas are rarely rehabilitated.

Five minerals in particular have been linked to serious human rights violations: cobalt (see our ethical shopping guide to batteries), and what are known as the four conflict minerals: tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold (known as 3TG).

For years, paramilitary groups have fought for control of small-scale artisan mines in the DRC, where extraction of ‘3TG’ minerals takes place. Forced and child labour are common, and the money raised funds further violence, exploitation and corruption.

Workers in the DRC have, however, urged companies not to simply leave the region, as many depend on mining for their income. Instead, companies should work to ensure that the minerals aren’t coming from mines controlled by armed groups.

We rate all electronics manufacturers on their conflict mineral policies, and they scored as follows:

Best: LG, HP and Asus followed by Acer, Apple, Bush, Lenovo, Sony and Samsung

Middle: Dell, Sharp and Panasonic

Worst: Currys (Logik) and TCL. Hisense didn’t appear to have a conflict mineral policy at all.

Human rights issues

The electronics industry is notorious for its poor treatment of the communities and workers in its supply chains, from the minerals funding armed conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to the sweatshops relying on exploitative student labour.

Television manufacturers have faced much less scrutiny over their practices than some other electronics like computers and mobile phones. However, they are linked to many of the same exploitative conditions.

HP and Israel

The Palestinian human rights movement Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) is calling for a boycott of HP-branded corporations. According to BDS, HP-branded corporations: "...provide computer hardware to the Israeli army and maintain data centers through their servers for the Israeli police. They provide the Itanium servers to operate the Aviv System, the computerized database of Israel’s Population and Immigration Authority."

Dell and Israel

Dell is a consumer boycott priority target of the BDS National Committee and its No Tech for Oppression, Apartheid or Genocide campaign, because it “supplies the servers, maintains services and related equipment to the Israeli military as a part of a $150 million 2023 contract funded by US foreign aid”. 

One of its subsidiaries conducts research and development activities in Israel’s National Cyber Park, which attempts to strengthen development in the Naqab while “Palestinian Bedouin communities in the region face forced displacement and de-development by Israeli authorities”.