Efficiency Gains Could Prove Proposed Plasma Ban Shortsighted

hihopes writes "As the EU calls for a ban on plasma TVs, a leading Harvey Norman executive said that the issue should be left to vendors, who at the recent CES Show in the USA showed an array of low-powered TV display screens."

Comments

Not banning plasmas.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Before everyone starts wetting themselves, calm down. While the frothing-at-the-mouth article states:

Despite several plasma vendors including Panasonic who are the worlds #1 manufacturer showing plasma power reductions of up to 40 percent, the European Union wants to ban the display technology.

The EU is not actually thinking about banning a particular technology, but:

The countries are close to agreeing upon new energy performance standards for TVs that large plasma displays will not meet. Plasma models typically use about 50 percent more energy than LCD models. The new standards, which will go into effect this spring, will pull the least efficient TVs from shelves and start a labeling system that ranks the efficiency of the remaining models.

Source. The new, more efficient Plasmas mentioned in TFA will presumably be fine under the legislation.

I now return you to your anti-EU anti-regulation frothing-at-the-mouth posts.

Re:Not banning plasmas.

[Eivind]

Energy-costs aren't high enough that it makes a difference to the end-consumer, in many cases.

Let's look at the maths for a fairly typical consumer wanting a new 50" TV, watching it for an average of 4 hours/day.

Alternative A: Plasma, $2000, 450W. Alternative B: LCD, $2500, 200W.

Now, 4 hours a day for a year is around 1450 hours, so A will consume around 650Kwh and B will consume around 290Kwh. The difference is 360Kwh, where I live this power will cost you about $40.

In -principle- he'll have saved back the 500 extra he paid for the TV in 12 years, assuming he keeps it that long...

But it just plain doesn't register in the wallet anyway. If we say he -does- keep the TV for 10 years, then the total bill for TV these 10 years looks something like this:

A: $2000 + $70(power)*10 + $40(cable)*120 = $7500

B: $2500 + $30(power)*10 + $40(cable)*120 = $7600

In this particular example, the plasma even ends up being the cheaper alternative. Even if plasma and lcd cost the same, the plasma would still cost only $400 more over the 10-year period, or put differently $3 more each monthh.

Re:Not banning plasmas.

[JasterBobaMereel]

They are not banning plasmas - they are banning very inefficient devices of all types, these tend to be some of the older designs of plasmas...

They are also forcing manufacturers to label new TV's showing how much energy they use so people have a choice ....

They would also prevent the sale of any new technology if it were very inefficient, but that is a good thing surely?

Looks all good to me .... another "EU bans xxxxx" which turns out a) they are not and b) it is a sensible decision....

EU does not ban, it informs people, pushes manufs.

[Moskit]

When energy efficiency comes into play, EU usually does not "ban" something, but it tries to inform people so they can make beter choice (=support "free market at play" argument). The second method is to establish some minimum/maximum value (such as for emissions from vehicles) to push manufacturers research better options. EU own wording is:

The energy demand in households accounts for 25% of the final energy needs in the EU. Electricity used for domestic appliances in households show the sharpest increase. Higher standards of living and comfort, multiple purchases of electric appliances and the growing need for air-conditioning are main reasons for this trend to prevail. Energy consumption by consumer electronics and new media as Internet is also steadily growing.

The response is to act in two complementary ways:
      * Energy Labelling of household appliances: Seen that the market of household appliances such as washing machines, dishwasher, oven, air-conditioning systems etc. are highly visible to the consumer, the intention is to increase consumer's awareness on the real energy use of household appliances through a liable and clear labelling in their sales points.
      * Minimum Efficiency Requirements: Compulsory minimum efficiency requirements will encourage producers of household appliances to improve the product design in view to lower the energy consumption at their use.

Electric appliances in EU are labelled according to their energy consumption. When you go to buy refrigerator or washer, you will find such standardized label on the device. Many people use these labels (or in effect device energy efficiency class) to choose better. Following page shows such label:
http://www.greenlabelspurchase.net/ha-eu-energy-labelling.html

Actual EU legislation is here:
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/demand/legislation/domestic_en.htm

Now, to put things in perspective: average electricity usage per year is 4000..16000kWh in US (source: Wikipedia), ~3000kWh in UK (source: electricity company), ~1600..2200kWH in PL (source: electricity company). In Poland this would calculate to 300-500USD (depending on exchange rate, which varies wildly).

According to studies done in Poland, TV is the fourth largest household electricity consumer. The first is refrigerator (33%), 2nd lighting and small appliances (25%), 3rd washing machine (10%). This assumes that you use gas for cooking.

Classic 21" TV (max ~55W) uses about 7-8% of energy consumed per year (in UK/US this might be much more), so you end up paying around 30-50USD per year just for TV electricity. Using large LCD (42", max ~200W) almost quadruples that number (yes, I know that depending on settings LCD might use less energy). Using Plasma (max ~400W) makes the situation even worse (yes, there are some optimization techniques claimed by manufacturers). You end up paying 4-7x as much for new TV as you used to.
Given these calculations it is clear that EU has started to do something about TV efficiency, as more and more people buy LCD/Plasma.

And computer? it's under 3%. Less than an electric kettle.