Is DTS MA more environmentally damaging than True HD?

[DiscoDogg]

Hi All. (My first post, and what a topic!).

Here's my question:

In assuming that DTS MA and True HD are lossless and equivalent in that they BOTH reproduce bit for bit the studio (input) master, then they (must) only differ in their "approach" to compression.

I have read that DTS MA requires greater processing resources to decode than True HD (giving the exact same result as for True HD), so what's the net increase in electrical power (if any) to decode.

i.e. It would be very interesting to be able to perform a comparison of power consumption where the only variable was the audio codec.

IF the DTS MA decode did consume more electrical power, then does this make DTS MA a more environmentally damaging/irresponsible codec than True HD (if so, is PCM the most environmentally friendly of all?).

PS: I am not aligned with Dolby or DTS, just wanted to add another facet to the (ongoing) debate re: DTS MA vs True HD - which one is "better".

Wayne.