U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-19-2009, 04:52 PM
 
4,089 posts, read 4,599,846 times
Reputation: 1251

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoarfrost View Post
When I click on that link, I get "Calif. requires TVs to be more energy efficient".
Talk to Yahoo Maybe they read this thread. The first sentence of the article is the same, or did you miss that in your partisan rage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-19-2009, 05:02 PM
 
737 posts, read 1,007,928 times
Reputation: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkbatca View Post
I'm quoting one article about the ban: "For example, all new 42-inch television sets must use less than 183 watts by 2011 and less than 116 watts by 2013."

I'm quite sure that unless you're talking about netbooks or very old school computers, newer computers with Intel / AMD dualcore and beyond with any 3D hardware acceleration will consume more than the ban limits. That may not be the case only if they are idle.

Heck, some video cards consume more power than the limits! You'll say "well, how many computers with those cards are out there?" Precisely! How many >54" mega plasma TVs are sold? I would suspect not enough to warrant a ban.

BTW, 116 watts on a 42" TV will mean crappier looking pictures (way lower contrast) unless some technology miracle happens...
I wonder why my Tri Core AMD computer with 4 GB of Ram and a Blu-Ray drive can function with such a meager 220 watt PSU Looks like I better not order the new Quad Core AMD Processor which has a TDP that is 30 watts LESS than my Tri-Core . My computer no where near the 400 watts of some of those big plasma TVs! I guess according to you I need to buy a 800 watt PSU and a cutting edge graphic card so I can be cool... might as well buy two more optical drives to be cool

If you bothered to check out the editor reviews of some of those TVs the low wattage models were very competitive against the 500 watt beasts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 05:03 PM
 
4,570 posts, read 6,382,046 times
Reputation: 2522
I'm not sure many businesses would support the idea. It will not pass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 05:04 PM
 
4,089 posts, read 4,599,846 times
Reputation: 1251
Quote:
Originally Posted by CityPerson09 View Post
I wonder why my Tri Core AMD computer with 4 GB of Ram and a Blu-Ray drive can function with such a meager 220 watt PSU Looks like I better not order the new Quad Core AMD Processor which has a TDP that is 30 watts LESS than my Tri-Core . My computer no where near the 400 watts of some of those big plasma TVs! I guess according to you I need to buy a 800 watt PSU and a cutting edge graphic card so I can be cool

If you bothered to check out the editor reviews of some of those TVs the low wattage models were very competitive against the 500 watt beasts.

It's all fun and games until it costs you a buck.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Southeast
4,296 posts, read 6,119,010 times
Reputation: 1444
CRT computer monitors and televisions suck up way more power than LCD or plasma, yet they remain on store shelves. In the late 90s, the tree huggers were in a frenzy over the proliferation of computers; they were afraid that as more and more people purchased and used computers power consumption would be off the charts. However, the opposite happened. Power demand actually decreased, thanks to none other than the availability of plasma and LCD monitors. Seriously, if you want to help the environment, do not ban or cause price spikes in televisions that replace the CRT dinosaurs. Maybe California should have a "Cash for Clunkers: TV Edition" to get rid of power suckers and replace them with modern flat screens....

And for the record, most computers consume very little electricity compared to other appliances. The only exceptions are computers that constantly run at full processor capacity or those several thousand dollar gaming rigs with 1000+ watt power supplies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 05:08 PM
 
737 posts, read 1,007,928 times
Reputation: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOPATTA2D View Post
It's all fun and games until it costs you a buck.
It is, isn't it I keep the $ in my pocket every month by having lower electric bills! Energy efficient bulbs here, energy efficient computer there, turning off lights over there, etc.

$ in pocket, thank you very much
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 06:10 PM
 
9,972 posts, read 14,034,281 times
Reputation: 9193
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOPATTA2D View Post
From the linked article which most people didn't actually bother to read..

"Some televisions already meet the early standards imposed under the rule approved Wednesday. About three-quarters of the TVs — more than 1,050 models sold today comply with the 2011 California standards, and more than 300 comply with the 2013 standard, according to the Energy Commission."

So 75 percent of the models already meet the 2011 standard..not sure how this constitutes banning big-screen TVs.

With the size of the California market, manufacturers will be increasingly rushing out more higher-efficiency models to meet the 2013 standards. Eventually the California standard will be a national standard at some time in the distant future..and you won't even know the difference, except for a slight decrease in your electric bills.

Quote:
CRT computer monitors and televisions suck up way more power than LCD or plasma, yet they remain on store shelves.
Can you really still purchase CRT monitors these days? I haven't seen one for sale at a retailer in over 3 years..

Last edited by Deezus; 11-19-2009 at 06:42 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 06:17 PM
 
Location: Palm Springs, CA
26,499 posts, read 24,238,187 times
Reputation: 7677
A much more accurate headline - although not as exciting:

California approves new standards on energy-hungry TVs -- latimes.com

(I'm not blaming the OP for his headline. I know he didn't write it.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 09:57 PM
 
Location: In Transition
1,628 posts, read 1,552,589 times
Reputation: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by CityPerson09 View Post
I wonder why my Tri Core AMD computer with 4 GB of Ram and a Blu-Ray drive can function with such a meager 220 watt PSU Looks like I better not order the new Quad Core AMD Processor which has a TDP that is 30 watts LESS than my Tri-Core .
Um, there's nothing holding anyone back from getting an underpowered power supply. Furthermore, just because a power supply says 220 watt, it does NOT mean your computer is drawing 220 watts. It means you can draw 220 watts from that supply and it's guaranteed not to fail. In fact, many time people who complain about reliability issues find out their computer power supply is underpowered. But you knew this, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CityPerson09 View Post
My computer no where near the 400 watts of some of those big plasma TVs! I guess according to you I need to buy a 800 watt PSU and a cutting edge graphic card so I can be cool... might as well buy two more optical drives to be cool
The only true way to know how much power a computer is actually consuming is using a power meter. The ones which reliably measure RMS AC voltage are the more accurate ones. Did you do this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CityPerson09 View Post
If you bothered to check out the editor reviews of some of those TVs the low wattage models were very competitive against the 500 watt beasts.
The point I was trying to make is, if you read my whole message, is the 2013 limit of 116 watts is so ridiculously low, that most appliances, including many computers, will not meet it either. Certainly almost all current TVs of that size will NOT meet that limit without severe degradation of picture quality (unless some technological miracle occurs).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2009, 10:00 PM
 
Location: California
29,630 posts, read 31,948,941 times
Reputation: 24753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkbatca View Post
Um, there's nothing holding anyone back from getting an underpowered power supply. Furthermore, just because a power supply says 220 watt, it does NOT mean your computer is drawing 220 watts. It means you can draw 220 watts from that supply and it's guaranteed not to fail. In fact, many time people who complain about reliability issues find out their computer power supply is underpowered. But you knew this, right?



The only true way to know how much power a computer is actually consuming is using a power meter. The ones which reliably measure RMS AC voltage are the more accurate ones. Did you do this?



The point I was trying to make is, if you read my whole message, is the 2013 limit of 116 watts is so ridiculously low, that most appliances, including many computers, will not meet it either. Certainly almost all current TVs of that size will NOT meet that limit without severe degradation of picture quality (unless some technological miracle occurs).
I think working toward "some technological miracle", or at least a leap forward, is exactly what this sort of stuff is all about.

It doesn't always work, and it isn't always successful, but without incentive it won't even be attempted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top