New California Energy Standards - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 19 Old 10-16-2009, 09:15 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
pcdo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Looks like it's really going to happen:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,4908205.story

I saw what happened in the other thread so let stay on topic, no LCD vs. plasma debates. Are any companies or technologies in danger of not making these requirements? For example, Panasonic is making more eco-friendly panels. Will that be enough? Will companies have to spend more money trying to improve energy standards which will lead to higher TV costs? Will companies be able to fudge their way through the standards, i.e. have all the programed settings be within eco-friendly range, but still allow customization that may put the panel outside the energy range at home? Is this all a moot point and basically all companies will be able to comply with standards without too much trouble?
pcdo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 19 Old 10-16-2009, 10:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
borf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
"technology and materials should result in "zero increase in cost to consumers"


my very conservative co-workers are complaining about this one. there will be some resistance at first but i think its not really an issue. it may accelerate Led/Oled. its less intrusive than a seat-belt law, helmet or cell phone law.
borf is offline  
post #3 of 19 Old 10-16-2009, 11:40 AM
Senior Member
 
zack8322's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Woopie!

I love this quote -
Quote:


Average first-year savings from reduced electricity use would be an estimated $30 per set and $912 million statewide, he said.

A whole $30 a year! That's $5 a month. Yeah right. I'm all for conservation and the environment but there are much bigger and better things to go after. I also love how they quote Vizio the maker of some of the crappiest sets out there, of course they would not have a problem meeting the requirements, that's exactly why their stuff looks as bad as it does.

I say take a page from the Republican play book, let people decide with their wallet.
zack8322 is offline  
post #4 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 12:18 AM
Member
 
orace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
pcdo,

why should you worry, you are not form "around here" ....


laugh it up,


BTW, I love your comebacks to Mr. "auditor55"

seriously, on the topic at hand,, this take micro managing to a new level.....
orace is offline  
post #5 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 06:41 AM
 
jvernon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Southlake, TX
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcdo View Post


I saw what happened in the other thread

I thought it went rather well, myself.
jvernon is offline  
post #6 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 10:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nicktx27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

"technology and materials should result in "zero increase in cost to consumers"


my very conservative co-workers are complaining about this one. there will be some resistance at first but i think its not really an issue. it may accelerate Led/Oled. its less intrusive than a seat-belt law, helmet or cell phone law.

How is it less intrusive?
Nicktx27 is offline  
post #7 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
borf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
those laws dictate your personal behavior, which i find very "big brother".
this law affects tvs (TVs) and *possibly* your options if u decide to buy one.
it could be worse.
borf is offline  
post #8 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 12:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nicktx27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 19
So limiting your choices on which TVs you can buy isn't big brother? Even if it is possibly.
Nicktx27 is offline  
post #9 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 04:46 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
pcdo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicktx27 View Post

So limiting your choices on which TVs you can buy isn't big brother? Even if it is possibly.

I think people throw around the term "big brother" too loosely. They're not telling you what TV you can buy, but rather forcing TV manufacturers to comply with energy standards. It's no different than having smog standards on cars. Whether the act will be effective is another issue.
pcdo is offline  
post #10 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 04:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nicktx27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 19
But the car you buy in CA is different than the one I buy in TX. So if its a state thing, then (just as an example) it might be more financially prudent for a TV company to just offer smaller TV's to CA i.e. 46 and below than have to mess with making a particular line just for CA. So I could buy a 65 in here but you could only get a 46. That seems like they're telling you what you can buy. I'm just saying. I think if you have an energy problem you should focus more on strengthening your infrastructure as opposed to dictating what people can and can't buy. Besides almost all TVs have energy star ratings anyhow. But you're right, whether or not the law will even be effective is yet to be seen. I just think it's a waste of tax money. JMO.
Nicktx27 is offline  
post #11 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 09:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MrBobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicktx27 View Post

So limiting your choices on which TVs you can buy isn't big brother? Even if it is possibly.

What are those wacko hippies gonna do next? Let gay ppl marry?

Solution: FREE. Explanation: I will have to charge$ you.

MrBobb is offline  
post #12 of 19 Old 10-17-2009, 09:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nicktx27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBobb View Post

What are those wacko hippies gonna do next? Let gay ppl marry?

What does that even have to do with what we're talking about?
Nicktx27 is offline  
post #13 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 07:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lee L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Morrisville, NC USA
Posts: 2,090
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicktx27 View Post

But the car you buy in CA is different than the one I buy in TX. So if its a state thing, then (just as an example) it might be more financially prudent for a TV company to just offer smaller TV's to CA i.e. 46 and below than have to mess with making a particular line just for CA. So I could buy a 65 in here but you could only get a 46. That seems like they're telling you what you can buy. I'm just saying. I think if you have an energy problem you should focus more on strengthening your infrastructure as opposed to dictating what people can and can't buy. Besides almost all TVs have energy star ratings anyhow. But you're right, whether or not the law will even be effective is yet to be seen. I just think it's a waste of tax money. JMO.

Actually, I am pretty sure that all the car makers started selling cars with 50 state emissions some time ago. Meaning that they all comply with the most stringent state requirements, which is california. So, the state of CA is actually dictating what all of us can drive.

I can't see it being much different for TVs. Except maybe they may just not opt to sell certain models in CA until they are gone, but in general, as time goes on, all TVs will meet the CA standards as it is not econimical to make two seperate TVs.

XBOX Live: SheriffTruman

Do you want a nice Keystone Jack panel behind your TV with HDMI, and Toslink? Check This Thread at AVS
Lee L is offline  
post #14 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 11:11 AM
Member
 
DM85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
They mentioned energy star standards the other day on the news. They say as is, some companies may not even be complying to set standards.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/ene...all-measure-up
DM85 is offline  
post #15 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 02:34 PM
Member
 
d_rob1031's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Why can't we let the free market decide?

If you have the means and are willing to pay for the electricity to use a better TV.. then do it. If you don't have the money to pay for the power, you probably don't have the money to pay for the TV in the first place. I could go on with more but my blood begins to boil.
d_rob1031 is offline  
post #16 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 04:15 PM
Member
 
coyotetu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 31
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Anyone here ever read Overload by Arthur Hailey? Fascinating book, albeit fiction is pretty well rooted in fact. There are hard choices to be made concerning conserving electricity and conservation, especially in California, and you better believe laws like this will be alot faster and more effective than the long bureaucratic process a utility has to go through to even have their infrastructure expansion plans even heard, let alone approved/built.
coyotetu is offline  
post #17 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 05:16 PM
Member
 
DM85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It's not really an issue of saving money for consumers, but more so finding ways to reduce carbon emissions. You might say "How much damage can one tv do?"...Well we're a planet of 6+ billion people. It adds up pretty quickly.
DM85 is offline  
post #18 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 05:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nicktx27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 19
^^Actually its a way for CA to try and reduce the amount of energy the buy from other states there by reducing their budget.
Nicktx27 is offline  
post #19 of 19 Old 10-20-2009, 06:06 PM
Member
 
DM85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicktx27 View Post

^^Actually its a way for CA to try and reduce the amount of energy the buy from other states there by reducing their budget.

That's a good point. I guess with any appliance that's energy star "certified" there has to be a balance...force a company to reduce energy consumption in their product while still performing at max parameters. Ofcourse, you can also set standards to high and end up with an inferior product that sacrifices quality and longevity.
DM85 is offline  
Reply Flat Panels General and OLED Technology

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off