Searching \ for '[TECH] Actual cost of CFLs was: Just how use' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=just+how+use
Search entire site for: 'Actual cost of CFLs was: Just how use'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[TECH] Actual cost of CFLs was: Just how use'
2009\12\31@180001 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
YES NOPE9 wrote:
> I am guessing ( I may not be correct ) , that CFLs are
> subsidized by the government.   Is this true in California
> and New Zealand.  When people quote a price , I would
> like to know what the actual cost to purchase would be
> without the subsidy.  Somebody is paying that subsidy and
> it may be moi !

No, it's not you, unless you are a Pacific Gas and Electric customer. It
is not a government subsidy, it is a PG&E instant rebate. They also
rebate certain (efficient) models of major appliances.

To some extent I suppose I am subsidizing the people who buy California
CFLs (illegally ?) resold on eBay.

Like Russell, I also mark the date on the bulbs when I install them.

Typically a percentage of them fail early, then there is the middle of
the pack at about 2 years, and then there are the elders that last a
long time.

I even use them in flush ceiling mount bucket fixtures, running base-up
and they seem to survive pretty well except in summertime when the attic
is very hot.

Cheers,

Bob



2009\12\31@182011 by Vitaliy

face
flavicon
face
Bob Blick wrote:
>> I am guessing ( I may not be correct ) , that CFLs are
>> subsidized by the government.   Is this true in California
>> and New Zealand.  When people quote a price , I would
>> like to know what the actual cost to purchase would be
>> without the subsidy.  Somebody is paying that subsidy and
>> it may be moi !
>
> [...]It
> is not a government subsidy, it is a PG&E instant rebate.

It definitely *is* a form of government subsidy. Pacific Gas and Electric is
a government regulated monopoly: the government must approve any rate
increases, and the government forces PG&E to offer "rebates" to customers. I
don't see it being substantially different from a direct tax.

To further illustrate the point, the government of California recently
bailed out PG&E to the tune of $10B:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Company#Bankruptcy

Similar programs are in effect across the US.

TANSTAAFL.

Vitaliy

2009\12\31@190313 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
Vitaliy wrote:
> Bob Blick wrote:
>>> I am guessing ( I may not be correct ) , that CFLs are
>>> subsidized by the government.   Is this true in California
>>> and New Zealand.  When people quote a price , I would
>>> like to know what the actual cost to purchase would be
>>> without the subsidy.  Somebody is paying that subsidy and
>>> it may be moi !
>> [...]It
>> is not a government subsidy, it is a PG&E instant rebate.
>
> It definitely *is* a form of government subsidy. Pacific Gas and Electric is
> a government regulated monopoly: the government must approve any rate
> increases, and the government forces PG&E to offer "rebates" to customers. I
> don't see it being substantially different from a direct tax.

You can choose to think of it however you wish. It makes economic sense
for me to use CFLs, and people who don't buy electricity aren't paying
what you call a "tax". I don't watch ESPN, but if I buy cable TV I am
subsidizing it to the tune of $4 per month. Would that be an ESPN "tax",
organized crime, or just "good business"?

Needless to say, people in Colorado (or Arizona) are not subsidizing my
low-cost bulbs, which was the original question.

And I choose to live in California. It costs more $, but it's worth it.
I like saving electricity, and if the Public Utilities Commission (or
whoever) thinks it's a good idea to provide incentives, that seems like
a step in the right direction. There are a lot of houses here with solar
panels because of incentives. It helps further the technology and each
house is like a small pilot program finding out what works and what
doesn't when the cost/benefit ratio is different. They could do a lot worse.

> TANSTAAFL

There are if you provide them. I was with lots of people on Christmas
day giving meals to the hungry.

-Bob


'[TECH] Actual cost of CFLs was: Just how use'
2010\01\01@164707 by Vitaliy
face
flavicon
face
Bob Blick wrote:
>> TANSTAAFL
>
> There are if you provide them. I was with lots of people on Christmas
> day giving meals to the hungry.

The material point is, somebody (you, the sponsoring charity, etc) had to
pay for the meals. There are few truly "free" things.

Vitaliy



P.S. I too believe in helping people out. I'm sure you and I disagree on the
means, and the style.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible/passage.aspx?q=Matthew+6:3-4

2010\01\01@173436 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
Vitaliy, I seem to recall we were asked to stop contributing to this thread.

Vitaliy wrote:
> Bob Blick wrote:
>>> TANSTAAFL
>> There are if you provide them. I was with lots of people on Christmas
>> day giving meals to the hungry.
>
> The material point is, somebody (you, the sponsoring charity, etc) had to
> pay for the meals. There are few truly "free" things.
>
> Vitaliy
>
>
>
> P.S. I too believe in helping people out. I'm sure you and I disagree on the
> means, and the style.
> http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible/passage.aspx?q=Matthew+6:3-4
>

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2010 , 2011 only
- Today
- New search...