I was just making a joke. Should have used a smiley face and the joke would be funnier if
some weren't actually promoting the idea.
Still $200 a year is a bit of change, is it really that much? Well, let's see....
Assume TV costs same as equal size double pane window with, R-Value of 2 vs. insulated wall value of R-23 where R= ?T/BTU/h and ?T=40F.
Rearranging, BTU/h = ?T / R, a double pane window has a heat loss of 20 BTU/h per sqft. A wall has a heat loss of 1.7 BTU/h/sqft. With a 54"x34" (65") TV as the viewing space that would be 255 BTU/h for a window and 22 BTU/h for a TV. A delta of 232.7 BTU/hr, or In watts, that's a delta of 68.5 W/h-window.
Let's say that ?T only lasts for 100 days. So that's 68.5W/h/window x 24 h/d x 100 d = 164.3 kW/window/season. It's linear, so lets say for 100 days in the summer there's a ?T=20F, that's 82 kW/window/season.
In Winter, using a heat pump (no fossil fuels in the future) with a COP of 3 (Q/W), that's 164 kW / 3 =55 kW. At $0.15/kWh, that's $8.25/winter/y. In Summer, 83 / 3 x 0.15 = $4.15/summer/y, or $12.45/y/window. With a constant COP we can assume the heat generated by the TVs in winter (which reduces heat load) is canceled out by the cooling required in summer. There's a lot of heat loss via air-leaks, so the actual savings should be more.
If you had 10 windows, that would be $120/y savings. So, not quite $200 per year. Still, if you're thinking about hurricane glass, this might be a better option.
But, from this, we can deduce that Mr. 1201 has $200 / 12.45 = ~16 windows and over 20 years will throw away $4,000. ; -)
Regarding heliotherapy, it would be cheaper and healthier to just have a garden outside. I wonder if TVs use "natural" light LEDs?
I think the TV would need a sensor to change the camera's angle of view based on the viewer's distance from the window. ; -)