Plasma TVs may be banned [AUSTRALIA]

Australian Broadcasting Corporation ^ | Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:01am AEST | Australian Broadcasting Corporation

[CarrotAndStick]

All current plasma TVs and many LCDs could be removed from sale by 2011. (File photo) (Reuters/Las Vegas Sun: Steve Marcus)

A report commissioned by the Federal Government says there is a growing demand for plasma and LCD televisions, which use more power than traditional TV sets.

It says energy rating labels are needed to tell consumers about the performance of the TVs.

But under a proposed six-star rating system, most current plasma TVs do not meet the requirements and could be removed from sale.

The report also suggests "minimum energy performance standards" be introduced which would eliminate the worst performing TVs.

It would mean all current plasma TVs and many LCDs could be removed from sale by 2011.

Manufacturers say they support the introduction of energy efficiency standards, but they need more time before the measures are implemented.

Australian Digital Suppliers Industry Forum coordinator Tim O'Keefe says it is unrealistic to expect manufacturers to meet the guidelines so soon.

"It's just totally unreasonable considering that we're a very small part of the global market," he said.

"They're expecting that the global suppliers will actually introduce or develop the technologies in such a time frame to be introduced for the Australian market."

But Australian Greenhouse Office spokesman Gene McGlynn says it is likely manufacturers will have two years to meet any standard that is introduced.

"By the time the standard came into place, with the industry knowing that the these standards are coming in, they can adjust their supply chains to make sure that the products will [meet the requirements]," he said.

"Again the history is that all the reputable suppliers will meet the standard."

[MarineBrat]

But what if I buy indulgences from The Goracle?

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

I thought that Australia was above this kind of non-sense.

[Phsstpok]

... there is a growing demand for plasma and LCD televisions, which use more power than traditional TV sets....

I know that LCD sets tend to use much less energy than 'traditional TV sets,' so I question this whole thing.  Maybe they're talking about rear projection large screens instead of direct view ones?  That's possible, but LCD TVs, even large ones, definitely use less electricity than CRT based TVs.

[CedarDave]

Nanny state regulation. Look forward to the same if Hillary is elected. It’s all about restricting choices to those approved by Big Brother (or Big Sister), the marketplace be damned.

[MaxMax]

In further news,
Autos over 100lbs will be banned by 2015. Economists say that if the economy
becomes bankrupt it will be because of the people and not their leaders.

[CarrotAndStick]

Maybe some idiot extrapolated the statistics of people upgrading from 21” CRTs to 50” LCDs.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

that’s what I thought too....thanks for speaking up.....

[untrained skeptic]

This may get rid of Plasma TVs in Australia, but none of the current LCDs will be on the market in 4 years anyway, and newer models will use less energy for the same size screen like. That’s the nature of advances in technology.

[Old Professer]

The goverment has said it won’t be banned yet but they are putting pressure on the manufacturers; also found this on the web from August, 2007:

“ICT usage by Australian businesses, the audit found, equated to 7.94 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2005, or 1.52 percent of total national emissions.

The industry produces[sic] emits slightly less than steel production (2.3 percent of total emissions) and slightly more (than) the civil aviation industry (0.97 percent), the audit found.

In response, the ACS advocates extending the Energy Star rating system that applies to whitegoods to ICT equipment.”

This whole Green Star thing is a work in progress and Au has a 6-Star ideal which nothing meets currently.

[Mark was here]

Plasma set to give of an amazing amount of heat, I’m surprised it took this long for the the whiners to catch on.

[TChris]

Australia really limits itself economically with this over-commitment to environmentalism.

Fear is a ruthless master, especially fear of imaginary monsters.

[Publius6961]

BUMP!

[reagan_fanatic]

I wonder if anyone has published any actual power rating comparisons out there that would show the differences in current draw between the sets in question?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

‘zackly. When government interferes with this natural progression toward more efficiency, everyone loses.

[Constantine XIII]

Politicians and reporters being ignorant about science?

It’s more likely than you think! :p

[CarrotAndStick]

Size matters as well, so we divided each set’s power use by its screen area to get a watts-per-square-inch rating. This way, small and large screens can be compared. While there are plenty of exceptions, the average score of each technology type is telling:

* Microdisplay rear projector: 0.14 watt per square inch
* LCD: 0.29 watt per square inch
* Plasma: 0.34 watt per square inch
* CRT: 0.34 watt per square inch

If power efficiency is all you’re after, the clear choice is rear-projection technology. Of the four, plasma screens are generally the most power hungry, but that’s more because of their size—on a square-inch basis, they are roughly equivalent to a large CRT set. Flat-panel LCDs often have a good brightness-to-consumption ratio, but they’re not exactly consistent.

Some LCDs are as low as 0.11 watt-per-square-inch, but some go as high as 0.37 watt. Of course, there’s always exceptions, the most noteworthy being Sharp’s 65-inch LCD that pulled down an amazing 583 watts in use and 76 watts even when it was “off.” Luckily, more and more new TVs are coming with a power-saver mode, which we’ve found can drastically cut power consumption.

Source:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-2.html

[mowowie]

A Laptop with a 15” lcd or a Laptop with a 15”CRT, which battery will die first? Duh.

[gridlock]

This may get rid of Plasma TVs in Australia, but none of the current LCDs will be on the market in 4 years anyway, and newer models will use less energy for the same size screen like. That’s the nature of advances in technology.

Unless maufacturers are worried that they will be banned, in which case progress will grind to a halt. That's the nature of government.

[Ramius]

Kinda’ silly. By 2011 you probably won’t even see many plasmas in the stores anymore.

[bill1952]

LOL! But why stop there?

Just think how much could be saved by outlawing TV altogether!
Hey, you can always read, can’t you?

Don’t you care about the planet, mate?

[Pilsner]

Well, they can always use these:

Solar Powered - Windup AM/FM/TV/SW/ Weather Radio!

Updated with a new features!

Larger internal nickle metal hydride battery! (was 900mah NOW 1300mah!)

More efficient solar panel!

More powerful windup generator!

This is an ideal emergency radio that can operate from four different power sources! This economy receiver has a built-in windup dynamo generator and a built-in solar cell.

Conventional operation from three AA cells (not supplied) or external 4.5 VDC source is also supported.

This radio receives AM/FM/TV/VHF Police, Taxi, Business/Weather plus Shortwave!

FM: 88-108 Mhz

AM: 530-1700 Khs, AM Std

TV 1: Channel 2-6 TV Sound

TV 2: Channel 7-13 TV Sound

VHF: 145-175 Mhz, Taxi/Police bands/ Business radio

Weather Band: National Weather Service 162.4-162.55 Mhz

SW: 4-26 Mhz AM Foreign/Amateur

Other features include: Sony tuner, power LED, mono earphones and wrist strap. 7.25x4.5x2.25

Another 25 years of regulations and we may all be using these. I'd watch a lot less TV if I had to either stand outside in the sun for the solar panel to work, or turn the hand crank.

[bill1952]

>Plasma set to give of an amazing amount of heat,

Just think of winter heat!

[Thom Pain]

Watch Out!

Next they'll be restricting the amount of water a toilet can flush!

What? Oh. Nevermind.

[theBuckwheat]

Who gets to decide and on what basis do they reject a particular model?

These government officials are acting like electricity is free and consumers are costing the government too much, kinda like when the UK’s National Health Service decided that they must save money by only changing the sheets in hospitals once a week, or that they would send transplant organs on the inter-city bus where they previously were sent via urgent ambulance.

As it becomes more clear about just how little we really know about how the earth’s environment responds to increased solar radiation and increased CO2, these government officials (and those who cheer them on), seem oblivious to the cost to the economy and to the environment of prematurely forcing television and video displays to be removed from the market.

[PAR35]

Then ban tube TVs because of the lead they contain, and the whole country will be better off.

[Dick Vomer]

what gives the best picture for sports? I’m not interested in thinness only picture quality for motion, like football and tennis.

[CarrotAndStick]

I believe CRTs provide the most accurate colour and the fastest video response.

Check this:

Picture Quality:

CRT TVs may be bulky, but then you have one of the best pictures you can get from a video display device. The truth is that not even the latest top plasmas can rival conventional cathode ray tube displays for black depth and contrast, while nothing beats a high resolution flat-screen CRT display tube for picture clarity.

In particular, today’s true flat-screen high-resolution cathode ray tubes are capable of producing crisp, vibrant images of exceptional quality. In addition, the CRT TV is easy to set-up, and will work well in a variety of locations and light conditions.

This means that if your screen size requirements fall within the display size limitations of CRT TVs, and if picture quality is of prime importance, then a CRT television may still represent a suitable and ultimately, a more affordable solution than the latest expensive plasmas and LCD TVs.

---

In reality, the only real concern that matters to most when it comes to the deployment of a CRT TV in the home vis-à-vis other direct-view display technologies, is the fact that these are relatively bulky devices; a conventional 32” CRT TV may easily take some 24 inches in depth. But...

Things are changing fast. New cathode ray tube display technology has managed to get ride of several inches from the conventional bulky displays we are accustomed to, with the sole scope of challenging rival flat-panel TVs at their own most appealing characteristic - being thin.

http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/CRT-Tv.html

[3niner]

Maybe some idiot extrapolated the statistics of people upgrading from 21” CRTs to 50” LCDs.

I think you must have hit on the answer. There's no way that a 21" LCD draws more power than a 21" CRT.

[hinckley buzzard]

Australian Greenhouse Office spokesman...

I always thought Australia was going to be the escape route when the US succumbs to the leftwing disease. "Greenhouse Office?" When Oz falls to this level it is a bad sign. A very bad sign...

[CarrotAndStick]

If you want the advantages of CRT for a viewing area of over 50” you must splurge on one of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRT_projector

http://hometheater.about.com/cs/television/a/aavprojectora_2.htm

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

“The goverment has said it won’t be banned...”

You mean government really can be banned?

[PUGACHEV]

I dunno. My 50” Panasonic Plasma is way, way, better than any CRT I’ve ever owned, even better then the Sony Trinitron I used to use with my computer. The blacks are blacker, the colors more brilliant, the outlines and textures sharper, and the hues are more natural.

[Old Professer]

Nice thought...

[The Duke]

Nanny state regulation. Look forward to the same if Hillary is elected. It’s all about restricting choices to those approved by Big Brother (or Big Sister), the marketplace be damned.

And, let me guess...the manufacturers that put the right amounts in the right offshore accounts will be able to sell their products(?)

[Dick Vomer]

what about screen sizes greater than 50 inches for sports with movement?

[Phsstpok]

I’ve had four corneal transplants. I’m not a good first person source for reviews of the relative quality of HDTV screens, to say the least.

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit has done some linking to various HDTV ratings in the past and reviews of his own experiences. If you go to his site and do a search you may find some good info.  Here's a fairly good post from just a few days ago.

I’m partial as a techie to the LCD over the plasma because I’ve seen reports that plasma has a “half life” burn in type problem. LCDs either work or they don’t, usually only failing when the back lighting fails, which is supposed to be about 6 years from purchase. Right now there’s a transition going on where the fluorescent tube back lighting on LCDs is being replaced by white LEDs, which are expected to last about 100 years. I currently don’t have an HDTV (I use a 19” computer screen and USB connected tuner) but I’m waiting for the LED transition and another round of price cuts before I buy an LCD set.

[TrueKnightGalahad]

+1 to what CarrotAndStick says in post #28. CRT is still the standard for black levels and response time (a particularly important parameter when watching fast-moving sports). So CRT is your best bet if you can accomodate the depth and don’t want/need a large screen. Plasmas approach (but don’t yet surpass) CRTs for both black levels and response times. Virtually all other technologies flop on one or both of these parameters. So if you can use a 32” CRT, go for it. If you want a 40-50-60” screen, plasma’s the way to go.

[Thunder 6]

Luddites!

Regards,