Plasma TVs also on Greens ban list
The Greens are upset that NZ will not ban energy inefficient plasma TVs, as the UK is planning to do.
Gerry Brownlee says:
But Mr Brownlee yesterday told the Herald the Government did not favour banning energy-hungry TVs.
“Our view is the information about appliances should be given to consumers and consumers should then make their choice.
“Consumers should be given as much information as they possibly can about the energy efficiency of appliances … but at the final point of purchase it’s the consumer’s decision.”
Can you imagine the backlog of things to be banned under a future Labour/Green Government?
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: banning, Greens
January 12th, 2009 at 6:51 am
I’m just glad I bought an LCD then!
January 12th, 2009 at 7:22 am
Plasma TV’s are more popular in the larger sizes because they produce a better picture than LCD’s. However LCD TV’s are getting better. People are recognising there are power savings to be had but they do not want to have these at the expense of quality.
As LCD TV’s get better, they will sell more and the goal of the greens will be attained without the need and expense of legislation. This is where the greens have a real problem. They will force change on us because it is ingrained in their ideology. People resist change where it is forced but will accept change when allowed to adopt it themselves.
3 years ago the 40 inch and above market was 75% plasma. Now it is much more like 50/50. No legislation was required to achieve this. The latest range of large screen LCD TV has exceptional performance, but why should the consumer have to pay $5-6000 dollars to get a 50″ LCD screen with the sort of contrast ratio and smooth movement that they can get in a 50″ plasma for $2000??
January 12th, 2009 at 7:26 am
Mr Farrar says :’Can you imagine the backlog of things to be banned under a future Labour/Green Government?”
We don’t need to go to the trouble of imagining them – Mr Farrar seems determined to list each and every imaginary example that pops into his head. As for the ‘energy-hungry’ Mr Brownlee, I’m still laughing over the wild-eyed claims he made last year over the power blackouts and ‘dangerously low’ lake levels, in light of the overflowing we have at the moment. Spluttering, off the mark predictions seem to be a hallmark of this NActional government and their henchmen
January 12th, 2009 at 7:40 am
^
For the 2008 winter, the chief executive of Meridian Energy, speaking for the electricity industry, warned in February that safety margins in both the capacity of the supply grid and power generation are very low, and limited cuts in supply may become necessary (such as cutting off hot-water supply systems from the power grid).
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10492585
Not so wild eyed now are they.
January 12th, 2009 at 7:44 am
Greenfly, the question is not why did we not have power blackouts, but how much thermal generation using fossil fuels was required to get us through the winter?
Remember the voluntary power savings we were encouraged to make? I do. The system we had did not cope with what was required, and the shortage of generating capacity drove up spot pricing.
January 12th, 2009 at 7:51 am
The biggest power saving comes in my household from simply not watching, wasting my time on, TV .. in fact quite often these days I don’t even watch the News. I can’t wait for Morning Report to return, the silence is deafening.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:00 am
slightlyrightly said: “Remember the voluntary power savings we were encouraged to make? I do. ” – yep! Worked a charm, didn’t they and yet Big Gerry suggests that all we need to do is provide ” the information about appliances to consumers and consumers should then make their choice” hardy hardy har! That’s going to work a treat!
Banana Llama – the Southern lakes are full to overflowing. Gerry was scaremongering. It’s his forte
January 12th, 2009 at 8:01 am
# jcuknz (91) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 0 Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 7:51 am
“I can’t wait for Morning Report to return, the silence is deafening.”
I wish someone could explain to me why TVNZ and Radio NZ think it is OK to take a month off each year, usually from a week before Christmas, which is marked by self-congratulatory celebrations of the year not-yet-ended, until about the fourth week of January. They replace detailed news with froth and fizz and retired musicians.
Yes I know that they need annual leave like the rest of us, but have you noticed how often the front persons disappear for long periods during the year. How much leave do they get anyway?
January 12th, 2009 at 8:08 am
greenfly (116) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 0 Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 8:00 am
Banana Llama – the Southern lakes are full to overflowing. Gerry was scaremongering. It’s his forte
Okay let me see if i have the hang of this.
Jeanette Fitzsimons is scaremongering*. It’s her forte
January 12th, 2009 at 8:18 am
plasma TV’s will overheat the world and we’ll all die = scaremongering.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:29 am
Greenfly. I work in the appliance industry, and I can tell you, the average consumer is better informed than you might think. Brownlee is right, if you give the consumer the ability to make an informed choice, as opposed to compelling the consumer to buy only what the government will let him, the result is a pissed off consumer.
The largest growth in our product range last year was Heat Pumps. The growth in LCD sales as a proportion of total TV sales was huge. Consumers are looking at these measures already. If a customer is looking at 2 fridge freezers, invariably energy efficiency will be the deciding factor in many instances.
Greenfly, you seem to have little faith in a person making the correct decision when informed of all alternatives. I have had 10 years experience in the industry. Energy efficiency is a major motivator for a lot of consumers. Granted, not all consumers have this requirement but enough do for the manufacturers to make this a major concern. The trend is for new models to be more and more energy efficient, and to have the product marketed in that way.
We do not need legislation and regulation to mirror the current trend.
As to your claim of Gerry Brownlee “scaremongering”. If there was no crisis, then why were mothballed thermal plants re-activated last year? Why were we encouraged to reduce power consumption? Why were our renewable energy generation facilities unable to cope with demand?
Lake levels were exceptionally low this time last year. We are fortunate that this is not the case this year. I know that Gerry did not make it rain but the concerns expressed by him last year were valid. If the situation were reversed, what do you think Labour would be saying in opposition?
January 12th, 2009 at 8:39 am
“Gerry was scaremongering. It’s his forte”
scare mongering in an election campaign – you think?
Obviously not something the greens would want banned – they wouldn’t have any policies left
January 12th, 2009 at 8:47 am
That settles it, I need a big TV for my office and I was not sure which one to get, if Plasma TV’s are considered evil by the Greens then that is exactly what I will be buying.
Also, how good is is to read that Greenfly thinks Brownlee is scaremongering.
Scaremongering is the reason the Green party exists.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:48 am
“As to your claim of Gerry Brownlee “scaremongering”. If there was no crisis, then why were mothballed thermal plants re-activated last year? Why were we encouraged to reduce power consumption? Why were our renewable energy generation facilities unable to cope with demand?”
The fly has been swatted by that one…..nice!
January 12th, 2009 at 8:48 am
The southern hydro lakes are overflowing, however the power companies are charging like wounded bulls. Didn’t some Wally from gummint say that power would be cheaper in the future? Yeah right, lying creeps just like the stupid deranged greens.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:52 am
The dictatorial nature of the watermelon party shines through again.
The Luddites are masters of conning the population with their environmental mesage, while hiding their sinister socialist side. They would like to ban everything and reduce NZ carbon footprint to nil.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:05 am
It’s funny isn’t it – Labore and the greenz, the gift that keeps on giving to National.
Ban ban ban, whine, regulate, ban.
Reminds me of the story about Jeannette trading in her stinking, smoking, fuel inefficient shitty car for a new one once she realised people were noticing her hypocracy.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:11 am
slightlyrightly said: ” you seem to have little faith in a person making the correct decision when informed of all alternatives”
Am I to take it then slightly, that in your industry, people have ceased buying these ‘energy inefficient plasma TVs’ of their own volution? That the industry is reacting to consumer demand and not the potential for legislation to demand more efficient products (as in the UK)? Really?
Mr Farrar’s ‘Ban It!’ yodel works a treat, doesn’t it
January 12th, 2009 at 9:12 am
and how about that ayn rand..?..eh..?
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/atlas-wanked-from-fiction-to-fraud-in-52-years/
(heh..!..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
January 12th, 2009 at 9:14 am
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/philu-wanked-for-52-years/
January 12th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Don’t forget the ” There is no more room for a refuse tip line”, All the holes are used up so charges will have to increase!
January 12th, 2009 at 9:20 am
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA did a greenie just accuse “chick magnet” brownlee of scaremongering? AHAHAHAHA
explain global warming HHAHA oh thats right, the world got colder so its now climate change!
January 12th, 2009 at 9:25 am
slightly – your ‘customer makes the best choices’ line is somewhat undermined by Big Bruv (poster boy for this blog) and his reaction,
“That settles it, I need a big TV for my office and I was not sure which one to get, if Plasma TV’s are considered evil by the Greens then that is exactly what I will be buying.”
I sense that your assurance that the buyers of ‘energy inefficient plasma TVs’ will make the switch, is not a reliable one.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Ban Urban $7.00 Chardonnay Socialists.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:27 am
You Socialists know all about $7.00 wine don’t you? What DID happen with the Aiden Smith and Co Wine Theft saga?
January 12th, 2009 at 9:33 am
bang bang.
(the sound of greenfly not clearing the holsters and getting both feet)
January 12th, 2009 at 9:36 am
surprised the greenies aren’t suggesting a ban on fuel inefficient cars -oh that’s right- that would affect their voters – cynical?
January 12th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Meh. 8yr old CRT TV FTW.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:44 am
I hardly think there’s enough plasma’s in the country to justify this, however not banning incandescent light bulbs was fucking retarded and continues to be
January 12th, 2009 at 9:49 am
BBC article here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6188940.stm
finishes with some suggestions – actually turning the thing off or having the option to set the brightness lower than it needs it be in a shop – for saving power that would probably make up a lot of the difference. Personally, I don’t manufacturers bothering with the latter in the absence of efficiency standards.
slijmbal, I’m pretty sure you’ll find the greens have advocated fuel efficiency standards for cars for a while, particularly new ones which is what this would be equivalent to.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Agree somewhatthoughtful.
As I said at the time, a government leadership team used to guiding recalcitrant children would have known how to pitch the light bulb change-rather than ban them outright, but I guess Labore didnt have much experience with family units.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Greenfly
You just don’t get it do you?
The more the Greens continue with their “we know better than you” line the more people like me will continue to resist.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:54 am
and how about that ayn rand..?..eh..?
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/atlas-wanked-from-fiction-to-fraud-in-52-years/”
Saw that shit and dissed it easlily…..try again Phil.
The US has been followings Rands perscription for the economy that caused the crisis….ha ha oh please! Find me where in Rands writings she advocated massive taxation and resdistribution of wealth to financial companies……Im waiting.
Conservatives hated Rand….she showed them up for the flip side socialists they are and she dispised both equally…..tell ya friends on this link that they have been down troued but the most basic historically facts…
January 12th, 2009 at 9:57 am
and how about that ayn rand..?..eh..?
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/atlas-wanked-from-fiction-to-fraud-in-52-years/”
Saw that shit and dissed it easily…..try again Phil.
The US has been followings Rands perscription for the economy that caused the crisis!?….ha ha oh please! Find me where in Rands writings she advocated massive taxation and resdistribution of wealth to financial companies,where she said the State should concern itself with providing first home buyers who weren’t able to meet their repayments with easy finance……Im waiting.
Conservatives hated Rand….she showed them up for the flip side socialists they are and she dispised both equally…..tell ya friends on this link that they have been down troued but the most basic historically facts….
Thought of getting a job and off the drugs got ya gittery Phil…?
January 12th, 2009 at 9:59 am
big bruv, no the greens don’t get it – thats why they are bridesmaids, again. The greens are a luxury item that urban liberals felt good about spending on in the good times, now its recession years the luxury items go out the door and blade steak stews come in.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Opps! Double up.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:06 am
Did anybody actually read the article that is referred to above:-
“British ministers expect to agree to Europe-wide minimum energy performance standards for televisions this year, in a move which should phase out the most inefficient TVs.”
They are Europe-wide standards, not just some Green initiative.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:11 am
“expect to agree”
Well, lets just see what happens then and follow suit appopriately shall we.
The Greens are over zealous knobjockies who need to get real about NZ’s place in the world food chain i.e. somwhere above Samoa.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:13 am
MikeG
“They are Europe-wide standards, not just some Green initiative.”
So what?, where is it written that we must follow every stupid idea that come out of Europe?
These are the same fools that banned bananas unless they were straight and tomatoes that were not perfectly round and uniform in shape.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Patrick Starr –
“bang bang.
(the sound of greenfly not clearing the holsters and getting both feet)
entomology lesson no. 1: insects (including greenfly) have 6
Big Bro – you should know, resistance is futile!
Mike G has it right (expect a tirade of tired cliches Mike)
January 12th, 2009 at 10:26 am
or did some green policy ‘anal-yst’ read a press release about “British ministers expect to agree to Europe-wide minimum energy performance standards for televisions this year, in a move which should phase out the most inefficient TVs.” and decide to try and coat-tail on the initiative and pretend it was green ‘policy’? More likely…
January 12th, 2009 at 10:28 am
“Pssssshhhhht”
The sound of mortein
January 12th, 2009 at 10:30 am
somewhatthoughtful – those light bulbs are being phased out anyway. not enough worldwide demand etc
fuck europe and fuck dirty euros too!
January 12th, 2009 at 10:40 am
I think MikeG has raised a point. Clearly these electricity-consuming luxuries are placing a demand on our existing power generation.
Its obvious we need to build more!………..and sooner rather than later
I’m a hydro supporter myself but there again a decent nuclear plant would solve the problems for decades
January 12th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Following Greenflys logic to conclusion, we should dispense with our own politicians and simply adopt all Europe’s policies.
Would certainly save us a lot of money, and we’d reverse the smacking legislation and the anti-nuke stance.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Stalin lives.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:55 am
# francis (521) Vote: Add rating1 Subtract rating 0 Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Stalin lives.
lmao i was just thinking the same thing, the Greens make themselves look like Stalins second wind at times …
January 12th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Given the present (and soon to be present) economic ‘climate’ a post promoting ‘energy inefficient plasma TVs’ seems a little thoughtless Mr Farrar, or are you of the opinionm that we ought to ‘spend our way out’ of the recession? You have plenty of supporters here who seem to believe that $pending is the way foward. Big bro’s off to buy one today, by his own account.
January 12th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Greenfly,
Big Bro would do so as an act of rebellion against being told what to do. That is the point you’re missing.
Consumers are already making purchases with energy efficiency in mind, therefore why the need for legislation?
January 12th, 2009 at 11:42 am
somewhatquitenotenoughthoughtful –
the trouble with banning the old light bulbs is that they are still more appropriate in several circumstances eg in cupboards where they are only on for a couple of minutes at a time – never mind the point about nanny state
January 12th, 2009 at 11:43 am
@expat-
Are you honestly trying to imply that it is a recent phenomenon for the Green party to be behind energy efficient appliances? Regardless of whether they initially came up with this specific policy, it seems to me that it is rather consistent with their views. In saying this however, this is one area where I do not support them. I stand by Mr Brownlee on this issue. It is much more desirable in my opinion to give the consumers the information to make informed decisions.
January 12th, 2009 at 11:45 am
their supporters often smell like it, too.
January 12th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Damn right I would Peter.
I detest being told what to do by snivelling lefties with a hidden agenda, it is the arrogant “we know better than you” approach that really gets my goat.
Showers, Light bulbs, food, Transport, the number of kids they would allow us to have and the way we raise those kids and now TV’s, do they plan to control everything we do?
January 12th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Greenfly.
You still do not get it do you.
People want to buy energy efficient products given the choice. Plasma TV gives a quantifiably better picture than the equivalent sized LCD at the same price. LCD still sells. People will choose the best option for them, and it is not the role of government to dictate what that should be.
For some people Plasma will be the best choice. It has been the best choice for some years because LCD just did not cut the mustard. This is no longer the case. Samsung and Sony are producing product that genuinely rival plasma for contrast, movement and picture quality.
Now you may not be a fan of conspicuous consumption, but like it or not there are those who wish to have a large screen TV. Now if you put 2 TVs next to one another, similar size, price and quality, and one uses 1/2 the power, what the hell do you think is going to happen?
This is why Gerry Brownlee is right. Inform Customers, and they will make the right choice for the right reasons. We do not need legislation to tell customers what TV they should be buying. There are more important issues for the country at the moment.
January 12th, 2009 at 11:57 am
You should be impressed Greenfly. This blog has taken the message to heart and so, rather than use pesticides, the “digital control” approach has been used. Have a look at the number of thumbs-down that have been brought to bear on you. One can only conclude that you have been digitally controlled. :LOL:
January 12th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Giant TVs (and computer monitors) just CAN’T be environmentally unfriendly. Otherwise Nobel Prize winner Al Gore wouldn’t have so many of them…
http://dilettanteville.wordpress.com/2007/05/19/al-gores-computer-set-up/
January 12th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
greenfly, I can’t help but think the scaremongering comment wasn’t well thought out. We all know the greens are the queens of scaremongering. It is only through fear that anyone takes you seriously.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Of course they bloody do!
The sole reason for anything left wing scum do is to be able to tell other people what to do which is of course the former communist wankers all moved to the “green” movement upon the collapse of communism.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
RightNow – perhaps you’re right. Perhaps Mr Brownlee wasn’t scaremongering at all, simply expressing his genuine belief that the lakes would run dry. They didn’t. Not by a long shot. People take the Greens seriously? This is progress indeed! There is hope after all
January 12th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
david – thanks for that. I’m hugely buoyed to hear that Kiwiblog contributers have abandoned the use of pesticides. This is real progress. Now, about those bloated tv screens ….
January 12th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Here you go Greenfly …
http://www.fknnewz.com/view/213/terrorized-into-being-consumers-1of10/
January 12th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
“People take the Greens seriously? This is progress indeed! There is hope after all”
“Vvzzzzzzzzz”
(now that’s the sound of the pigs flying)
January 12th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Greenfly:
I’m pleased that you are buoyed. My preference would have been DDT but then some idiot raised a stink and got it banned – thereby causing a million or so deaths per year from malaria.
Actually on reflection, you have named yourself quite appropriately for a greenie.
A low form of life that gains its sustenance by sucking the sap from the host plant, sap that has been manufactured by virtue of the structure and efforts of the host; a parasite which, unless controlled in number or eradicated, will extract sufficient nutrient to severely weaken the host thus leading to the decline of both species.
Sounds about right to me!
January 12th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Yes david – I’m loathed by good, honest organic gardeners and righteous DDT brigade, in equal measure
You might like to have a wee chat to some of your beloved dairy farmers to gauge their views on DDT (clue: it’s not a substance they would choose to have show up in their (cow’s) milk – there are many parts of the country where even Fonterra will not accept milk from, because of past DDT use.)
BTW – you are wrong about the relationship between plants and greenfly – they are symbiotic, when all the other players (ladybirds, ichneuman wasps etc. ) are taken into account.
Patrick – you’re hearing things! (it’s all inside your head – I only say that because .. pigs don’t fly, yet you hear them …)
slightlyrightly –
“People want to buy energy efficient products given the choice”
“People will choose the best option for them”
Your two statements are contradictory and so is your justification for letting the market decide. It will swing one way or another for reasons other than those proposed in the UK. If people were making purchasing choices because of the state of the environment, we wouldn’t be in the situation we are now, would we.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
So the straight banana, round tomatoe, and ban English cheese brigade are always right?
YMBFJ.
Those bastards churn out 3 laws a day!
Pointless paperwork, which the Southern Europeans agree to and then ignore!
There have been some u turns though. Sending traders to prison for keeping to old weights became to ‘Hot’
So they have their petrol in litres, and yet can buy curvy bananas in lbs again.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Greenfly, the amount of our precious electrical resource you’ve used today by commenting on here has forced another 0.45 pacific islanders to flee their home! Stop making the sea rise you selfish consumer of resources. Shut your system down now!
January 12th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
greenfly – on Kiwiblog, every day’s a good day for hating and bitching about the greenies!
Even from the farthest reaches of the opposition benches, “the greenies” are ruining our lives by their mere existence, therefore we must each day get hot under our collars and have a good old whinge about them. (‘Cos that in and of itself shows you how much “better” we are!)
When will they learn that all right and wrong in the world can be defined in terms of human property rights?
January 12th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Yes Greenfly, DDT was bucketed on at one stage in an attempt to control soil dwelling pests – you may be too young to remember the ravages of Porina, Grass Grub and Army Worm. These are now controlled with other pesticides.
And yes, Fonterra is customer responsive in screening and rejecting milk from land exhibiting excess soil DDE (the residual of DDT) levels because that is demanded by the customers or countries in which customers do business. But that still begs the question as to whether DDT (or possible subsequent developments of it) should have a place in control of pests. For example Greenfly. I don’t eat roses and in my garden they do not form part of my food chain so I would see nothing dangerous in the judicious use of a bit. I would have to say that there are other chemicals I would feel more nervous about.
And I would still maintain that Rachel Carson has a lot to answer for – not all of it good.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
goodgod – that’s ok, most of him is still inside the vale then!
Ratbiter – big ups to Mr Farrar for posting a regular diet of slanted anti-green swill, just to keep his hounds salivating.
Must say, I like it here!
[DPF: The credit goes to the Greens for always wanting to ban things]
January 12th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
C’mon Rat, “hating” is a pretty strong word. Surely you mean “baiting” !
January 12th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
david – that’s the story! Splash a little DDT around, because you don’t eat from your rose garden! Jeeeeeze man! Planning to stay at your place forever are you? Not ever going to sell to someone else who might replant your rose gaarden with veges to feed their children – confident about that are you? You’ve hit that particular nail right on the head. Don’t mention your theory around any dairy men will you.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Yes, at least he can choose to do this. Given the chance you Greens would have legislated to ban free speech completely.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Anyone mention to the greens that were tossed out on their asses?
Who givers a crap what they want banned, they’re as relevant as John Minto this week.
January 12th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
As an owner of an LCD TV, I can either run it at full bore, severely limiting the life of my screen, or I can run it with a lower backlight setting and upping things like contrast and picture brightness without cranking up the backlight. I suspect that if I ran it at its most vivid setting, it would be just as hungry as a Plasma.
However, keep this in perspective: the energy-hungry nature of Plasma means that many manufacturers built an energy saving mode into their plasma screens. SlightlyRighty is right, as LCDs increase their contrast levels, plasma will be moved aside by market forces. Eventually OLED will (hopefully) make its way onto the market and the energy savings will be even better. This is the great thing about competition – technology improves if there is a demand for it.
If consumers want energy efficient TVs, they will buy them. But I’m more disturbed about the Greens wanting to ban something so symbolic of our consumer demand at a time when we need that demand more than ever.
January 12th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
getstaffed
The Greens do not want to ban free speech just the speech they do not agree with.
You would still be allowed to be racist, defamatory, and hateful just as long as you were doing it in a politically correct fashion or in support of a left wing or socialist/communist/terrorist group.
January 12th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
By the way Greenfly, in the paper today (dompost) is the story that every google search you make consumes enough energy to boil a kettle of water twice!
GOOGLE MUST BE BANNED!!!
January 12th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
David @ 1.21.
Soapy water is quite effective at removing greenfly – it seems to have a good deterent effect on other types of greenies too.
January 12th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
I’ve written on this over at kiwipolitico. Happy reading kiwi bloggers!
http://www.kiwipolitico.com/2009/01/nats-give-thumbs-down-to-energy-efficiency/
January 12th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Bar of soap tossed into the room is like a grenade going off at a greenie meeting.
January 12th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
I’m all for banning plasma TVs. Nothing to do with the environment, but they’ve overtaken cars as the new penis substitutes.
If I hear another conversation along the lines of “Oh, you’ve only got a 42 inch? Well I’ve got a fifty two inch”, I’m going to puke.
January 12th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Oh, for the good old days coming back and all sorts of stuff gets banned.
I am looking forward to my next holiday in Fiji or Singapore where I will bring back two plasma TV’s – one for me and the other to sell to pay for my trip.
And for those who were not around in the 60′s and 70′s – that is the reality of it.
My goodness, but how could I be involved in burning all that extra fuel in that 777. Oh the quandary those Greens give me.
January 12th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Plasma TV gives a quantifiably better picture than the equivalent sized LCD at the same price.
We bought a new TV a few months ago. The sales people were really pushing plasma screens. In fact, they were pushing them so hard we thought they had probably been told to get rid of them ASAP which put us right off them.
One problem with their sales pitch was that every plasma screen we looked at had a noticeably inferior picture when compared to the LCD screens that were all around them and this was on fast motion, slow motion, sports, relatively static scenes etc. They must have all been very badly adjusted.
We bought an 100mhz LCD with good contrast and are very happy with it. It copes very well with an Xbox 360′s output and the DVDs we watch look excellent.
And we use less power!
January 12th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
The one thing the Melons have been highly successful in banning, especially amongst themselves, common bloody sense.
January 12th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Thrash Cardiom, have heard that big screen TVs do not take will to things like xbox’s, it would probably pay to check.
January 12th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
big screen TVs do not take will to things like xbox’s,
Do not take well in what way? It seems to cope well enough with the speed. No artifacts etc or bblluurriinngg.
January 12th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Thrash.
Out of curiosity, where did you shop??
January 12th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
# greenfly (125) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 4 Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
BTW – you are wrong about the relationship between plants and greenfly – they are symbiotic, when all the other players (ladybirds, ichneuman wasps etc. ) are taken into account.
You have failed to understand the point. A symbiotic parasite-host relationship requires that the parasite remains in low numbers for either to survive (about 4.9% of voters is ideal for the green party, anything over this amount is bad for the country).
Patrick – you’re hearing things! (it’s all inside your head – I only say that because .. pigs don’t fly, yet you hear them …)
slightlyrightly -
What a dull, pointless response for someone who has told us all how smart he is before.
“People want to buy energy efficient products given the choice”
“People will choose the best option for them”
Your two statements are contradictory and so is your justification for letting the market decide. It will swing one way or another for reasons other than those proposed in the UK.
You must have had another logic failure if you see these statements as contradictory. He is saying that people will make a choice based on their perceived value (price, quality, style, efficiency, longevity) and that if the other factors are close enough, people will choose a more efficient product over a less efficient product.
If people were making purchasing choices because of the state of the environment, we wouldn’t be in the situation we are now, would we.
Now you displaying a common type of Green arrogance. People are making choices based on the state of the environment and that is why we are in the situation we are in now, which is ok. A classic example of environmental influence on consumer choice is the car, which was a very popular option compared to dumping 100,000kgs of horse manure every day on the streets of London alone.
Don’t forget, only 9% of people agree with your assessment of the environment.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Ten years prison for criticising the Green Party. Welcome to the gulag.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Sonny Blount – apologies for the lame reply to Patrick’s … lame joke (though I can’t for the life of me remember telling you all how smart I was) Are you suggesting that people chose cars because they had had enough of horse shit? That’s an interesting take on history. Your claim that only 9% of people agree with ‘my assesment of the environment’ is one that you must have extruded from a poorly lit part of your anatomy. How on earth did you draw that conclusion? Your ‘symbiotic parasite’ theory (4.9% etc) likewise. Puts Act, the Maori Party and the Mr Dunne Party in a bad light and casts them in a remora-like role with National, doesn’t it?
January 13th, 2009 at 9:04 am
“..# bharmer (62) Vote: Add rating 9 Subtract rating 0 Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 8:01 am
# jcuknz (91) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 0 Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 7:51 am
“I can’t wait for Morning Report to return, the silence is deafening.”
I wish someone could explain to me why TVNZ and Radio NZ think it is OK to take a month off each year, usually from a week before Christmas, which is marked by self-congratulatory celebrations of the year not-yet-ended, until about the fourth week of January. They replace detailed news with froth and fizz and retired musicians.
Yes I know that they need annual leave like the rest of us, but have you noticed how often the front persons disappear for long periods during the year. How much leave do they get anyway?..”
but hey..!..you’ve always got whoar…
..another twenty-something stories today..
..and every day..
http://whoar.co.nz/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
January 13th, 2009 at 9:05 am
and i am always ‘better’ than them..anyway..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
January 13th, 2009 at 9:06 am
The longer the bone carving wearers piss off the better.