What is Digg?287 Comments
- built2spill, on 10/14/2007, -8/+184Aren't CRTs much worse?
- inactive, on 10/16/2007, -1/+76Hand-crank plasma FTW.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -0/+65*** http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/11/2056 ... ***
Environment Minister rules out plasma 'ban'
Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull has ruled out banning plasma screen televisions.
A report commissioned by the Federal Government says there is a growing demand for plasma and LCD televisions, which use more power than traditional TV sets.
It says energy rating labels are needed to tell consumers about the performance of the TVs.
But under a proposed six-star rating system, most current plasma TVs do not meet the requirements and could be removed from sale.
But Mr Turnbull says the rating system would not mean the death of flat-screen TVs.
"Reports of the death of LCD and plasma TVs are grossly exaggerated - there is no plan to phase out or ban LCD or plasma TVs," he said.
"This is not a question of denying people choice, it's an objective of informing choice."
Buried as 'sensationalistic *****' - mcsurvey, on 10/14/2007, -0/+46Buried as inaccurate. Pioneer and most top-tier plasma OEM's already reach the new power standards.
- murraj2, on 10/11/2007, -6/+47From the article: If a revised Australian energy rating guide gets passed, then all current plasma televisions would be banned from sale by 2011. That's right, all plasmas and even many power-hungry LCDs would be taken off store shelves due to their high energy consumption.
They didn't make a law to ban Plasmas, it's just that all plasmas fall above the level for acceptable energy use. This ban would almost definitely cover all CRTs too. - tnoy, on 10/17/2007, -2/+41Microdisplay rear projector: 0.14 watt per square inch
LCD: 0.29 watt per square inch
Plasma: 0.34 watt per square inch
CRT: 0.34 watt per square inch
Source: CNET - tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -6/+40How about they spend the time and money it would take to implement such a ban on increasing the amount of clean(er) energy available? Invest in solar, wind, hydro (well, maybe not so much hydro), and nuclear power. I'm not sure where I read it, but I remember reading someone saying how the average person is only going to use more and more energy. Efficiency and clean energy are the solutions, not trying to stifle people.
- StealthMonkey, on 10/11/2007, -15/+49Not at all. Plasma TV's use FAR MORE.
Average plasma: 328 watts
Average rear-projection: 208 watts
Average LCD: 193 watts
Average CRT: 146 watts
Source: CNET - mustang460, on 10/11/2007, -26/+55this is why i hate government intervention once you take baby steps and ban incandescent lights(it would be better to simply educate people how they can save both money and the environment)something you can kinda agree with they just keep taking it up a notch
- nblsavage, on 10/11/2007, -6/+32yes...very much so. I really don't understand their thnking.
- TannerC, on 10/11/2007, -10/+34Great, more for me.
- heartcoldfusion, on 10/11/2007, -2/+23It means once you open the proverbial floodgates, you can't close them.
Once Pandora's box is open, you can't close it.
You give an inch, they take a yard. - hambend, on 10/11/2007, -5/+25What makes you think you can educate Australians?
/New Zealander, had to say it. - mustang03282, on 10/11/2007, -4/+24there is nothing good on tv there anyway they get all there shows off torrent sites
- PFinn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21the mental image of this is just hilarious to me..... "*****, the plasma turned off again, someone go crank it quickly before i get killed" /while in the middle of an online Halo 3 match
- Theisos, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20FTA: "...all plasmas and even many power-hungry LCDs would be taken off store shelves due to their high energy consumption." and "...here's to hoping that the manufacturers hear the energy-conscious cry of Australia, and produce some more energy-efficient TVs." So we're talking about TVs that are not energy efficient. This has nothing to do with with the type of display - it has more to do with whether or not the display is energy friendly. The same ban would apply to CRT TVs which have screen sizes as big as a truck and require a nuclear reactor to be powered.
- niczar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18The average train uses more energy than the average hummer. Duh.
- CannedMango, on 10/11/2007, -6/+22This could turn out to be a good thing. If enough countries passed this law, you would see technology emerge for low-power LCD televisions.
- Larke2000, on 10/11/2007, -11/+24Crikey!!!
(sorry, but somebody had to say it) - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15By 2011? I doubt anyone has $50,000 to fork over for a HDOLEDTV after the 60% income tax there.
- tnoy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15All current plasma and LCD TVs are not going to be on the market in 2011 anyways. The industry as a whole is shifting twards lower power consumption, too. I don't see this as that big of a deal.
- rohanch, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14How do these averages work though?
I guess the "average" CRT is around 22" or something, average LCD around 32", if you're only talking about TVs. I'm pretty sure a 32" CRT uses more power than a 32" LCD. - hmunkey, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15I hate to post up here unrelatedly, but this article is inaccurate. Read it before commenting please.
"If a revised Australian energy rating guide gets passed, then all current plasma televisions would be banned from sale by 2011. That's right, all plasmas and even many power-hungry LCDs would be taken off store shelves due to their high energy consumption."
As user Murraj2 put it: They didn't make a law to ban Plasmas, it's just that all plasmas fall above the level for acceptable energy use. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16Go back home and stop mooching off our welfare system.
/Australian, had to say it. - Sheco, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16Average plasma: 328 miles
Average rear-projection: 208 megabytes
Average LCD: 193 kilograms
Average CRT: 146 km/hour - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13I guess we should have just educated people about lead paint and leaded gasoline too.
Seriously...sttop pretending like this isn't done all the time. - skews13, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12now if they can just figure out a way to ban rupert murdoch.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Well if you'd seen the content w have its like they've done that already.
All we get is crappy US reality shows and ***** brainless crap designed to numb us into a state of perpetual lethergy and buy more crap we don't actually want or need.
(Hmm, same as US TV by the sound of it). - shark615, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13You do realize that most cars were electric before the advent of accesible, cheap gasoline.
Right? - Lewie, on 10/11/2007, -24/+33Average plasma: 328 watts
Average rear-projection: 208 watts
Average LCD: 193 watts
Average CRT: 146 watts
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-2.html - dinostabOMG, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10I don't see why everyone should allow you to consume as much as you can afford to if it means destroying OUR planet.
- TheColonel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Yeah, but how many *CURRENT* plasmas will still be on the market in 2011? They're not planning on banning owning them.. just the sale of .. 4 years down the road the average plasma on the shelf in the shops will be a lot more energy efficient than today..
- tnoy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9You're one of the very few people that have read more than the headline.
- mrsteveman1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7And how often is your screen strictly black? I know the majority of time my HDTV sits either off or running on a channel which is black almost never.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Nuclear Power FTW
- j0hnn0r, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Buried, as innacurate, sensationalist crap. Saw this on ABC here in Aus, and nowhere has a 'total' ban been mentioned, at most, they only want to phase out some old or really massive models.
- zweben, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Yep. If this is actually enforced and lasts, the manufactures who decide to remain in the market will probably cut power consumption by reducing the display brightness and/or size significantly.
Banning things that use a lot of energy is the worst thing that could be done to cut energy use. They need to reward (and assist) conservation instead of punishing waste. - Avor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7And surely the threat of oil reserves running low for the past 20 years played no major role.
- StarlessKnight, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Your idea is intelligent and therefore banned, never to be heard by intelligent politicians. The electric company lobbyists will be paying you a visit shortly.
- Gizza, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6The Australian / New Zealand relationship I think is a lot like the US / Canada relationship.
- deckard1, on 10/13/2007, -0/+6Saying 30 Watts per day doesn't make sense. I think you mean 30 Watts.
- Rahodeb, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11...slippery slope
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope - inactive, on 10/13/2007, -0/+6Did you even read the article?
Yeah, I thought not.
Don't make comments based totally off the article title!. - kaelyiesta, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6So they are really banning larger screens but in a sneaky roundabout political way. Sounds about right. Yay politics.
- davidrools, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6tidal energy might be a good solution for the aussies too.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8It's not like you need a 240v, 60a connection to run these things. Maybe ban spas and whirlpools, instead. They waste water, have the potential to introduce chemicals into the water table, and use up more juice than Barry Bonds during his record setting year...
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Yeah, but I noticed that the lead free paint just doesn't taste as yummy.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6OLED TV's will be out by then.
- KeelBug, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Gizmodo need to get their facts straight. Buried.
- IllBeBack, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8"Flight of the Conchords" RULES!
/Fan of the show and New Zealand, had to say it. -
Show 51 - 100 of 282 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is