| FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, November 19, 2009 |
Senator Feinstein Calls for National Energy Efficiency Standards for Televisions
-Television usage accounts for nearly 10 percent of household energy consumption-
Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has issued a call for national energy efficiency standards for televisions, one day after the California Energy Commission (CEC) approved a measure that will require televisions to reduce current energy consumption by one-third by 2011 and by one-half by 2013.
Television usage accounts for nearly 10 percent of all household energy consumption.
Yesterday, Senator Feinstein sent a letter urging Dr. Steven Chu, Secretary of the Department of Energy, to follow California’s lead by setting a rigorous national efficiency standard.
Below is the text of the letter sent by Senator Feinstein to Secretary Chu. Attached are the also the two charts referenced in the letter:
November 18, 2009
Secretary Steven Chu
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave., SW
Washington, DC 20585
Dear Secretary Chu,
I am writing to ask you to help reduce American household energy consumption by establishing national energy standards for televisions.
Televisions account for nearly 10% of energy consumption in American households, and their use of energy continues to rise. In recognition of this trend, the California Energy Commission (CEC) has today finalized standards for television energy efficiency. The standards require televisions to use one third less of current energy consumption by 2011 and half of current energy consumption by 2013.
The CEC anticipates that in California these standards will save 6,515 GWh (see first attached graph), enough to power 854,000 single-family homes for an entire year. Moreover, the CEC’s proposal has support from the environmental community, Vizio—one of the largest producers of flat panel televisions in America—and utility companies.
Increasing energy efficiency in American homes is one of the most cost effective ways to reduce energy consumption. The second attached graph from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy demonstrates that efficiency standards work. Energy consumption for appliances with standards has steadily decreased over the past few decades, while consumption for televisions has risen, especially in recent years.
Congress authorized the Department of Energy to set standards for household appliances through The Energy Policy Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA). To date standards have been set for every appliance listed in that Act except for televisions. While I appreciate successful programs such as Energy Star that have helped consumers choose better models, standards can ensure the improved efficiency of the worst performing models and reduce energy use.
California was the first state to enforce minimum efficiency requirements for refrigerators and other products in 1979. Given the success of these programs, I hope the Department will take a serious look at creating national standards for televisions which are as effective as California’s promising program.
Please feel free to contact me to discuss this important issue. I would appreciate hearing from you on this matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
!
"You'll take my Giant Screen TV from me when you pry the remote from my cold, dead hands, punk!!"
Can you believe this s**t?!?
1 comment:
Kris,
Senator Feinstein should think twice...
Governor Schwarzenegger is shooting himself in the foot!
This ban is wrong also in an overall energy savings perspective
that he presumably wants.
1. All energy efficiency regulations are 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"
However:
Inefficient products that use more energy can have performance,
appearance and construction advantages
Examples (using cars, buildings, dishwashers, TV sets, light bulbs etc):
http://ceolas.net/#cc211x
For example, big plasma TV screens have image contrast and other
advantages along with their large 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.
Conversely,
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
http://ceolas.net/#cc214x
Either way, supposed energy - or money - savings aren't there.
2. 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, 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.
----------------------
Why energy efficiency regulations are wrong,
whether you are for or against energy and emission conservation
http://ceolas.net/#cc2x
Summary
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 and other
electrical products
Post a Comment