HDTV Magazine
Welcome, Guest  •  Sign In  •  Register  •  Help
Receive instant notification of new articles: Register Now to receive notification of new HDTV Magazine Articles via email as soon as they are published.
Dale Cripps
California Monkey Wrench
by Dale Cripps on April 11, 2006 Category: Politics & Policy

I had planned on bringing you the details of the new Mitsubishi line tonight but this story (see below) broke today. It is important enough to preempt the product discussions. I am working on an expanded version of the CEA press release and will post it on our site tomorrow. The reason that this story is important is not because the consumer electronics industry cannot meet the regulatory demands, but the trade offs for doing so can backfire in several ways. First, the people needing these final transition boxes may well be unhappy with the performance from lower power schemes. Secondly, the clock is ticking. It is hard to redesign and bring to market in time to accommodate the February 17, 2009 deadline--the date which ends all analog broadcasting. So, tomorrow, all things willing, I will bring you both my comments and research done on this story and a discussion of the products from the Mitsubishi line show. _Dale Cripps

CALIFORNIA'S NEW ENERGY CONSUMPTION REGULATION FOR DIGITAL TELEVISION ADAPTERS THREATENS TO LEAVE MILLIONS OF CALIFORNIANS IN THE DARK

Mandate Will Do Little to Conserve Energy

Arlington, Va., April 11, 2006 - The following statement was issued today by Consumer Electronics Association (CEA®) President and CEO Gary Shapiro and National Association of Broadcasters President and CEO David K. Rehr regarding the California Energy Commission's (CEC) mandatory regulation for digital television (DTV) adapters. The Commission is expected to respond this week to public comments requesting the Commission rescind the regulation.
"We strongly urge the CEC to withdraw the energy regulation for digital television adapters. These converters are necessary for existing analog televisions to receive the new digital and high-definition television signals by antenna. This regulation would likely raise the cost and limit the availability of these products, potentially leaving millions of Californians on the wrong side of the digital divide.

"The CEC has acted prematurely, setting energy standards for a product that is not yet on the market. The federal government is preparing to announce a $1 billion program to help American families purchase these converters so they can continue to receive television over-the-air once the nation shifts to DTV - including the millions of Californians who rely solely on over-the-air television reception. By mandating energy consumption specifications for these products before government and industry have the opportunity to define what types of converter boxes will be eligible for the subsidy, the CEC's regulation jeopardizes the ability of Californians to participate in this program in a meaningful way. The regulations could force the boxes eligible for sale in California to come at a premium price, reducing the value of the subsidy.

"Alarmingly, the CEC has promulgated this regulation on false facts and assumptions concerning DTV converters. For example, the CEC concluded that 46,000 digital television converters are in use throughout California, despite the fact that set-top DTV converters are not available on the market in the United States. Nonetheless, the Commission conducted a cost-benefit analysis and calculated energy consumption and savings figures for this non-existent product.

"Saving energy is important, but the CEC's regulation misses the point. The digital television transition itself will save energy as broadcasters stop running both analog and digital transmitters. In fact, with every month that the transition to digital television is delayed, California could relinquish more than $1.6 million or almost $20 million per year in energy savings.
"The consumer electronics and broadcast industries are committed to energy conservation. The consumer electronics industry, for example, has long participated in the voluntary federal Energy Star program, which aids governments, businesses and consumers in making energy-efficient choices that save energy, save money, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment. Additionally, manufacturers are deeply involved in industry-led standards-setting activities focused on energy efficient design. More, new multi-functional consumer electronics devices that combine the operations once performed by a series of products into one converged device also help reduce energy consumption by providing higher energy efficiency than multiple devices.

"The California Energy Commission's unnecessary and unjustified regulation for DTV adapters must be withdrawn to ensure that no Americans are left behind in the digital transition."

Other industry leaders also weighed-in on the California Energy Commission's regulation of DTV adapters:
"[We] are concerned that the [CEC regulation] could have adverse consequences for the public. It may result in establishing a different, perhaps more expensive, converter box just for California residents. As a result, California viewers may not receive the full benefits of the federal [subsidy] program. In turn, this may have the unintended consequence of delaying the availability of these converter boxes to the citizens of California. Consumer acceptance is the key to the digital transition, and any delay or impediment to the roll out of digital to analog converter boxes could slow down the digital transition."
- David Donovan, president, The Association for Maximum Service Television

"As the country has finally developed a clear path to the decades of effort in the transition to digital television and all its benefits, it is unconscionable that any agency with a mandate to work for the public interest could be foolish enough to place any unilateral impediment or single out the last key enabler of this long anticipated transition with an arbitrary rule like this."
- Charles H. Jablonski, former vice president of Broadcast and Network Engineering, NBC

"Retailers want their California customers to have the same range of opportunities that our customers in other states will have to keep receiving broadcast television."
- Robert S. Schwartz, Consumer Electronics Retailers Coalition

"The evolution from analog to digital television must continue unencumbered to insure a smooth and cost effective transition. Artificial restraints service no one."
- Randall Dark, co-founder and president, HD Vision Studios, Los Angeles

Posted by Dale Cripps, April 11, 2006 10:49 PM

Reader Commentary

Reply
hislonv • Apr 12, 8:02am
I guess they are bored with all of the rain we are getting here. All they will do is open up the door to ebay and mail order ways for getting these devices. The consumers won't care if they meet energy requirements or not and the government won't be able to stop it.
The amount of energy that they would save in a year is insignificant compared to the amount that is wasted by them concocting such laws or the analog stations all broadcasting their redundant signals.
I haven't seen the whole article, but how much energy can these things use? I know they don't exist so it isn't easy to answer, but someone must have an idea how much added energy use will exist when they are turned on in addition to the TV set.
Energy Star. Aren't they the ones that made it possible for my computer to remain partly on all the time burning up energy when I think that it is off?
Next... :shock:...
Reply
Bob Mankin • Apr 12, 8:10am
Bold headline. Except these regulations have been on the books since 2004 and the latest actions on the part of the California Energy Commission that I see were to delay the effective dates by 6 months. Did the CEA just wake up from a long nap?

The article clearly wants to instill fear while being short on facts. What specific requirement is the CEA having issue with? 3 years is a looooooong time to respond to a power supply redesign issue, IME and IMO.

BTW, it's projected in a Federal study that digital STBs will account for 4% of US power consumption by 2010. That's not an insignificant number, hence the reason for power consumption standards on both the Federal and State levels.

From what I know about the issue, it has nothing to do with the tuner performance of the boxes, but rather the power used during standby mode which makes up 75% of the time the DTV adapter is plugged into the wall. Claiming it will somehow result in poorer performance is not accurate....
Reply
Roger Halstead • Apr 12, 11:26am
First, it's not unusual for some aspects of a regulation to go un-noticed for many months.

Next; 4% for all digital set top boxes (DSTB)so I assume the way it's worded that means *all* including my satellite TV receiver, cable decoder, and anything associated with the addition of HDTV. Knowing stats they are probably calling the DVR, The DVD recorder/player, and VHS recorders STBs as well. To me we need to separate out the digital to analog (D/A) converters which is what we are talking about here and I think that is going to be a small % of the STBs.

But, let's look at power. It's should be safe to assume that a simple D/A converter it going to take considerably less power than say my satellite receiver which draws a maximum of 35 watts and typically runs at half that. If the D/A converter is full featured (IOW) it downloads menus and other information as does my satellite receiver then it needs to remain on most of the time. If I leave the satellite receiver unplugged for ...
Reply
Bob Mankin • Apr 12, 1:33pm
Roger, I'll let you read the piece for yourself. In the first page or two they define what "STB" was for this particular study.

http://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2004/am_stb.pdf

Without seeing more on what specifically the CEA is complaining about, it's hard to determine if the complaint has any merit or is just a veiled attempt to allow sloppy STB designs into the market. I'm all for designing more power efficient, savvy code equipped hardware. I think there is too much "throw it over the fence" mentality when it comes to what the consumer electronics manufacturers put out for product these days.

It should also be noted that countries like the UK and Australia are addressing these very same issues today. You can find some of their legislative efforts with a Google search....
Reply
Bob Mankin • Apr 12, 1:50pm
A sidebar to these proposed regs, Motorola made some comments in response to solicitation for such by the Legislature and their only objection seemed to be with the wording that required testing at both 115V and 230V. Maybe they saw an unintentional requirement for dual power supplies? Later revisions of the proposal(Feb. '06) seemed to address their concerns.

I find that sorta interesting because IME Motorola is not exactly known for efficient power budgeting with their products. My Comcast box(Moto 6412) is known to have marginal cooling issues and resulting performance problems. If you design these products from the get-go with better power management and budgeting some of these problems will go away. It's that penny-wise, pound foolish thing biting them on the butt....
Reply
robmxb • Apr 12, 7:13pm
Roger, I'll let you read the piece for yourself. In the first page or two they define what "STB" was for this particular study.

http://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2004/am_stb.pdf

Without seeing more on what specifically the CEA is complaining about, it's hard to determine if the complaint has any merit or is just a veiled attempt to allow sloppy STB designs into the market. I'm all for designing more power efficient, savvy code equipped hardware. I think there is too much "throw it over the fence" mentality when it comes to what the consumer electronics manufacturers put out for product these days.

It should also be noted that countries like the UK and Australia are addressing these very same issues today. You can find some of their legislative efforts with a Google search.

Virtually all DVB-T COFDM receivers sold in the UK can meet the California energy usage requirements today. The CEA tried to sabatoge the California ene...
Reply
Dale • Apr 13, 3:28am
I am always puzzled by those who say that COFDM is the reason other nations are doing so well in SDTV and we are doing so poorly in HDTV when our HDTV market is the most successful in the history of consumer electronics. Sure it got off to a bumpy start. While there are glitches to this very day the pain of a difficult start is well behind us. Ask the retailers. They are showing record years in video sales due entirely to H/DTV.

Your comment that the COFDM DVB-T box meets the California spec of 1 watt standby and 8 watts active is correct. It should be added that the DVB-T does not decode 19.2 Mb/s MPG 2 signals nor does it have the GEMSTAR program guide we manage in standby.

I do think that had we the luxury of 7 and 8 MHz channels the COFDM choice might have been attractive. But we operate, and were mandate to live, in a 6 MHz channel. I was there when COFDM was first brought forward at the IBC in Amsterdam and knew all of the U.S. team who were assigned the task of evaluating...
Reply
Bob Mankin • Apr 13, 8:50am
The COFDM vs. 8-VSB argument is decided and dead. Bob, I give you the persistance award, but that dog won't hunt. We won't be switching to COFDM in the US. Period. End of story.

I totally disagree with the idea of a subsidy for power supply design! If a vendor wants to compete in this space, then pony up the R&D and play the game like all the rest. Forget the gov't handout idea. Are these companies expecting handouts on the front end also planning to hand over their profits on the back end when they get to market? I'm guessing no. If you don't believe in capitalism and the inherant risk taking, then sit on the sidelines and let someone else do it! But don't sit their and whine that you can't make enough money off the deal, because I can assure you that someone else will.

We're not talking designing a space shuttle here. 3 years to get it done is plenty of time, IMO and IME. The fact that only selected vendors are complaining about the timetable should tell you something. Th...
Reply
Dale • Apr 13, 11:41am
Here is the problem with applying free market thinking throughout this particular situation:

WHAT IF THERE IS NO MARKET?.

THAT IS WHY A SUBSIDY IS IN READINESS.

The subsidy is there as a reserve in the very likely event that there is no market demand for the products that need to be installed on existing analog sets still dependant upon over-the-air signals in order that the shut off of analog frequencies can occur without severe political "noise" or repercussion.

As far as being competitors, these companies compete all day long every day of the week with all kinds of products that we want. To label them as non-competitive seems short sighted.

The problem we anticipate is in the last phase of the transition in the form of a non-responsiveness from the poorer markets. There is a market segment of over-the-air television viewers who neither care anything about, nor do they want digital television services at any price. This segment will not, and often cannot, do anythi...
Reply
BobDiaz • Apr 13, 11:43am
Bold headline. Except these regulations have been on the books since 2004 and the latest actions on the part of the California Energy Commission that I see were to delay the effective dates by 6 months. Did the CEA just wake up from a long nap? ...

If you go to the following link:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/documents/2006-01-30_WORKSHOP_TRANSCRIPT.PDF

You will see a meeting taking place on Monday, January 30, 2006. The PDF file is a bit long, but if you go to page 199 and read on from there, you will see that it was a second chance to fix an impossible standard.

The estimate for the number of homes in California is 12,507,767 as of 2002. In the meeting notes the estimate was 13% of the homes use just an antenna; that comes to around 1.6 million California homes needing DTV Adapters. See:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html

Assume that the power savings is 7 watts per h...

More from Dale Cripps

» - Currently Reading

More in Category: Politics & Policy

About Dale Cripps

Dale Cripps is a professional journalist who has focused two thirds of his career on the subject of high-definition television. Upon completing his education in business and service in the military he formed Cripps and Associates, South Pasadena, California, in 1964, which operated as a market-development company for aerospace services. In 1983 he turned to television and began what has become a 20 year campaign to pioneer HDTV. For fifteen of those years he published the well-regarded HDTV Newsletter (an international monthly written for television professionals). During much of this same time he also served as the HDTV-Technical Editor for "Widescreen Review Magazine." On November 16, 1998 he launched the Internet distributed HDTV Magazine, which remains the only consumer publication devoted exclusively to high-definition television. In April of 2002 he co-founded with Tedson Meyers of Coudert Bros, the High-definition Television Association of America, which is presently based in Washington DC. Cripps is the president of this organization. Mr. Cripps is a charter member of the Academy of Digital Television Pioneers and honored by that organization with the DTV Press Leadership Award of 2002. He makes his home in Oregon.