The time has arrived for home automation specialists to recognise their legal duty to the environment and consumers. First off, they must get to grips with the issue of labelling home entertainment products.

Earlier this year Environment Minister Peter Garrett announced a new labelling scheme to allow consumers and home automation specialists to identify the most energy-efficient TV sets at point of sale.

His announcement coincided with the release of a report on household energy use that forecast an increase of 56% by 2020 (see Connected Home Australia September/October 2008, industry news, p.8).

The concern surrounding home entertainment product emissions is emerging consistently from the corridors of power.

Without wanting to sound alarmist, if this is something you are unaware of then you need to pay attention.

Director of the New South Wales home automation installer Easy Living Solutions Justin Adcock says all hi-fi equipment this year will come under a star rating for power efficiency on standby.

“A lot of the big players are aware of this, but it seems they are not too worried.”

If Justin is right then the big players are playing a dangerous game.

Peter Garrett points out that 25% of Australians buy a new television each year, and TVs are now the fourth-biggest use of electricity – behind water heating, domestic refrigeration and lighting.

“It is critical that we help households identify and invest in the latest cost-saving, energy-efficient technologies in appliances and energy-saving and water-saving design features,” he says.

The Australian Consumers Association (ACA) says a paucity of energy-use labels in Australia leaves consumers of video games, plasma TVs, computer products and whitegoods in the dark about the power consumed by these items.

Take a Sony PlayStation3 left on but not in use. It can cost almost $250 a year – which is five times the cost of a medium-sized fridge.

The Xbox 360 is not far behind. With power bills going up, ACA says it’s wise to turn off electrical devices at the plug or at least use standby power.

But the whole issue of gadgets and gizmos and the energy they use clearly goes way beyond the boundaries of the buildings we occupy in Australia.

Last year the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change included in its report on global warming a chapter dedicated to residential and commercial buildings.

However, lead author and specialist in energy-efficient buildings of California’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Mark Levine says the situation is not as grim as it may sound.

“There is a broad array of accessible and cost effective technologies and know-how … which can abate greenhouse gas emissions in buildings to a significant extent … these include passive solar design (and) high-efficiency lighting and appliances.”

Dr Levine draws attention to labelling and training initiatives as a way of reducing carbon emissions in buildings.

And for those retrofitters among any tradies reading this article he pointedly says the greatest challenge is the development of effective strategies for upgrading existing buildings.

“Climate change literacy and awareness of technological, cultural and behavioural choices are important preconditions to fully operating policies.

“Applying these policy approaches needs to go hand-in-hand with programs that increase consumer access to information and awareness and knowledge through education.”

General manager of NSW-based AV distributor WC Wederspoon Michael Williams recently gave a talk to CEDIA Expo on the Gold Coast on the subject of sustainability and the law.

He says the TV labelling scheme is good news because it will educate the public. However, he suggests the crucial issue of product manufacture is being neglected amid all the discussion on labelling.

“It is a watered-down version due to the fact that all we rate these devices on is power consumption.

“So a device manufactured using ‘dirty power’ and sweat-shop labour by a non‑green manufacturer – and is planned for obsolescence – can still get a fabulous star rating.

“It will still qualify for upcoming legislation even though its manufacturing process generates more CO2 emissions than its reduced power consumption will ever save.”

Michael says the move by the minister’s office could mean a huge loss of choice for the consumer.

“So many products will no longer be available. It could mean that the consumer has a chance to be educated on the availability of green AV products. It could mean higher prices. It could mean considerable savings on energy bills.

“It could mean the opportunity to earn personal carbon credits.”

Yet Michael has no doubt that the introduction of labelling will make a difference to energy saving in the home, and he draws attention to Europe to make his point.

“Let me use the example from the German Environmental Fund about a power-saving process developed by a German AV manufacturer.

“If everyone in Germany used this process in their home entertainment products the country would save somewhere between 1.4GWh and 2GWh a year – enough to power more than 350 households annually.

“In the US they will tell you that each year they could save the equivalent of 17 power stations or taking three million cars off the road.

“In Australia it would be the equivalent of taking at least 28,000 cars off the road each year. This is hardly insignificant.”

It is a point taken up by Dr Levine in the chapter from the UN on global warming. However, he brings a measure of scepticism to his argument as to how consumers, architects and other professionals will demonstrate their commitment to energy-saving technology.

“In spite of the availability of … high-efficiency technologies and practices, energy use in buildings continues to be much higher than necessary.

“The substantial barriers that need to be overcome and the relatively slow pace of policies and programs for energy efficiency will provide major challenges to rapid achievement of low-emission buildings.”

What makes this so frustrating for the likes of consumers and home installation specialists with an interest in energy efficiency is that the methods hardly amount to rocket science.

For example, 75-90% of lighting energy use can be saved by the use of occupancy and daylight sensors to dim and switch off electric lighting, more efficient lighting devices and measures such as ambient lighting.

But all this needs to be considered alongside the growing proliferation of electronic equipment such as set-top boxes, Dr Levine says.

“Portable devices with attendant battery chargers – combined with inefficient power supplies and highly inefficient power supplies and highly inefficient circuit designs that draw unnecessary power in the resting or standby modes – have caused this equipment to be responsible for a large fraction of the electricity demand growth in residential and commercial buildings in many nations.”

However, he highlights Australia along with South Korea, China and Japan as deserving of praise for efforts to reduce standby energy use. In other words, Australia is ahead of the game in many ways.

For example, minimum energy performance Standards for home entertainment products have long been endorsed here by organisations such the Equipment Energy Efficiency Committee, which reports to the Ministerial Council on Energy.

The council is made up of Australian federal, State and territory governments and the New Zealand Government.

The Federal Government’s efforts to get its citizens to ‘kick the carbon habit’ with the help of a TV labelling scheme may be laudable. Whether they will succeed depends on consumer commitment. Only time will tell.

And that, as the likes of former United States vice-president Al Gore continues to remind us, is running out.