Energy | November 19, 2009 |
California Bans Sale of Energy-Guzzling Plasma TVs
By Timothy B. Hurst In a 5-0 vote, The California Energy Commission today approved the country’s first efficiency regulations for TVs of up to 58 inches. The new Appliance Efficiency Regulations will require new televisions sold in California to consume 33 percent less electricity by 2011 and 49 percent less electricity by 2013.
The average plasma TV uses three-times as much energy as a traditional set. The commission estimates that switching to more efficient TVs will save an average of $30 per set per year and $8.1 billion in electricity bills statewide over the first decade. The regulations go into place for televisions sold after Jan. 1, 2011, and will reflect similar regulations the state has put on refrigerators, air conditioners and dozens of other household appliances since the 1970s.
“The real winners of these new TV energy efficiencies are California consumers who will be saving billions of dollars and conserving energy while preserving their choice to buy any size or type of TV,” said Energy Commission Chairman Karen Douglas.
Televisions now account for ten percent of the average California home’s electricity consumption.
“Californians buy four million televisions each year and they deserve the most energy efficient models available,” said Douglas.
While some trade groups cried foul and said the new rules would stifle innovation and interfere with a market process that is already driving increases in efficiency, California-based Vizio, perhaps the most successful LCD and plasma TV maker in the U.S. told state regulators they would have no problem meeting the new standards by 2011.
More than 1,000 TV models on the market today already meet the 2011 standards and according to the California Energy Commission, cost no more than less-efficient sets.
Reprinted with permission from Ecopolitology.com
Reddit
Digg
Stumble
ShareThis
Comments By Readers
Governor Scwharzenegger is shooting himself in the foot!
1. Taxation is better for everyone, if energy really needs to be saved.
TV set taxation based on energy efficiency - unlike bans - gives Governor Schwarzenegger's impoverished California Government income on the reduced sales, while consumers keep choice.
This also applies generally,
to CARS (with emission tax or gas tax), BUILDINGS, DISHWASHERS, LIGHT BULBS etc,
where politicians instead keep trying to define what people can or can't use.
Politicians can use the tax money raised to fund home insulation schemes, renewable projects etc that lower energy use and emissions more than remaining product use raises them.
Also, the energy efficient products can have their sales taxes lowered.
2. Product regulation, bans or taxation, are really however UNWARRANTED:
Where there is a problem - deal with the problem!
Energy: there is no energy shortage
(given renewable/nuclear development possibilities, with set emission limits)
and consumers - not politicians - pay for energy and how they wish to use it.
It might sound great to
"Let everyone save money by only allowing energy efficient products"
However:
Inefficient products that use more energy can have performance, appearance and construction advantages:
RE big plasma TV screens they have - for example - contrast advantages
(dark and light differentiation) along with the bigger image sizes.
Energy inefficient products also usually cost less, or else they'd be more energy efficient already.
Examples (using cars, buildings, dishwashers, TV sets, light bulbs etc):
http://ceolas.net/#cc211x
There might therefore not even be running cost savings either, depending on usage.
Two more factors contribute to that:
1. If households use less energy, then utility companies make less money,
and will just raise electricity prices to cover their costs.
Conversely,
2. Energy use might rise.
Energy efficiency means cheaper energy, so people just leave TV sets etc on more, knowing that energy bills are lower,
as also shown by Scottish and Cambridge research
http://ceolas.net/#cc214x
Either way supposed energy -or money- savings aren't there.
More on why energy efficiency regulations are wrong
- whether you are for or against energy and emission conservation -
http://ceolas.net/#cc2x
Summary
Politicians don't object to energy efficiency as it sounds too good to be true. It is.
--The Consumer Side
Product Performance -- Construction and Appearance
Price Increase -- Lack of Actual Savings: Money, Energy or Emissions. Choice and Quality affected
-- The Manufacturer Side
Meeting Consumer Demand -- Green Technology -- Green Marketing
--The Energy Side
Energy Supply -- Energy Security -- Cars and Oil Dependence
--The Emission Side
Buildings -- Industry -- Power Stations -- Light Bulbs
Post Your Comment