johnnymk

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNT516V87T.DTL


California state regulators, who have limited automobile emissions and required large utilities to increase use of renewable energy, now are taking aim at a ubiquitous household item - the television.

Consumer demand for bigger, flatter and fancier TVs has dramatically increased the amount of energy needed to watch the tube, officials say. The California Energy Commission says a 42-inch plasma television uses more energy than a large refrigerator.

To reduce the electrical draw from TVs, the commission has proposed the nation's first mandatory energy limits on televisions - limits that many large LCD and plasma TVs on the market do not meet.

"We want to get rid of energy-guzzling televisions," said Adam Gottlieb, spokesman for the state energy commission.

The proposed rules would take effect from 2011 to 2013, eventually cutting the use of power by 50 percent.

But only one-fourth of TVs now sold in the state meet the standard, and a leading manufacturers group predicts that the rules will cost consumers and the state money, stifle innovation and result in fewer choices on store shelves.

The energy commission wants to place "artificial energy-use limits on televisions," said Doug Johnson, senior director of technology policy for the Consumer Electronics Association, which represents most television-makers.

Johnson said the group's goal is "not to create harmful and unnecessary regulations. We have to recognize what is already working and think of ways to promote that in California."

The association paid for a study that predicts California will lose $50 million a year in tax revenue and 4,600 jobs, mostly at retail outlets that will cut back on their merchandise, if the plan is adopted. Johnson said simple changes such as reducing brightness settings and promoting the voluntary Energy Star program backed by the federal government would be better goals.

But the energy commission said those efforts will not go far enough and that technology exists that makes the agency's goal possible at a savings to consumers.

That position is backed by Vizio, the second-largest flat-panel television manufacturer in North America.

Vizio supports the standards and "would also support earlier implementations" than the dates set by the commission, Kenneth Lowe, vice president and co-founder of Vizio, wrote in a letter to the commission.

This year the Irvine TV maker is selling a line of televisions, known as EcoHD, that meet the 2013 standards. The new rules would increase manufacturing costs by a "few tens of dollars," Lowe said. The commission estimates those costs will be offset by savings in energy costs from $104 to $164 over the lifetime of the television.

The proposed regulations also are supported by the LCD TV Association, which represents manufacturers and suppliers for TVs.

Bruce Berkoff, who chairs the group, told the commission that its proposal will encourage innovation and added that concerns over availability of televisions are "clearly at odds with industry practices of improvements and TV product cycles."

Environmental groups back the changes and dismiss the concerns of some industry groups. The changes also could result in energy savings nationwide, said Noah Horowitz, senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

"History has shown that once manufacturers make changes to meet California standards, over time that is how they produce all their televisions," he said.

The state commission is expected to vote on the proposal during the summer, although no date has been scheduled. A workshop on the plan will be held before the vote and will include public comment.

TV nation: What we're looking at - and how much energy it consumes

688

Average kilowatt hours used by a plasma TV per year

275

Average kilowatt hours used by an LCD TV each year

193

Average kilowatt hours used by a CRT television per year

88

Percent of new TV sales that are LCD televisions

63

Percent of TVs in California that are cathode ray televisions

35

Number, in millions, of televisions in the state

10

Percent of household electricity consumed by TVs

5

Average number of hours a day Californians watch TV

Sources: California Energy Commission and PG&E

__________________
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” (Winston Churchill)

raimin

i was looking to replace my crt rptv with a plasma

well if they give me a rebate check to switch to another tv, i may be interested...
but otherwise, another nanny state policy being looked at

bachviet

I still go for a plasma as my main (living room) TV for my future home.

Don't we already pay for using plasma TV's via our electricity bill?

__________________
Dell Dimension 9200 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.4GHz) | 4x1GB DDR2 | 256MB nVidia GeForce 8800GT

Dell Studio 17 | Intel Core i7-720QM (1.6GHz) | 2x2GB DDR3 1066MHz | 1GHz ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650

Intel P4-C 3.0GHz | ECS 865PE-A | 3x512MB PC3200 | 128MB PNY GeForce 6600GT

Maarchk

Yeah I don't get it. if you use it, you'll pay more... Kind of like the gas guzzling. It adds up if energy gets more expensive. If people ask for more efficient tv's they'll get there. We california people are a little over zealous...

__________________
"The girl is crafty like ice is cold."

"I left my heart in san francisco... And my liver at Moe's Tavern."

A real friend is one who listens to you as much as they talk to you.

brainsmile

it's not about paying more. It's about conservation of what is a limited resource.

__________________
**********************************
DCM #1 (Founder)





"Nobody beats Vitus Gerulaitis 18 times in a row." - Vitus Gerulaitis on beating Jimmy Connors after 17 failed attempts.

Jeffbx

Wow, I'm glad I got an LCD instead of a plasma.

But I always thought LCDs used less power than CRTs? I wonder if they're comparing a 42" LCD with a 30" CRT. That was always a good justification for swapping CRTs with LCDs for computer monitors - because the LCDs used less power.

VTGreg

LOL, of course Vizio and an LCD maker industry group are backers of the proposed regulations. Vizio wants to sell their new tvs and this would be a boon for LCD makers.

If manufacturers decide to address energy requirements for plasmas this regulation could be a good thing. If not, it will just restrict options that californians have when buying a new tv.

__________________
It only ends once... Anything that happens before that is just progress.

Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear.

bachviet

I just buy it online and have it shipped.

brainsmile

You know.... my company has a solution to help lower energy usage of electronic items such as TVs too Johnnymk

zippyjuan

Average CRT is much smaller than the average LCD so energy use comparison on that is a bit misleading.
My 50" plasma has an Energy Star sticker on it. If their number for average power consumption applies to my model then my plasma must be using 27% of all of my electricity. My last bill said I used 210 kWh for the month. Yes, an LCD does use less energy but at the time I made my purchase, the cost of an LCD was a lot higher than the plasma was and the quality of the plasma much better. If I was buying now, I would be more inclined to look at LCD. I paid about $1700 which is still not that bad of a price for a Panasonic.

That is what I did- in part because I don't have a car to take one home in. Kinda hard to throw it on the back of a bicycle!

__________________
I add new pictures to my photo gallery pretty regularly. You can see them here if you are interested: http://www.pbase.com/jeffryz

InfiniteNothing

I agree. Unless you are getting your energy from solar or something how does paying more excuse being wasteful?

__________________
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.

cheapie

meh. electricity is more about pollution imho. we're not really worried about running out of coal or nuclear power here in the midwest.

__________________
70% of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Bob Sanders

brainsmile

actually we have a patent on a device to eliminate vampire power

Jeffbx

Ooh - nice!

Ship me one - I'll be happy to beta test it for you

InfiniteNothing

Don't things like TV need power to do things like monitor the IR sensor for power, save your favorite channels, etc?

brainsmile

yes but we have an answer for that too

Daedalus

Energy-star appliances are fairly efficient when off. I know my TVs use about 1W when off (my meter only measures whole numbers). Over a year's time that still works out to around 9KW-H, or ~$1.26 per year per TV for me to have the privelege of remote control. If I wanted to get really nazi with it I could put them on a power strip, along with the cable box, DVD player, receiver, etc.

I'm all for raising energy prices to effect change in people's habits. I like the tiered pricing structure that my utility has. I say keep the lower tiers unchanged, and raise the prices in the higher tiers. Let consumers decide how to prioritize their energy use rather than writing stupid laws that try to restrict consumer goods while being ineffective at doing so. What a waste of time.

InfiniteNothing

I just don't think the threat of mildly higher electric bills is a very effective deterrent from wasting electricity.