Energy Star 4.0 goes into effect for HDTVs, puts 'em on a diet
By Tim Stevens 
posted May 4th 2010 9:56AM
posted May 4th 2010 9:56AM
Your next Energy Star-approved HDTV? Chances are it'll be a little greener than your last one, thanks to the new 4.0 ratings going into effect. These drastically reduce allowable consumption for displays, offering on average a 40 percent improvement in efficiency compared to 3.0 models, meaning a 50-inch set can consume, at most, 153 watts (compared to 318 in the 3.0 world). Beyond that, a display that has been turned "off" can consume no more than one solitary watt whilst waiting for your next command. All sets produced as of May 1 must meet these new regulations to earn that prestigious blue badge, and then in 2012 the 5.0 rules come into effect, dropping maximum consumption by roughly another 40 percent -- good news for those who love the planet as much as they love watching Nature on peripheral vision-filling display.
This probably quite ignorant, but I wish that the world would spend it's time trying to increase green electricity production and stop trying to cut down on a few watts.
@jamo23 those few watts quickly add up when there are MILLIONS of TVs out there....both need to be done, so yea do the improvement of Green Energy Tech but ALSO make the things that use the energy more efficient as well...
@jamo23 Traditionally, most of the world's watts are spent on lighting and indoor climate control. But, standby electronics and computers have become a significant portion of consumption.
@jamo23
These ratings are a joke anyway. Who is in the market for a gas powered alarm clock?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361974,00.asp
@ddicted
Just because someone is able to skirt the rules, don't make the rules a joke. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
@nrb
Any system that grants certificates based on just what the manufacturer sends you is a joke...
Same goes for the "CE" sign in Europe - "the manufacturer agrees to obey certain standards" - never ever tests it...
Lead paint? Why not.... you don't need to tell anybody...
(Which is why Germany protested when the EU suggested having just the French CE... the German GS is an actual test :))
But back to the "Energy Star" - as long as they don't withdraw all certificates and test the devices its as useful as a manufacturer stamp saying "were more efficient" (than out first product 40 years ago was)
@jamo23 Both should be done. And I'm glad a lot of emphasis was put onto mobile to make chips efficient. Like that architectures are done right instead of just going for power and ignoring watt usage.
@nrb
Whatever makes you sleep better at night. The reality is instead of companies spending their own dime on advertising the energy efficiency of their products, we have a government agency spending millions of tax dollars that at the end of the day does not do a damn thing other than issue stickers to any company that requests them.
Wow
But plasma is so pretty!
Pretty soon the HDTV is going to be able to power your a/c unit in the event of a blackout... while you watch avatar in 3D.
We need an Engadget Green for posts like these...
@Stevenk GreEngadget.com?
About time, my LCD has a 3 stick power cable, like a microwave. And i noticed that since i got it my electricity bill increased even thou my bro moved out. Think about it, additional person less and the bill still increased.
@Sea Urchin The extra "stick" doesn't bring more juice.
In fact, it doesn't do anything that the neutral "stick" doesn't do. It was only implemented because electricians kept screwing up on how they wired the outlets.
@Sea Urchin
lol at 3 stick
nice....by the time I buy a new TV it should be 4.0 compliant....
The question is will any future plasma sets be able to meet the new requirements?
There are LED back-lit models of LCD displays that meet the new regulations already, but My 1 year old 50 Samsung plasma allows me to not turn the heat on in my living room in winter, so I have to wonder if plasma will be able to keep up.
Or will the remaining plasma manufacturers simply forget about seeking energystar compliance as it is merely a guideline and not a legal requirement like CAFE for automobiles
@KC
I doubt any new plasmas meet these requirements. Hell even my old 42" eats up close to 300w max. But I wonder if these are max power limits or average. Plasmas don't eat up close to max on an average basis.
@KC Samsung has been boasting that their 2010 plasmas are energy star 4.0 compliant since the beginning of the year. It was in an engadget article a while back.
It is always nice to see something move towards the reduction of my electricity bill.
I'll have to wait on the purchase of a new HDTV set. I'm spending my money on an Energy Star certified gasoline-powered alarm clock.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/29/gasoline-powered-alarm-clock-catches-energy-star-off-guard/
About time they updated Engergy Star for TV's. You walk down the entire row of TV's at Best Buy and there isn't one that meets their old standards. I'm glad they are pushing the manufacturers to do better.
I actually thought "compared to 318 in the 3.0 world" would be a very crude reference to third world countries the first time i read it.
Didn't energy star get in trouble because manufactures were bribing them, I don't really trust them.
By Grabthar's hammer....
what a savings!
Not bad, the only way the manufacturers are going to improve energy efficiency is if you force them to.
"offering on average a 40 percent improvement in efficiency compared to 3.0 models, meaning a 50-inch set can consume, at most, 153 watts (compared to 318 in the 3.0 world)"
Dropping from 318 watts to 153 watts is about a 52% improvement.
@FitFan
"ON AVERAGE"
Meaning that other size TVs will have more or less of an improvement.
@Hazdaz
Yeah, I undertstand the concept of average. But the post stated that the average 40 percent reduction means "... a 50-inch set can consume, at most, 153 watts", when in fact it doesn't tell us that at all. A 40 percent average reduction tells us nothing about a specific size.
You don't get something for nothing. Reduce power means dimmer displays, increased latency, etc. Where is my choice?? I should be able to choose between a poor performing, super efficient unit or bigger, brighter unit with crisp and peppy 240Hz refresh. Maybe I'll decide to use the better performing set less, maybe not. I end up paying for it either way. I just want government to stop mandating every aspect of my life.
@gwhiz first, this isn't banning any more power-hungry displays. you'll still be able to buy them, they just won't have this sticker to display. on the other hand, displays without this sticker probably sell less than those with it, so manufacturers might start to discontinue producing more power-hungry displays.
"Reduce power means dimmer displays"
not necessarily. and LED display can be brighter than CCFL while using less power, for example. yes, some manufacturers may decrease brightness in some models to meet this requirement, but a more efficient design and better technology can negate the need for that.
@gwhiz
This isn't a government mandate. This is a certifications process, like THX. There's no mandate that says every TV sold must meet Energy Star; this is simply Energy Star saying if you want to put our shiny sticker on your TV, this is what you have to do.
@John H
Unfortunately, here in the Peoples Socialist Republic of Kaleefornya, we do have government imposed restrictions (starting in 8 months) on television power usage on sets under 58".
@gwhiz
Well, it's pretty hard to tackle climate change without putting power use restrictions on things. Actually, lower power doesn't make the systems any worse - for example, you could have a faster switching LCD by making the LCD layer thinner, for example. There's lots of room for companies to innovate within the power limits.
@gwhiz Keep your filthy communist hands off my TV, Barack HUSSEIN Obama! Palin/Beck 2010!
@gwhiz
Cry me a river.
:rolleyes:
Maybe if dillholes didn't take our natural resources for granted we wouldn't need programs like EnergyStar - and even then it's a CERTIFICATE program, not a mandate.
Companies have been doing a great job at improving their energy efficiency since the program started almost 20 years ago. But I am sure even back then, there were idiots that were running around with their heads cut off screaming that the sky was falling. Instead smart companies invested in research and engineering to improve their products and not say that it can't be done.
@gwhiz Except in this case you will because LED technology is advancing. The efficacy (lumens/watt) for LEDs has increased from 1 around 12 years ago to ~150 today (and 200 in the lab). We'll see 200 commercially in the next 6-9 months, maybe a year, and the future should bring us 250 to 300 lm/W.
If the lighting technology levels were stagnant, your comment would be true - just in this case it's not.
@gwhiz reduced power does not necessarily mean dimmer displays.
Modern plasmas are more efficient than those for a few years ago simply from improvements to the luminous efficiency as well as from functionality that determines optimal output based on ambient conditions.
LED displays consume less power than CFL LEDs simply because of the lighting technology behind the screen uses less power. LED TVs also benefit from thinner TVs and better local DCR which are desirable features in their own right.
OLEDs will be as bright as LCD LEDs and have contrast levels better than plasmas and will use even less power because there is no backlight at all. OLED means thinner TVs, better viewing angle, response rate etc. which are all desirable features in their own right.
There is plenty of choice. If you absolutely must have the most power inefficient TV imaginable I am sure you could order it from another state or import one somehow. For every one of you, hundreds of thousands will be completely happy with an otherwise identical but efficient TV, one which saves them money in energy costs and does less harm to the environment at the same time. Which is more or less the point of energy ratings to begin with.
@xyglyx
If you're going to try to fake being on the right at least educate yourself on when the next Presidential election will be held.
@KarlW Climate change huh? Now did you realize that they stopped calling it global warming and know the reasons why, or did you just fall in line like a good little sheep? You think the earth gives a damn about our television efficiency? Did it 300 years ago? 1000 years ago? During the last major ice age? 1 million years ago? The climate changes regardless of pro cap n tax swindlers with a political agenda that has nothing to do with "saving the planet". I'm all for improved technology, but anyone who thinks that a market regulated to hell is going to get us there faster doesn't know history from a zit on their ass. And for those of you who say it isn't, you're not watching the news or paying attention because that's exactly where many of our politicians, no matter the party, are taking us. We're not 13 trillion dollars in debt because of too little government.
sounds like this would rule out most, if not all plasmas. it's a good initiative, though. people's tv's are on a fair amount, and reducing the sleep consumption is also crucial.
Huge fan of the Energy Star program.
I personally think that they should be even more strict with certain appliances/gadgets. They should also be advertising this stuff more often so consumers are more aware... I could see companies still pimpin out their EnergyStar 3.0 rating even though 4.0 is now the one to beat.
It's meaningless. Not being Energy Star compliant doesn't mean the sets cannot be sold, it just means they don't get the doofy sticker on them. The majority of people don't know or care if their appliance has the certification because it doesn't effect the appliances functionality.
Well, OLEDs of the future will be able to capitalize on this marketing opportunity.
Unless they require all flat screens to support DPMS over HDMI (the thing that turns off your tv/monitor when connected to a computer) then it will still suck. I bought a Samsung a year ago that didn't support that for some ridiculous reason.
Couldn't care less. I'll by the TV set that has the best picture and the right feature set, full stop. If it has to chew up some more electrons to get the picture I want, so be it.