"..wipes all the benefit from energy efficiency saving in other improving whitegoods around the house in one single purchase."
That's a big generalisation that would often be completely incorrect. Depends on how efficient your plasma is, how big it is, how much you watch TV, and how much potential for energy efficiency there was in other parts of the house.
If you had an efficient 42" plasma (200Watts when on, 1W in standby) and only watched 1.5 hours a day on average, then you would use about 120kWh a year. The average Australian house uses about 7,000-10,000 kWh a year in total, so using a plasma like this doesn't make much difference at all.
Maybe if you had a 50+" plasma (averaging 450 Watts when on), and watched 6 hours a day your line might be true Luke (you'd use about 1000kWh a year on your TV then).
The interesting thing about plasmas (that many of really do crave coz they do look good) is that in one purchase it wipes all the benefit from energy efficiency saving in other improving whitegoods around the house in one single purchase.
I think this is a case of the press releases and news articles blowing the facts out of proportion.
What they are thinking of doing is setting a minimum energy performance standard for televisions. This is already done for most other large appliances, such as fridges, washing machines, aircon etc.
There is a huge variation in the energy efficiency of televisions, which is especially pronounced across plasma TVs, which tend to be higher energy consumers THROUGH VIRTUE OF BEING MUCH LARGER typically than conventional TVs.
Setting a minimum standard will mean that the worst performing TVs will become obsolete (which they would have done anyway over time). It ensures that all NEW plasma TV designs for sale in Australia will meet minimum energy performance standards, which the TV manufacturers are certainly capable of doing.
So nobody is trying to ban plasma TVs, they are just being required to be more energy efficient.
TAke note of this: just as there is apparently climate alarmism in the press, there is also conspicuous indignation and exaggeration of what can or is being done to mitigate global warming.
For all you people in Australia who want to save the Earth by getting rid of your plasma televisions, the people in the U.S. will be glad to take them off of your hands. I heard a comment from the left's favorite enemy, Ann Coulter, yesterday in which she said, "Only liberals think that they can reduce the temperature of the Earth by buying flourescent bulbs."
"..wipes all the benefit from energy efficiency saving in other improving whitegoods around the house in one single purchase."
That's a big generalisation that would often be completely incorrect. Depends on how efficient your plasma is, how big it is, how much you watch TV, and how much potential for energy efficiency there was in other parts of the house.
If you had an efficient 42" plasma (200Watts when on, 1W in standby) and only watched 1.5 hours a day on average, then you would use about 120kWh a year. The average Australian house uses about 7,000-10,000 kWh a year in total, so using a plasma like this doesn't make much difference at all.
Maybe if you had a 50+" plasma (averaging 450 Watts when on), and watched 6 hours a day your line might be true Luke (you'd use about 1000kWh a year on your TV then).
Got to be careful of these rules of thumb.
"Anne Coulter is a raving lunatic."
Then she should be in with a good chance of winning the Nobel Peace Prize 2008!
Anne Coulter is a raving lunatic.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larisa-alexandrovna/ann-coulter-thinks-that-j_b_67969.html
" COULTER: No, we think -- we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say."
The one that suits your needs with an eye on best power consumption.
What type of TV should we buy?
The interesting thing about plasmas (that many of really do crave coz they do look good) is that in one purchase it wipes all the benefit from energy efficiency saving in other improving whitegoods around the house in one single purchase.
I think this is a case of the press releases and news articles blowing the facts out of proportion.
What they are thinking of doing is setting a minimum energy performance standard for televisions. This is already done for most other large appliances, such as fridges, washing machines, aircon etc.
There is a huge variation in the energy efficiency of televisions, which is especially pronounced across plasma TVs, which tend to be higher energy consumers THROUGH VIRTUE OF BEING MUCH LARGER typically than conventional TVs.
Setting a minimum standard will mean that the worst performing TVs will become obsolete (which they would have done anyway over time). It ensures that all NEW plasma TV designs for sale in Australia will meet minimum energy performance standards, which the TV manufacturers are certainly capable of doing.
So nobody is trying to ban plasma TVs, they are just being required to be more energy efficient.
Can read the discussion paper here:
http://www.energyrating.gov.au/library/details200710-tv-meps-labelling.html
TAke note of this: just as there is apparently climate alarmism in the press, there is also conspicuous indignation and exaggeration of what can or is being done to mitigate global warming.
Next they'll be recommending the old wind-up gramaphones as earth friendly family entertainment...
For all you people in Australia who want to save the Earth by getting rid of your plasma televisions, the people in the U.S. will be glad to take them off of your hands. I heard a comment from the left's favorite enemy, Ann Coulter, yesterday in which she said, "Only liberals think that they can reduce the temperature of the Earth by buying flourescent bulbs."
Should help to increase sales in plasmas before 2008