California sets limits on energy-gulping TVs

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,567
969
126
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5AH5DC20091118

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California regulators on Wednesday gave final approval to the nation's first mandatory energy curbs on television sets, a growing but often-overlooked power drain that accounts for 10 percent of home electric bills in the state.

Supporters say the measure will save California consumers more than $8 billion over 10 years in electricity costs and enough energy to power 864,000 homes. California often leads the way in environmental initiatives in the United States.

The rules require all new TVs sold in California to consume 33 percent less energy than current sets starting with the 2011 model year, and 50 percent less starting with 2013 models.

This is expected to set a new industry standard for TV manufacturers everywhere by virtue of California's sheer size as a consumer market. An industry trade group says the rules could force some TV sets off the market in California.

The regulatory move was sparked in part by the recent surge in popularity of larger flat-screen televisions that gobble up on average at least 40 percent more electricity than the old-style cathode ray tube, or CRT, sets.

"This is a consumer-protection measure, this is a measure that will protect the environment ... and the benefits to Californians will begin to be felt almost immediately," agency chair Karen Douglas said before the California Energy Commission unanimously adopted the rules.

INDUSTRY RESISTS REGULATIONS

The regulations were opposed by some in the consumer electronics industry as unnecessary, costly for TV makers and consumers and at odds with a voluntary nationwide labeling program, Energy Star, administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The Consumer Electronics Association has said a fourth of all TV sets for sale today would fall short of the standards and would have to be pulled from the market.

Under pressure from some retailers, the commission scaled back its original proposal and exempted the very biggest TV screens, those larger than 58 inches in diagonal. But those mega-sized screens account for no more than 2 percent of all televisions sold, the commission says.

The rule was adopted against the backdrop of a larger state effort to cut heat-trapping greenhouse gas pollutants by 28 percent by 2020. Public utilities, which backed the measure, estimate it will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 3 million metric tons over a decade.

Nearly three years in the making, the measure is the latest in a long line of energy efficiency regulations pioneered by the California Energy Commission for a appliances ranging from refrigerators to cell-phone chargers.

CRT screens still make up the bulk of the estimated 35 million sets in California homes today. But they are rapidly being replaced by flat-panel models, mostly liquid crystal display, or LCD. They account for nearly 90 percent of the 4 million new TVs sold each year.

Supporters say the most energy-gulping models will be replaced by more efficient sets before the new rules take effect, leaving consumers plenty of choice. They also say lower electric bills will more than offset any price hikes.

The commission said more than 1,000 TV models now on the market already meet the 2011 standards.

I own one TV like this and I've often wondered how efficient these things are. People sure have been buying them up like crazy so it has to affect energy usage.

I don't think it's a bad thing.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
.... I pay my electric bill, if I want a tv that gulps down energy then why the fuck shouldn't I have one? Because we're not producing enough energy to meet demands? Then maybe the state and feds should stop fucking road blocking every goddamn thing that comes around to create more electricity because it may hurt an animal or cause a little more CO2 into the air.
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,567
969
126
I see nothing wrong with this.

Agreed. Industry is slow to enact change or outright resists it so we legislate it.

I'm sure the free market loons will be in here soon to tell us how we have no right to legislate what we want...too late.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,701
6,257
126
There will be a long term benefit for sure. I suspect the wailing about it will increase in volume from numerous sources, but in the end all the dire predictions will be proved False, Energy will be saved, and People will still be able to buy giant screens.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Note that celebrities can still have 50,000 square foot houses*, but by regulating one type of television while allowing another marginally more efficient we have given rationality to our fiddling (while California economically burns.)

* Not that I want to control how big a house one can have; I'm just saying the effect of this is mind-blowingly small. Living far from that bowl of granola I expect to be affected not one whit.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,537
9,757
136
Note that celebrities can still have 50,000 square foot houses*, but by regulating one type of television while allowing another marginally more efficient we have given rationality to our fiddling (while California economically burns.)

* Not that I want to control how big a house one can have; I'm just saying the effect of this is mind-blowingly small. Living far from that bowl of granola I expect to be affected not one whit.

Lowest Common Denominator.

TV manufacturers will not build a special series of TVs just for California. The entire nation will suffer this new product line - for better or worse.
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
.... I pay my electric bill, if I want a tv that gulps down energy then why the fuck shouldn't I have one? Because we're not producing enough energy to meet demands? Then maybe the state and feds should stop fucking road blocking every goddamn thing that comes around to create more electricity because it may hurt an animal or cause a little more CO2 into the air.

Maybe you should take your fat ass outside, and stop watching so much TV. Just a suggestion.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
With the switch to LED for the light source, displays should drop power use by about 30% and the picture will actually look better because with LED light you can dim parts of the picture while having other areas bright.

With the current backlight you either get all bright or all dim which makes for poor blacks.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Only in Kalifornikizstan. They are trying to ban dark colored cars also.
This is a government that buys thousands of black vehicles and has a governor who commutes every day by private jet. You couldn't make this shit up.
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
So, they're going to ban TV's that make up less that 2% of sales, and are just so large as to be fucking stupid ostentation. Cry me a fucking river.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
So, they're going to ban TV's that make up less that 2% of sales, and are just so large as to be fucking stupid ostentation. Cry me a fucking river.

no... the mega-sized TVs are getting an exception because they only make up 2% of sales, but nice try.

ps- i don't own a tv.
 

cubeless

Diamond Member
Sep 17, 2001
4,295
1
81
ca news at 11:

in an ironic turn of events, today a marijuana delivery van was stopped and a load of illegal bigscreen tv's was found inside...
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,137
225
106
.... I pay my electric bill, if I want a tv that gulps down energy then why the fuck shouldn't I have one? Because we're not producing enough energy to meet demands? Then maybe the state and feds should stop fucking road blocking every goddamn thing that comes around to create more electricity because it may hurt an animal or cause a little more CO2 into the air.


Hmmm, do I detect an attitude problem here?

Just wait till we tell you what car you can't buy next. The only one you will be able to buy is a toyota prius hybrid or any other car that can get over 40MPG.

Did you have a temper tantrum when they told you you gotta wear your seat belt? How about not smoking in public places? Maybe when they stop making incandescent bulbs and force you to use the twirly florescent ones you will start to complain again?

I'm all for being green! Bring it on! Drill Baby Drill! :p
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
Hmmm, do I detect an attitude problem here?

Just wait till we tell you what car you can't buy next. The only one you will be able to buy is a toyota prius hybrid or any other car that can get over 40MPG.

Did you have a temper tantrum when they told you you gotta wear your seat belt? How about not smoking in public places? Maybe when they stop making incandescent bulbs and force you to use the twirly florescent ones you will start to complain again?

You wish. It's too bad my Cobra also comes with a handy HK G3. What's mine is... well... mine. Now are you going to kill me to take away my car if I refuse to trade it in? Because that's what it would take. You see the political predicament here... you claim you're in favor of "saving lives" with seat belt and helmet and smoking laws... yet you would kill someone for defending their preference in vehicle which clearly paints a picture of brutal totalitarianism and hypocrisy which won't work in your favor, particularly when a armed populace is involved.

The drug "war" should prove to you that when people want something and it's prohibited, they are going to get it anyway, even if they have to produce it themselves. You going to outlaw CNC machines and machine shops also to make sure people can't just build their own evil gas guzzlers? You'll never catch me with less than 400 HP regardless of the 'law'. Unlike Iran and China, among other places, where 100,000 vulnerable civilians can be turned away and squelched by a mere 100 armed police... well I don't think I need to point out the difference in the outcome in the USA, so good luck with enforcing that.

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

Not that I would complain if I can get 40 MPG too, it's just not a priority for me a the detriment of everything else, namely the ability to spank your Prius when you throw a fit of smug road rage and laughably attempt to out accelerate me.

Won't go that far though; it's only been a year and Americans are seeing through the BS and opposition is growing. Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, etc, their days are all numbered and they know it, hence freaking out over getting their totalitarian health care shit passed ASAP.

Oh, I don't have a TV. I do have a 1080p projector and a 106" screen, in addition to a 37" LCD as my PC monitor. In fact I don't even have network TV coming into my house, I find it overly sensationalized and opinionated and demeaning, with it's array of "experts" that everybody is supposed to agree with. "Who's to blame?" "Experts say this and that!" "ZOMG! KITTEN FLU!"

I wonder if the projector meets their czar's approval, not that I would care or do anything about it. I can't imagine those UHP bulbs are very energy efficient wasted so much of their work giving off heat and UV energy as a byproduct to producing bright uniform visible light.
 
Last edited:

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Feel-good-do-nothing legislation. The industry is already ahead of this regulation with the latest line of LED sets.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,701
6,257
126
Feel-good-do-nothing legislation. The industry is already ahead of this regulation with the latest line of LED sets.

Which is why the legislation won't have much an impact on the ability to buy a set. I suspect some Brands won't be able to comply, but there won't be any shortage of sets for people to buy.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
Agreed. Industry is slow to enact change or outright resists it so we legislate it.

I'm sure the free market loons will be in here soon to tell us how we have no right to legislate what we want...too late.

ie: other people don't do what we want them to do and don't share our unquantifiable OPINION so we will be totalitarian pricks and force them to at gun point, esp. if we can gain majority agreement via mass media bias and selective censorship.

Why hello there Mr. Stalin!

Tell me how being threatened by the church for not proclaiming faith in god in the 1500s is any different from being threatened by government force for not believing in global warming or some other boogieman?

Anyhow keep your shit to Kalifornia unless you want to add fuel to the states rights fire that has kindled across the nation.
 
Last edited: