Giant plasma TVs banned in Britain over climate change

good they suck use lcd. and it dosnt have to be huge. just enuff to look good

Good, nobody REALLY needs one of these.

Of course you're absolutely right,but the mere fact,that the persons really responsible apparenly don't give a @#$%$#@ does not mean that I am off the hook.At least,that's what my "conscience"tells me.

im sure if they turned off Las Vegas for half an hour it wiould save enough energy for everyone in the UK to run a plasma TV for a few centuries.

Cant they tackle the ACTUAL problems and stop being petty.

I'm afraid you have no choice,have you seen any non-flatscreen tv's lately in the shops.?But I'm sure they are getting cheaper and cheaper and less energy consuming.

can´t afford them, so no problem for me :)

peterindia writes, hopefully sarcastically,

"I agree that a person should have to pay a rate according to their energy use. If a person can afford a two to five thousand plasma TV they can afford to pay for the excess energy they use."

With the money and mindset of the stereotyped Paris Hilton, you'd have to agree. Money is everything that matters on earth. You have a problem with that? Up yours.

But once you recognize that money is a fiat currency, a paper fiction wallpapering a global fantasy, that the money game is rigged, and that it's a game we're losing on all fronts - you wake up.

Face it, as a representative of the irrational downsides of neo-con and neo-liberal values, that same iconic Paris we love to satirize, one so prophylactically shielded from all the hardships of economic reality, the image of Paris the eternal child would have been an ideal choice as a neo-Presidential candidate.

The reason is simple. Our commercial culture exalts wealth with such superstitious fervor that by itself wealth can be used to justify the grossest recklessness and irresponsibility. The more wealth any person, or entity, commands, the more of their incredible idiocy we'll tolerate, not only socially but legally. There really are two levels of law and the better is reserved for them that's got.

Conversely, moving down the scale, relative poverty is used to explain what virtue is, why (like taxes) virtue must never apply harmfully to the rich, and why strict rules must be imposed on lesser people (e.g. for abusing addictive drugs) without restraint. Two people, same criminal offense. One goes to the slammer, the other doesn't.

Our zeitgeist is a New Yorker cartoon captioned, "Poor things! To survive of course, they must be brilliant and decent! You understand, they have no money..."

These are fragments of the Kafkaesque disconnect we've witnessed for the last 8 years of unfettered insanity. It's how we've rationalized a pathological rejection of the reality science reveals.

In fact: we're overloading the planet with toxins, poisoning ourselves chemically, spreading havoc ideologically, mass-exterminating species (both flora and fauna) that we depend upon, burying ourselves in debt, killing the real basis for democracy [freedom derived from equally shared responsibility] while whining about even the threat of being deprived of blatant trivia - like plasma TVs..

Up until about 20 years ago future survival could be divined solely by reducing life to analyzing commercial transactions under the standards of ideological purity. To be optimally "FREE" especially for a corporation, you must be able to waste and pollute resources as it suited you. Bless em'. Government was ready to help.

Why? Because what separated you from reality was that you could afford the Opportunity Costs. To help further that aim all that was required was the ability to pass along those burdens to someone else further down the chain.

Along with this exclusivity came the idea that the rest of civilization had absolutely zero right to say - "Wait a minute - we're running out of that resource too, and we all need it!"

Now? For years our scientists have underestimated the risks, and we're running out of essentials at rates we never before imagined.

Yet denial continues undisturbed - still blindly insisting that what matters most is - "Is it affordable?"

Yes. Extinction is affordable.

I agree that a person should have to pay a rate according to their energy use. If a person can afford a two to five thousand plasma TV they can afford to pay for the excess energy they use.

This is so "Big Brother watches you" or "father knows best".Why not let people decide what to buy,the more energy-consuming your tv,the higher the price.(the less tax)..We introduced this system a few month ago for cars and it seems a huge success.Amsterdam,Holland.

AreOh writes,

“Good riddance. Over priced, inferior technology that uses waaaay to much juice. Far better options are available... “

Good point. For any European old enough to remember when the expense of war resulted in a counter-balance of nation-wide rationing, this latest and seemingly odd prohibition represents the same principle, slightly skewed, perhaps as a global trial balloon.

Yes, it is damnably paternalistic. It's the kind of interference an adult emphasizes to a kid who thinks buying clothes is more important than eating.

But there are two war fronts now for Europe to contend with. Area one is Iraq\Afghanistan [later possibly Pakistan and Iran.] Area Two's conflict is an economic tussle with Russia, as China looks on. Both countries have distinct advantages which Europe no longer can boast.

In particular, Europe has recognized the truth. It simply can no longer afford the luxury of squandering what now is scarce: that being electrical power derived from the burning of Russian natural gas. For this reason economic jingoism is carefully reduced, because for the foreseeable future the continent is hostage to whatever prices the Russians wish to impose to punish the EU for expanding NATO into Russia's back 40.

Europe is being taught hard lessons. Witness the shut down of gas when Europe refused to pressure Ukraine.

European leaders now have distinctly awful political choices. One, is the continuation of a neo-con\neo-liberal theological dogma of "Let The Consumer Choose!" More than anything else, this aesthetic fantasy largely was based on personal wealth, high disposable income and relatively cheap energy. "I can buy whatever I want!" is a hymnal you are unlikely ever to hear anywhere in the underdeveloped world.

Choice Two. As The West approaches 3rd-world financial penury we can trust that the "We're Still Powerful!" breast-beating will continue. And it may pump up enthusiasm for how great things still seem, but more realistically where we are implies a political downside. Without the resort to national rationing of power, this invites a risk of critical shortages, and that a substantial portion of the electorate will freeze during winter or be hospitalized from heat prostration during increasingly hot summers. Europe already has seen both.

Politically smart to let this happen on your watch? Not likely.

Since no politician wants to admit that the economic genius of The West has hit the wall, and reality has basically declared - screw ideology you're no longer the Boss - the pols are obliged to use devious means to admit covertly that we can't afford to squander energy.

As things get worse, anything which drains excess power will become a target.

There, and in due course - here.

good riddens...America next?

Why is the government wasting its time doing this when there are bigger ways to save energy? Like maybe forcing all the members of government to bike to work instead of driving around their expensive cars?
Oh, but that won't happen. Any act that infringes on the government will never, ever pass.

I think it's a good idea, but I still watch a 15" CRT. It will be difficult for the folks who really want the larger screens. BUT, here comes OLED, as EddieStar said above. I hope these measures encourage companies to come up with more "green" technology. By the way, instead of scoffing at greenies or calling global warming and the energy crisis a "hoax," it wouldn't hurt to try to be a little more conscientious of reducing waste any way we can, instead of having it be all about me, ME, ME.

thats right your plasma tv's and hummer brand dvr's will not destroy this planet any longer :D

kenamaddox writes,

"The governments of this world are trying to control our every move. Manmade global warming has been proven a giant hoax and not supported by any scientist thats not on some government payroll."

A proven hoax, you claim? Proven by you? By Fox Noise? By suckup scientists and politicians in the pockets of Big Oil?

Be brave: show us this awesome proof..

They put off a shit load of heat...that's for sure.

i'm all for it. people seem to think 'freedom' means being able to do whatever the fuck they please, but then of course that infringes on everyone else's freedom.

give me excess or give me death i say!

Get a nice projector!

This was Cuba's tactic verbatim. They have for years banned 'wasteful' and 'exorbitant' electricity use by banning appliances like toasters and microwaves. It's quite disconcerting when a supposedly democratically-based government begins befriending authoritarian tactics in the sake of what the government deems as right and wrong. It's not the choice of the government that should determine the products available to paying consumers - those exactly who must act as the strongest force pulling the Western world out of its economic depression.

Regardless of what one considers frivolous or extravagant, the choices of purchase should be left to those with their own personal preferences. This would be exactly the same as a government banning speech because it determines said speech as not aligned with its own ideals and beliefs.

Obviously, this act isn't being done for no reason as it serves to help preserve the future by emphasizing energy efficiency and frugality. It's important to set standards for efficiency and encouraging green development in the production of commercial goods. But, if a person ready and willing to pay for the extra amount of energy required to power these larger television sets, that money can go back to energy companies who are supposedly the dominant force in sponsoring and developing alternative energy. To deny consumer demand is to purposefully limit one's economy and national capacity to repair itself from the past downturn.

Good riddance. Over priced, inferior technology that uses waaaay to much juice. Far better options are available...

It is all about the OLED technology :)

The governments of this world are trying to control our every move. Manmade global warming has been proven a giant hoax and not supported by any scientist thats not on some government payroll.

My new roomie owns one. I hope I'm not expected to fork over extra for electricity if he's the one doing all the damage.

It's a good job I don't have one then!