• http://www.ceolas.net peter dublin

    Hi Tim,
    In my view, Governor Scwharzenegger is shooting himself in the foot!

    1. Taxation is better for everyone, if energy really needs to be saved.
    TV set taxation based on energy efficiency – unlike bans – gives Governor Schwarzenegger’s impoverished California Government income on the reduced sales, while consumers keep choice.
    This also applies generally,
    to CARS (with emission tax or gas tax), BUILDINGS, DISHWASHERS, LIGHT BULBS etc,
    where politicians instead keep trying to define what people can or can’t use.
    Politicians can use the tax money raised to fund home insulation schemes, renewable projects etc that lower energy use and emissions more than remaining product use raises them.
    Also, the energy efficient products can have their sales taxes lowered.

    2. Product regulation, bans or taxation, are really however UNWARRANTED:

    Where there is a problem – deal with the problem!
    Energy: there is no energy shortage
    (given renewable/nuclear development possibilities, with set emission limits)
    and consumers – not politicians – pay for energy and how they wish to use it.

    It might sound great to
    “Let everyone save money by only allowing energy efficient products”
    However:
    Inefficient products that use more energy can have performance, appearance and construction advantages:
    RE big plasma TV screens they have – for example – contrast advantages
    (dark and light differentiation) along with the bigger image sizes.

    Energy inefficient products also usually cost less, or else they’d be more energy efficient already.

    Examples (using cars, buildings, dishwashers, TV sets, light bulbs etc):
    http://ceolas.net/#cc211x

    There might therefore not even be running cost savings either, depending on usage.

    Two more factors contribute to that:
    1. If households use less energy, then utility companies make less money,
    and will just raise electricity prices to cover their costs.

    Conversely,
    2. Energy use might rise.
    Energy efficiency means cheaper energy, so people just leave TV sets etc on more, knowing that energy bills are lower,
    as also shown by Scottish and Cambridge research
    http://ceolas.net/#cc214x
    Either way supposed energy -or money- savings aren’t there.

    More on why energy efficiency regulations are wrong
    - whether you are for or against energy and emission conservation -
    http://ceolas.net/#cc2x
    Summary
    Politicians don’t object to energy efficiency as it sounds too good to be true. It is.
    –The Consumer Side
    Product Performance — Construction and Appearance
    Price Increase — Lack of Actual Savings: Money, Energy or Emissions. Choice and Quality affected
    – The Manufacturer Side
    Meeting Consumer Demand — Green Technology — Green Marketing
    –The Energy Side
    Energy Supply — Energy Security — Cars and Oil Dependence
    –The Emission Side
    Buildings — Industry — Power Stations — Light Bulbs

  • http://www.naturalmedis.com Natural Medicines – Alternative Natural Remedies

    Great info for saving energy/