If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now

Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency

Sony flat screen tvFollowing California’s decision earlier this week to require elevated energy efficiency standards for TVs, the Canadian province of Ontario is considering a similar move.

On Nov. 18, California became the first state in the country to institute its own standards on energy efficiency of televisions sold within its borders. New TVs sold there must show reduced electricity consumption of 33 percent by 2011 and 49 percent by 2013, reports the San Jose Mercury News.

Considering California’s status as a bellwether state, some pundits expect other states and possibly even the federal government to follow suit. Already, the EPA has unveiled new standards for TVs to attain Energy Star status.

Just days after California’s big announcement, Ontario is considering tougher rules on energy efficiency for flat-screen TVs, reports The Star.

A New Democratic Party official hailed the tougher rules as overdue.

Real-Time Data as a Foundation to Drive Sustainability Performance
Sponsored By: Sphera Solutions

OSHA ITA Cheat Sheet
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

Waste and Climate: Reducing Your Footprint
Sponsored By: Covanta Environmental Solutions

Stormwater Management Programs: How to Integrate New Technologies to Improve Processes and Operations
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS


2 thoughts on “Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency

  1. Governor Schwarzenegger is shooting himself in the foot!

    1. Taxation, while still wrong, is better than bans for all concerned.
    TV set taxation based on energy efficiency – unlike bans – gives
    Governor Schwarzenegger’s impoverished California Government income on
    the reduced sales, while consumers keep choice.
    This also applies generally,
    to CARS (with emission tax or gas tax), BUILDINGS, DISHWASHERS, LIGHT BULBS etc,
    where politicians instead keep trying to define what people can or can’t use.
    Politicians can use the tax money raised to fund home insulation
    schemes, renewable projects etc that lower energy use and emissions
    more than remaining product use raises them.
    Energy efficient products can have any sales taxes lowered, making
    them cheaper than today.
    People are not just hit by taxes, they don’t have to buy the higher
    taxed products – and at least they CAN still buy them.

    2. Product regulation, bans or taxation, are however unwarranted:
    Where there is a problem – deal with the problem!

    Energy: there is no energy shortage
    (given renewable/nuclear development possibilities, with set emission limits)
    and consumers – not politicians – pay for energy and how they wish to use it.

    It might sound great to
    “Let everyone save money by only allowing energy efficient products”
    Inefficient products that use more energy can have performance,
    appearance and construction advantages
    Examples (using cars, buildings, dishwashers, TV sets, light bulbs etc):
    For example, big plasma TV screens have image contrast and other
    advantages along with the bigger image sizes.

    Products using more energy usually cost less, or they’d be more energy
    efficient already.
    Depending on how much they are used, there might therefore not be any
    running cost savings either.

    Other factors contribute to a lack of savings:

    If households use less energy,
    then utility companies make less money,
    and will just raise electricity prices to cover their costs.
    So people don’t save as much money as they thought.

    energy efficiency in effect means cheaper energy,
    so people just leave TV sets etc on more, knowing that energy bills are lower,
    as also shown by Scottish and Cambridge research

    Either way, supposed energy – or money – savings aren’t there.

    Why energy efficiency regulations are wrong,
    whether you are for or against energy and emission conservation
    Politicians don’t object to energy efficiency as it sounds too good to
    be true. It is.
    –The Consumer Side
    Product Performance — Construction and Appearance
    Price Increase — Lack of Actual Savings: Money, Energy or Emissions.
    Choice and Quality affected
    — The Manufacturer Side
    Meeting Consumer Demand — Green Technology — Green Marketing
    –The Energy Side
    Energy Supply — Energy Security — Cars and Oil Dependence
    –The Emission Side
    Buildings — Industry — Power Stations — Light Bulbs

Leave a Comment

Translate »