I see that EU regulation as positive. We got to wake up and see the world we're living in. TV's can improve (maybe at slower rate) with same or even less power consumption. And that's pretty much the same for every objects. Panasonic OLED TV series is improving step by step at each yearly generation and power consumption has never been so low for their products. It is definitively possible to keep product energy efficient while in active use. For gaming hardware we can already witness power hungry attitude while these last extra % performance are costing a lot in power consumption. They need to stop making non sense choice only to beat or be the closest to the competitor and rethink about the best balance between power draw & performance.

XenthorX:

Sorry, but I firmly believe you're absolutely in the wrong. No later than today Apple was forced to add USB-C to be compatible to universal charger EU policy.

In twenty years you'll see how happy people are that USB-C is the standard in the EU.

Intel plans to massively invest in Europe over the next decade (€80 billion), including into a ship factory in Germany.

Both Italy and Germany have committed to refund 40% of the costs of new fabs, and their production is not to be directed at the EU market, but the global one. This is simply shifting some production out of China, not an appreciation of the EU's purchasing power - except that the Chinese have never paid to locate production in China.

The reality is that we've spent the last century innovating and consuming as if world resources were unlimited, built Casinos in desert, consumed water, oil, gas like no tomorrow.

Sure, humanity could stay with manufactories and horse transport - but what about horse droppings emitting methane?;)

Of course we have a responsability to plan for a sustainable way of life, for us and futur generations, and unconstrained consumerism won't magically by itself go into this direction.

Here, I agree. The problem is that none of these "pro-ecological" governments has ever dealt with what is most important from the ecological point of view - the low durability of products, requiring the exchange of material goods every year, two or three. And the need for education that promotes the acceptance of durable products instead of replacing fashionable trash with newer ones every now and then. But after all, it is much more convenient for all of us to raise pompous slogans on the subject of ecology, at the same time replacing the computer every year:( Instead of this bigotry, I believe that technological progress is what can save the Earth from destruction. Therefore, I do not support politicians who create laws for political popularity, laws that are only seemingly beneficial, but in fact harmful in the long run.

sykozis:

That has got to be the dumbest thing I've read today..... We rely on this planet to survive. Being "pro-ecology" is never irrational, unless you believe that the desire to survive is irrational. There are specific policies that are irrational or outright idiotic, but a "pro-ecology" position is the furthest thing from irrational.

Maybe it is worth reading more carefully? I wrote "our pro-ecological legislative actions" not "any pro-ecological legislative actions". I have written about irrational "pro-ecological" legislative of the European Union, where ecology is just an excuse to achieve popularity or completely different goals.

one of the major things having a negative impact on the planet after running plants/heating houses/transportation, is the fact that ppl dont buy any food/drink related things "locally" e.g. from less than 100 km/mls around them. lots of "waste" in all forms is from shipping things around that are utterly useless like having fiji water in Europe/french yogurt in Alaska or candy from Germany on the other side of the globe.

Dragam1337:

Im curious, how are you making your own ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel

A small headline, creating this kind or amount of maximum attention, is a good sign! Usually, I am against any regulations, but to reinvent tech or finding new solutions, some possible "guidance" can be necessary. With a blank TV screen you may reach people who don´t want to leave their "forever growing prosperity bubble". At leat for 1/2 century, we are aware of growing energy/ environment/ consumption problem. Reminds me to 1973 sci-fi movie "Soylent Green", watch it in 8k, if available. Plot takes place 2022!!

like how especially US companies/politicians/their paid "bots" claim regulation hurts everything, not just their bottom line, yet operate without problems in more regulated markets. especially things like asbestos/ddt and the like, required changes/new laws to prevent further problems in any form.

People don't need gaming PCs because consoles are great. People also don't need TV's at all because it would be better for society if they were at work earning money and paying taxes.

XenthorX:

On the topic of electric car, they're more polluant to produce, but past 50.000km they've compensated their negative impact compared to thermic cars. It's in french but you get the pollution (c02) generated for various km. (it depends on how the country generate electricity mainly). Dark blue: Car fabrication emission Light Blue: Battery fabrication emission Red/Orange: Usage pollution unit is gCO2e/km

Moral of the story is that the bigger the battery is (SUV/Tesla) the longer it takes/the more km it takes, to have a positive impact on environement. Small/Medium sized electric cars are what we should aim for.

this is missing all the pollution of lithium lifecycle that is not just CO2.

@XenthorX over the whole "cycle" of a car, starting with parts being made and put together, until the parts ends up in a junkyard/landfill/recycler, the Prius is worse than a US V8 pickup. completely ignoring the fact that Top Gear tested it against an M3 with 400 HP, doing 10 laps on their track at normal driving speeds, and it got only 17mpg vs the 19 the BMW did. or that a Porsche 918 with almost 900 HP, gets better mpg (up to 78 iirc) while producing less emissions (79g/km), compared to the 50-60mpg and 200-250g from the prius. as a German Politian said, there are no "green" cars.

manufacturers just need to do a better job and get the consumption lowered.

geogan:

The future of 8K TVs is in danger because... peoples eyes cannot see the difference at normal viewing distances.

This. Exactly this. Even for 4K, you need to be what, like closer than 3 feet away from a 50" TV to see any sort of detail degredation? Higher resolutions in VR headsets.... yeah, they can make a serious difference. 8K is just a waste of resources no matter how you slice it.

Actual EV has a problem and it's called lithium. you have to deal with this, as we have to deal that actual hydrogen tech (direct combustion and cell fuel) has other issues (direct combustion mainly getting hydrogen in a clean and efficient way, fuel cells not being efficient as EV and not clean as direct combustion). The problem is, everyone thinks the EV is actually a solution but it's not. And we have to deal also that while in lab they rose a lot the endothermic engine efficiency we are centuries away to get it in real life and with an efficiency % enough to say: fuck EV and fuck hydrogen research.