The California Energy Commission is proceeding with a proposal this summer to ban the sale of TV sets that do not meet new efficiency standards when they are turned on and displaying a picture — a measure of power consumption that is not currently regulated at all.
But the market and technological advances may already be advancing this goal, as large-screen plasma sets fall out of favor and LCDs become more energy efficient.
The CEC proposal is set up as a two-tiered system. The first enforces efficiency standards beginning in 2011 and would save 3,831 gigawatt hours (and bring down overall TV energy consumption by 33%) by placing a cap on the active mode power usage (in watts) of individual TVs. Current standards in California only regulate TVs in standby mode, at a cap of 3.0 watts.
According to the Commission, energy used in standby mode only represents about 5 percent of all TV energy consumption.
The proposal is based on the following formulas:
The program’s 2013 second stage promises to reduce energy use by 49%. If they are enforced, the new standards are expected to save Californians between $18 and $30 a year per TV set in energy costs. As noted by the Commission, current LCDs use about .27-watts per square inch and plasmas use 0.36-watts per square inch.
This isn’t the first time Government has stepped in to regulate the energy efficiency in a gadget. More than thirty years ago, regulations on always-on refrigerators were passed and were first seen by companies as oppressive. Those companies eventually adapted and the result was a more efficient product. Similar acts have managed the energy needs of air conditioners and other gadgets.
Not surprisingly, several TV companies are seeing this proposal as an all out declaration of war. On the front lines are the folks that put on the Consumer Electronics Show every year, members of the Consumer Electronics Association. They think they’ve done enough to self-regulate their industry, including setting up tougher energy criteria with the new Energy Star 3.0.
Currently, the standards set up by the Energy Star project are not as stringent.
The Energy Star caps are set by a formula that uses native vertical resolution and visible screen area. Power Integrations recently noted that the Energy Star formula (PMax = 0.240*A + 27), with a TV-viewing area between 680 inches and 1045 inches, limits 42-inch TVs (754 in.sq.) to 208 watts in consumption. More than 300 TVs qualify at that limit right now, including some energy-hogging Plasmas.
It’s important to note that the Energy Star program is voluntary, and most of the TVs that would be banned by the proposal would be larger TVs that are already losing steam in the market anyway.
The CEA, working on behalf of companies likely to be most affected by the proposal (over-40-inch CRT and Plasma television makers), says pushing through this law would immediately take out 25 percent of TVs off the market. They claim that removing any TV options would harm companies already hurting from the recession.
Those who’d benefit from the new law don’t share the same belief. The LCD Manufacturers Association, including up-and coming TV makers like Vizio, are supporting the proposal.
The Commission, says the law’s main goal is to reduce the strain on the energy grid, which will help avoid building expensive new power plants. It cites the fact that TVs are among the fastest growing electronics in the business and are slated to grow further.
But that’s a deceptive citation because recent TV growth has focused on LCDs and other ‘greener’ TVs.
Energy-hogging TVs are on their way out, without the help of the government or an overriding desire by consumers to own energy-efficient TVs. Most buy LCDs because they’re simply cheaper and are finally approximating the quality of larger plasma televisions.
As we noted recently, the next six years are expected to follow this model as well, with super-efficient OLEDs growing in popularity and availability.
So this might be a moot issue after all, even if you take into account the very largest TVs, which the CEA says will be ones most penalized.
Consider the Mitsubishi LaserVue Laser TV, which comes in huge sizes over 65 inches. Its laser technology not only produces good video, but is also the most energy-efficient, with long-lasting lasers that never need replacing.
So the intention of the commission is generally positive, but it looks like consumers are already ahead of the game here. No matter what happens with the proposal, energy-hogging TVs will be gone within two years.
The CEC has told Wired.com there will be further opportunities for the public to give input on this issue through public hearings and comments on its website, http://www.energy.ca.gov/commission/complaint.html. There’s currently no word on the exact date the proposal will come to vote in the summer, but we’ll update this post when we learn more.
Follow Jose Fermoso on Twitter at twitter.com/fermoso
I don’t know what this is and I don’t care. It may be a MacBook Mini concept. Or a crazy leak. Or just a perfect fake. Whatever. It’s beautiful. I want. [Updated with pictures].
According to a 9to5 reader, this perfect rendering, photoshop, or whatever the hell it is came inside a Russian magazine. My knowledge of Russian doesn’t go beyond “hey, wanna dance?”, “cheers,” and “you have beautiful blue eyes, let’s go back to mine” so I don’t have a clue about what this page is saying. If you speak the language of Dostoyevsky, drop me a line because I want to know.
Being a programmer myself I sometimes find that I get a kind of writer’s block that plagues my brain. No matter what I try I just can’t figure out what I’m trying to do, but there might be a new community that is able to help in situations like that.
