Welcome Guest | Sign In
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider

E-Commerce Times Talkback

ECT News Community   »   E-Commerce Times Talkback   »   Re: New Calif. Standard Nixes Energy-Guzzling Flat-Screen TVs

Re: New Calif. Standard Nixes Energy-Guzzling Flat-Screen TVs
Posted by: Samantha Young 2009-11-19 18:24:31
See Full Story

California regulators have adopted the nation's first energy-efficiency standards for televisions, a move that will eventually ban power-hungry sets from the state's store shelves. Wednesday's action by the California Energy Commission could lead the way in a general reform of standards for an industry increasingly focused on wide-view, flat-screen, high-definition sets. The 5-0 vote by the California Energy Commission is just the latest effort by the state to secure its place in the forefront of the environmental movement.

Why all energy efficiency regulations are wrong
Posted by: peterdublin 2009-11-19 18:39:58 In reply to: Samantha Young
All energy efficiency regulations are wrong
whether one is for or against environmental savings

Governor Schwarzenegger 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 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"
Inefficient products that use more energy can have performance, appearance and construction advantages
Examples (using cars, buildings, dishwashers, TV sets, light bulbs etc):
For example, big plasma TV screens have image contrast and other advantages along with the bigger image sizes.

Products using more energy usually cost less, or they'd be more energy efficient already.
Depending on how much they are used, there might therefore not be any running cost savings either.

Other factors contribute to a lack of savings:

If households use less energy,
then utility companies make less money,
and will just raise electricity prices to cover their costs.
So people don't save as much money as they thought.

energy efficiency in effect 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

Either way, supposed energy - or money - savings aren't there.

Why energy efficiency regulations are wrong,
whether you are for or against energy and emission conservation
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
Jump to:
How will the pandemic influence your holiday shopping habits this year?
I will shop online exclusively, for my own safety and to help limit the spread of the coronavirus.
I will do some shopping online, and some in-person because I want to support merchants in my area.
I will shop online definitely, and I will consider local retailers -- but only if they provide curbside service.
I will only shop in-person because the risks associated with e-commerce outweigh my chance of catching COVID-19.
I will not do any holiday shopping this year due to circumstances related to the pandemic.