1 E NERGY S TAR ® Monitor Industry Meeting April 29, 2002 San Francisco, CA Craig Hershberg US EPA

2 Why Are We Here? Maintain open lines of communication to arrive at a challenging and fair specification Very interested in your input as you have in-depth product and market knowledge Present EPA’s program framework and convey flexibility in terms of efficiency levels based on manufacturer data

3 Meeting Goals Present Draft 1 Monitor Specification Solicit industry feedback on all aspects of the specification and partner commitments Initiate timeline for developing final specification

4 Roles and Responsibilities TCO Development: Presentations this afternoon and tomorrow –Logistical simplicity –Harmonization over the long term NRDC and other interested parties: Provided recommendations to EPA –Elements included in draft specification –Co-presenters with EPA in today’s agenda

5 E NERGY S TAR Voluntary partnership with EPA and DOE Easily identifies energy-efficient products for home and office –Representing approx. top 25% in their category for energy efficiency One label at the national level for over 30 products Reduces air pollution and saves money Turn-key solution International presence

6 Computer Monitor A commercially available electronic product with a display screen and its associated electronics encased in a single housing that is capable of displaying output information from a computer via one or more inputs, such as VGA, DVI, and/or IEEE –CRT, LCD, or other display device –No devices or an upstream cord connected to hub/port when monitor is being tested –Attempted to differentiate TVs and monitors based on how they are marketed and sold

7 The Big Picture Savings in 2010 under proposed monitor specifications: –Energy: 26 billion kWh –Energy Bill (in 2001 $): $1.8 billion –Carbon: 3.5 MMT Equivalent to 29 billion lbs of CO 2 not emitted into air –Equals yearly emissions of approx. 2.5 million cars Notes: (1) Savings include active, sleep, and off, and (2) Assumes CRTs are replaced with a mix of E NERGY S TAR qualified LCDs and CRTs, with increases in market penetration going to LCDs

8 Timeline: Key Proposed Dates April 2002 EPA releases Draft 1 Specification First EPA/Industry meeting May 2002Industry to test products and submit data/suggestions to EPA EPA/EU meeting in Nice, France June 2002EU and industry to provide comments on Draft 1 Specification EPA issues Draft 2 Specification July 2002Executive Order 1 year anniversary EU and industry to provide comments on Draft 2 Specification August - Fall 2002EPA releases subsequent drafts as needed EU and industry to provide comments as needed EPA finalizes specification, preferably in late summer January 2003V4.0 tentatively takes effect

9 European Union Signed agreement between EPA and EU to coordinate OE labeling Work together to develop new or revised specifications covered by agreement EPA to present draft monitor specifications to EU in late May in Nice, France EPA would like initial industry feedback in 3 weeks to include in EU presentation

10 Why Active Power? Feasible without negatively affecting product performance; in fact, some manufacturers are already meeting the proposed specifications Limited additional energy savings potential in sleep and off modes Not dependent on enabling rates Allows a variety of technologies (e.g., CRT and LCD) to qualify

11 Recognizing LCDs Highlight a new technology in the marketplace Additional benefits: –Space –Heat –Power consumption –Useful life –Installation –Disposal

12 Key Stakeholders Panel Manufacturers Final Assemblers/Resellers European and Asian Labeling Programs Retailers Market Transformation Community (Utilities, Regional Groups, and Environmental Organizations)

13 Mayo Clinic Case Study More and more businesses, ranging from hospitals to financial institutions, are making the switch to LCD monitors. Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, MN, started making the switch to LCDs in As of January 2002, they have over 7,900 LCD monitors in use around the hospital.

14 Annual Savings for Mayo Clinic For each 15” LCD monitor that replaced a 17” CRT monitor, the Clinic saved over $40 in energy bills. This amounts to a total savings of over $321,135 annually.