Kiss your big-screen goodbye?

xj4094dg

Its time to move from California...

In their continuing quest to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, state regulators have uncovered a new villain in the war on global warming : your big screen TV

Couch potatoes, beware.

The California Energy Commission is considering a proposal that would ban California retailers from selling all but the most energy-efficient televisions. Critics say the news standards could take 25 percent of televisions off the market — most of them 40 inches or larger.

“The larger the television, the more at risk it is of being banned unnecessarily in California,” said Douglas Johnson, senior director of technology police for the Consumer Electronics Association.

Geez what next?

McLoki

Would make getting a projector a much easier sell to the wife....

nooshinjohn

California has already banned everything else. Next they will ban suwoofers, claiming that their sonic output causes earthquakes...

thsmith

Lobbyist will fix that law.

mhardy6647

vacuum tube hifi's days are surely numbered (not to mention all Class A power amplifiers -- tube or soiled state).

disneyjoe7

Do it now Sal, while she's on board.;)

vlam

CA has enough problem already... Just another way to focus attention of all their "real problem"

sucks2beme

Of course, one BIG problem they haven't built any new power plants in
35 years in California. They buy power from surrounding states, driving
up prices. If they don't fix that soon, they won't need new regulations,
they'll need a supply of candles.

Kex

I see nothing remotely alarmist about this. You can have imbalance either way: with no motivation to improve efficiency, it can be argued convincingly that manufacturers frequently line their pockets selling outdated, inefficient technology. It make sense to me to encourage better technologies that save money, such as energy efficient cars, dishwashers, laundry machines (a huge improvement IMO), water heaters, furnaces, a/c units ... So why not televisions as well? Perhaps this is just California leading the way, and looking ahead?

http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/tv_faqs.html

Kex

Lasareath wrote: »

My wife wants me to mount the projector in the living room, she's tired of out 36" Wega, she says it's too small!

We were using a 36" CRT until we got our first 46" LCD, about a year ago. We still use the 36" for watching TV in the family room, and the larger screen for watching movies in the living room.

After living with it for a year, I would say that 36" is plenty for watching the news, or basic programming; but 46" is possibly on the small side for movies. However, our living room is not that big (12' x 18', IIRC), so we would probably be sitting too close if it got much bigger (sitting about 9' from the screen currently), and we don't really want the TV to dominate the decor in the living room when not in use, which even the 46" already does to some extent.

My ideal setup would probably include a hidden projector and screen in the living room for movies, that would only be visible when in use, and staying with a 36-42" flat screen in the family area for normal TV viewing. JMO, good luck with the quest!

Sherardp

Lasareath wrote: »

My wife wants me to mount the projector in the living room, she's tired of out 36" Wega, she says it's too small!

Heck yeah do it asap before she changes her mind, Panasonic 3000U or Epson should do the trick with electric screen allowing you to keep the 36 in place.

Left CA awhile ago, staying in Japan as long as I can.

bobman1235

Kex wrote: »

I see nothing remotely alarmist about this. You can have imbalance either way: with no motivation to improve efficiency, it can be argued convincingly that manufacturers frequently line their pockets selling outdated, inefficient technology. It make sense to me to encourage better technologies that save money, such as energy efficient cars, dishwashers, laundry machines (a huge improvement IMO), water heaters, furnaces, a/c units ... So why not televisions as well? Perhaps this is just California leading the way, and looking ahead?

http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/tv_faqs.html

There is a distinct difference between "encouraging better / more efficient technologies" and just a blanket outlaw of technologies that are deemed inefficient (completely arbitrarily, no less, by a government).

steveinaz

Just 1 good earthquake away from the return of sanity. Kalifornians made their bed, now they can sleep in it.

BlueFox

Kex wrote: »

After living with it for a year, I would say that 36" is plenty for watching the news, or basic programming; but 46" is possibly on the small side for movies. However, our living room is not that big (12' x 18', IIRC), so we would probably be sitting too close if it got much bigger (sitting about 9' from the screen currently), and we don't really want the TV to dominate the decor in the living room when not in use, which even the 46" already does to some extent.

I have a 57" Hitachi CRT RPTV in an 11'x12' room. Perfect. Just like being at the movies.

venomclan

steveinaz wrote: »

Just 1 good earthquake away from the return of sanity. Kalifornians made their bed, now they can sleep in it.

A lot of the countries probelms will go away with that earthquake...

TOOL -

Kex

bobman1235 wrote: »

There is a distinct difference between "encouraging better / more efficient technologies" and just a blanket outlaw of technologies that are deemed inefficient (completely arbitrarily, no less, by a government).

Like I said earlier: you can have an imbalance either way, and neither is a good thing. After reading the proposal very briefly, this seems no different to what has already been done in other industries (despite the somewhat alarmist title of the thread), including automotive, household appliances, and HVAC, to name but a few. If nobody starts the push, we'd still be dumping our garbage in fields (including somebody else's fields) and driving three speed transmissions with fully leaded gasoline in the tank, but you in particular should definitely stay true to your state's motto (you do live there, after all) so carry on!

tonyb

Yeah,Cali is a bit over the top.Tax stuff out of existance.Wait,all that class A tube gear that doesn't have the saves energy seal on it,will get taxed up the ying yang.Some of you guys are going to need a windmill in your yards the size of a ferris wheel,with all that tube gear your running.:DQuestion is,when is enough,enough? Just curious,what would it take,how much taxation,will it take for some of you to stand up and say "stop"?

Kex

tonyb wrote: »

... Just curious,what would it take,how much taxation,will it take for some of you to stand up and say "stop"?

That's a totally seperate topic IMO, and yes, we are being taxed over the top IMO. The wisdom of raising taxes in a recession, like our 1% sales tax hike and vehicle licensing increase of 100% seems very questionable. Why try to give "the consumer" tax breaks as a stimulus, and then take the money right back through increased taxes? But then, the state does seem to be seriously broke. I still don't see how that relates to what is proposed for the energy consumption of TV's though. That seems more comparable to the attempts to control water consumption because there is a chronic shortage here.

MacLeod

God I hate California.

treitz3

mhardy6647 wrote: »

vacuum tube hifi's days are surely numbered (not to mention all Class A power amplifiers -- tube or soiled state).

****, when and if that happens? I'll move to another country.

That [to me] is like allowing marriage with no sex. :eek:

lightman1

I never even had to turn on the heat in my house during the winter. Greenhouse Effect be Damned!

wallstreet

Ok, so order it mail order and have it shipped to your front door. That has I bought my last LCD HD TV. Americans will not be denied!

gdb

Jeez, can't you find your way to Nevada or Oregon to buy a banned TV ??