High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition News & Informative Articles Get the Latest High Definition News & Informative Articles Here! Please post newsworthy information here only! This forum is NOT for your first post. Thank you!

California mulls big screen TV ban, could others follow suit?

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-30-2009, 05:58 PM   #16  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 526
Default

How can anyone stand to live in the miserable state?
firsTraveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2009, 09:02 AM   #17  
HD Elitist
 
hatt's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FL
Age: 44
Posts: 6,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by firsTraveler View Post
How can anyone stand to live in the miserable state?
Some can't.

Quote:
For the fourth year in a row, more residents left the Golden State than moved here from other states, according to a report released Wednesday by the California Department of Finance.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,2777902.story
hatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2009, 10:42 AM   #18  
SD HURTS MY EYES
 
Stew4HD's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tejas Baby
Posts: 9,989
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SOBAY310 View Post
Yeah, I contemplated moving the family out to Sugar Land. But I just didn't think we could adjust to the heat in the summer time.

It's still a thought in the back of my mind though. I love where I live, but the cost to live here may not be the most beneficial thing for us in the long run if we can't save any money.

I've lived here all my life though.
I grew up in SoCal and now live in Sugar Land. I miss the scenery and moderate temps of Cal but not the pollution, population and high prices!

It can be unbearable hot here but housing is affordable
Stew4HD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2009, 10:48 AM   #19  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Dnsks's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohninTenn View Post
I would give that as much credence as I would a gun ban.
Let me clarify this. I mean if they pass a gun ban I would not care and anyone else can kiss my rear..
Who would want to kiss that lard bag...wait, your in Cali...oh.
Dnsks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2009, 05:18 PM   #20  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,311
Default

Even though some fools rejoice at the high power consumption of plasma television sets, and say on God no don't let the horrible government dare regulate energy guzzlers, we still have to realize that even the threat of such regulation does have some benefits for the future.

Anyone who has followed the eHDMI posts has seen that some LCD TV manufacturers are getting it, as they are figuring out ways to reduce power consumption while reducing screen thickness. Tell me again why this does not benefit the consumer?

And if that threat does spur plasma TV makers to reduce power consumption while increasing quality, tell me again how many some of you fools enjoy watching a Plasma TV that kites your electric bill when you could have equal quality with a lower electric bill?
NonMcTubber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2009, 05:32 PM   #21  
Administrator
 
rbinck's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 16,976
Default

Who are the fools?
rbinck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2009, 05:39 PM   #22  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbinck View Post
Who are the fools?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe a good question rbinck, but it sounds somewhat similar to the old Ralph Nader auto safety debate. If nothing else, cars today are far safer and accidents are far more survivable today.

Why should we not ask the Plasma TV makers to innovate and create better technology with lower energy consumption. The fool is they that assume we can't do both.
NonMcTubber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2009, 09:55 PM   #23  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

This has been debated to death in the past.

If one looks at the published power consumption figures, one will find that there are LCD's that draw as much or more power than many Plasmas and that the typical power consumption of a Plasma display is much less on average than what the specs indicate, as the specs are sloppy (there is no standard "average power consumption" test criteria, so the manufacturers just put down their own estimate, as it didn't really matter in the past as long as the display didn't exceed the figure they listed).

Power consumption of a PDP is relative to the imagery on the screen--in primarily dark scenes, a PDP can use much less power than an LCD of the same size, as the backlight on most LCD's is on at full brightness all of the time.

In terms of cost, even some of the least efficient Plasma displays would add only a few dollars per month to most people's electric bills-- a cost that could easily be recovered by just swapping out a few heavily used incandescent light bulbs in the house with CCFL's.

It's certainly not fair to single out Plasma displays when all non-projection displays consume more power as the screen increases in size and PDP's, on average, tend to be larger than LCD's.

If they are going to do something like this, they should set a maximum figure for watts-per-diagonal inch, so it will weed out the least efficient displays regardless of size or display technology.

I just don't see how they rationalize making big-screen TV's the target from an energy usage standpoint--on average, the larger a refrigerator I buy, the more energy it uses; the larger a house I buy, the more energy it uses; the faster my computer, the more power it uses; the louder my stereo, the more power it uses; the quicker my hairdryer works, the more power it uses. What's so special about big screen TV's, other than some people can afford them and some can't?
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 10:30 AM   #24  
mmmmm High Def
 
soupnazi's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,152
Default

Boby has made some really good points.
If you look at the big picture, no pun intended, the people that are using the most power are the ones that can afford the products that use the most power.

When an authority uses the word "ban" it is called fascism.
I think there may be other ways to fix this problem. Maybe luxury taxes on more products. This doesn't mean the money from these taxes are going to fix enviromental issues but it might deter the sale of more enegy guzzling products. I know everyone wants the finest but it is costing the enviroment.
soupnazi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 05:34 PM   #25  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

Considering the social, political, infrastructure and environmental costs associated with energy usage, I would have no problem if there was an "energy guzzler" tax on inefficient electronic/electric products, much like a "gas guzzler" tax on vehicles, to encourage the development and purchase of more efficient products. But all taxes like this are really scams to get the government more money at the expense of the citizens. I consider incentives to do the desired thing, rather than punishments for doing something else, a better solution.

I despise the idea of a "luxury tax". What's a luxury? Who gets to decide? Anything that isn't food, shelter or clothing is a luxury, so probably around 90% of things we buy in this country are luxuries (that's one of the reasons our economy can be fragile--we're far too dependent on consumer's buying things they want, not things they need, and when things get scary, people stop buying a lot of things they don't need).

But the Socialists in our government like to play the class war by picking on things that only wealthy people can afford. So we see things like a luxury tax on yachts--which almost destroys the yacht-building industry and costs thousands of people their jobs (early 90's http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/21/ny...oat-sales.html ).

Or we see a luxury tax on cars that penalizes car companies for developing new safety and environmental technologies, when then try to recoup some of their investment by putting those technologies in their more expensive cars that can bear the cost adder.

As long as companies or individuals can buy, sell or trade carbon credits, the "re-distribution of the world's wealth" plan masquerading as environmental policy is another good example.

Last edited by BobY; 04-02-2009 at 09:28 PM..
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 06:18 PM   #26  
Yorktown, VA
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobY View Post
Power consumption of a PDP is relative to the imagery on the screen--in primarily dark scenes, a PDP can use much less power than an LCD of the same size, as the backlight on most LCD's is on at full brightness all of the time.
What is the source for your claim that "a PDP can use much less power than an LCD of the same size"? I looked and can not find anything to support it.

"many flat LCDs actually have adjustable backlights that you can turn down to consume less power and produce a dimmer image, while some newer LCDs, including ones that use LED backlights, can be set to dynamically adjust the backlight intensity and use less power in dim scenes." http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-2.html

"Because LCD uses a backlight system and closes pixels off to produce darkness, the power consumption of an LCD HDTV is constant whether the image is bright or dark. Plasma panels produce more brightness by pumping more energy into each cell or pixel that needs to be brightened, and it turns down the power to cells that need to be darkened. As a result, plasma power consumption varies with the brightness of the picture. For most content people tend to watch Plasma HDTVs tend to use more power. It is true that plasmas are likely to use less power displaying dark scenes, or movies that are dark in general, but averaged out; plasmas do tend to use more power. "

"One new feature in the latest HDTV report is energy consumption. CR’s engineers determined the amount of energy used by typical LCD, plasma, and rear-projection TVs turned on for 8 hours a day, 365 days a year. Most sets didn’t use significantly more energy than a 32- to 36-inch picture tube TV. One exception was 50-inch 1080p plasmas, which used twice-as-much energy as the biggest picture-tube set, and more than a comparably-sized LCD. Not surprisingly, bigger screens of all types consume more electricity than smaller ones." http://www.contactomagazine.com/arti...prices0208.htm

I agree with your bottom line, BTW
Quote:
I just don't see how they rationalize making big-screen TV's the target from an energy usage standpoint--

Last edited by nmlobo; 04-02-2009 at 06:21 PM..
nmlobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 09:25 PM   #27  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmlobo View Post
What is the source for your claim that "a PDP can use much less power than an LCD of the same size"? I looked and can not find anything to support it.
We've discussed it often over the years here, you can search the threads out, but here is a recent discussion:

http://www.highdefforum.com/high-def...ed-europe.html

and here is the link in that thread to some data:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-...content;rb_mtx

The data shows a number of LCD's that draw more power on an absolute basis than a number of Plasmas and the Watts-per-Square-Inch is all over the place--you'll see many LCD's with "poor" scores per size and many Plasmas with "good" scores per size. While on average LCD's are better, there are far too many "poor" LCD's (per size) and far too many "average" and "good" Plasmas (per size) for anyone to say it's a slam-dunk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmlobo View Post
"many flat LCDs actually have adjustable backlights that you can turn down to consume less power and produce a dimmer image, while some newer LCDs, including ones that use LED backlights, can be set to dynamically adjust the backlight intensity and use less power in dim scenes."

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-2.html
But if owners leave the backlight all the way up, what difference does it make? Those with Plasma displays can turn the brightness down also, so that really doesn't affect the debate.

Selective backlights are a good way to reduce LCD power consumption, but few LCD's have them (particularly in the price range that most people are buying) and none of them have an LED-per-pixel, so there is efficiency loss there as well.

Part of the issue we had with some of C-Nets results is they intentionally left the displays in factory default "torch" mode for their tests, assuming that owner's would do the same, but that doesn't really tell you what the power consumption would be if the user decides his display is using too much electricity and wants to cut down.

If I set my thermostat to 72 degrees in the winter, it uses a lot more energy than if I set it to 68 degrees, so I don't set it to 72. If I didn't care about wasting energy, I would be more comfortable at 72--it's up to the user to set things the way they want if they are concerned about energy usage or their electric bill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmlobo View Post
"Because LCD uses a backlight system and closes pixels off to produce darkness, the power consumption of an LCD HDTV is constant whether the image is bright or dark. Plasma panels produce more brightness by pumping more energy into each cell or pixel that needs to be brightened, and it turns down the power to cells that need to be darkened. As a result, plasma power consumption varies with the brightness of the picture. For most content people tend to watch Plasma HDTVs tend to use more power. It is true that plasmas are likely to use less power displaying dark scenes, or movies that are dark in general, but averaged out; plasmas do tend to use more power. "
That's pretty much what I said and it's true. Why should something be banned based on being "averaged out"? If they want to beat up on something, beat up on specific products that are inefficient relative to comparable products, regardless of the technology or size.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmlobo View Post
"One new feature in the latest HDTV report is energy consumption. CRís engineers determined the amount of energy used by typical LCD, plasma, and rear-projection TVs turned on for 8 hours a day, 365 days a year. Most sets didnít use significantly more energy than a 32- to 36-inch picture tube TV. One exception was 50-inch 1080p plasmas, which used twice-as-much energy as the biggest picture-tube set, and more than a comparably-sized LCD. Not surprisingly, bigger screens of all types consume more electricity than smaller ones." http://www.contactomagazine.com/arti...prices0208.htm
Well, 50" Plasma displays are much bigger than the biggest "picture-tube set", so the real question is power-usage-per-square-inch. Mid-size cars use more gas than subcompacts. Should we ban mid-size cars?

The article doesn't say what "comparably-sized" LCD's draw, only that Plasma draws more, so it's an unfair comparison. C-Net's comparisons indicate that even some of the least efficient Plasmas would cost less than $10/Month more than a comparably sized LCD and that's assuming torch mode at 8 hours/day, 365 days/year, so the real-world difference would be less and could easily be compensated for in other ways.
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


to California mulls big screen TV ban, could others follow suit?
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Big Screen and High Def Score With Super Bowl Fans Cass High Definition News & Informative Articles 0 01-14-2005 11:33 PM
Big Screen Wishes To All ! miamivice55 The High Definition Lounge 0 12-24-2004 01:45 PM
DVD to show off your Big Screen TV? SirCharls High Definition Movies & Video Clips 2 12-05-2004 01:15 AM
Big Screen Digital(TM) Announces Plan to Develop the Largest Independent High Definit Cass High Definition News & Informative Articles 0 10-05-2004 10:52 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:57 AM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands