Before heading home to face the anger at the now infamous health care “town halls,” Congress rushed through an extension to what was then considered a popular program: Cash for Clunkers. Then, like much of the August break, Cash for Clunkers went sideways as critics picked apart the program’s weaknesses, consumers stopped showing up with so many clunkers, and dealers started making noise about something as simple as when they might actually get the rebate money that the government promised.
So, what do you do when you have a poorly-conceived and ill-managed project winding down (Clunkers expires at 8 p.m. EST on August 24)? Kick off another one, even more poorly thought out, and gloss it with an equally catchy name: Cash for Refrigerators.
Beginning in the fall, consumers will have access—through existing state-level energy efficiency incentive programs —$300 million in stimulus funds made available as rebates for energy efficient appliances.
So far, so good. If a consumer is out buying an appliance to replace an existing or broken-down one, it is better that they choose an energy efficient model. But, what about special incentive program purchases? Who is the buyer and why are they buying?
The answer is that the most well-educated and most discerning consumers become aware of and make use of special rebate programs for energy efficient appliances. These are not impulse buyers. Some may actually be committed to greening their kitchen and just waiting for the right incentive push, but I doubt it. In other words, my perception is that most of the $300 million will go to middle-class households that already may have a relatively efficient refrigerator, like Clunkers, it won’t get at the really dreadful stuff in use in the lowest income households.
Worse still, this program does not borrow one component from Clunkers that would actually have been effective: there is no requirement to take the old appliance offline. Odds are that many of the middle class households claiming the rebate will use the new appliance in the kitchen, and move the old one to the basement, the garage, or the back porch, where it will be pressed into service storing extra beer and the overflow from Costco. The old fridge remains on the grid and we add in the new appliance too. Does that sound like a good environmental deal?
Granted, it would be very difficult to have consumers truck their old fridge in to dispose of it and claim eligibility for the program, but why not make disposal of the appliance part of the program and use some of the $300 million to fund existing programs in cities around the U.S. which haul away old appliances and make sure that they are disposed of properly — or, at all.
Without some guarantee that the old appliance is coming offline, there is no telling what the efficiency gains of this kind of spending might actually be. With appliances that are unlikely to find duplicate use in the house (i.e., a dishwasher), the program may return some value in kwH reduction; but, without a guarantee in place, we might just have given the cash directly to the appliance manufacturers and saved a lot of administrative difficulty.
Find this photo and others on Flickr by searching “edcrowle.”
The writers think that most of us have enough room to have two refrigerators. Most city dwellers (and most people live in cities) scarcely have room for one refrigerator much less two. I would wager that most people will gladly give up their old clunker.
This article turns stupid toward the end.
"Odds are that many of the middle class households claiming the rebate will use the new appliance in the kitchen, and move the old one to the basement, the garage, or the back porch, where it will be pressed into service storing extra beer and the overflow from Costco. The old fridge remains on the grid and we add in the new appliance too."
You don't know that for sure and have no way to prove it.
"Granted, it would be very difficult to have consumers truck their old fridge in to dispose of it and claim eligibility for the program, …"
I think most of the big-box stores that sell large appliances will haul away the old one for free or cheap. It happened when I bought my stove from Lowes. It's also one reason the previous sentence doesn't make sense.
But I agree that along with this plan should come an education and recycling effort that Cash for Clunkers lacked.
If anyone really believes that this program – or Cash For Clunkers – has anything at all to do with environmentalism, they are living in a dream world.
This program has a single intended goal: to get US consumer to stop spending and stop saving. There's no end to the Federal government's shortsightedness.
Thanks for reading and for posting the comments! Always glad to get some conversation going.
W. Worth: I agree that a lot of urban consumers do not have space for an extra fridge, but the fact is that a large percentage of those same consumers are renters who do not own or upgrade the fridge or other major appliances in their units — that duty falls to the landlord. Landlords would not be eligible for this program on any mass scale.
Grapecranberry:
Absolutely correct, I have no empirical evidence to show that the program will be used for back-up fridges, just my hunch based on some time in the utility industry analyzing the use of these rebate programs as they currently exist.
As for Lowe's hauling away the old appliance — indeed they do offer that service in many locales, but it doesn't come with any guarantees as to how the appliance will be disposed of. If the program is designed to get these old appliances off the grid (or similarly old appliances that clunkers could be picked over to supply junk parts), then the program is not a success even if Lowe's hauls the appliance away and either disposes of it in a less-environmentally friendly way or sells it for parts.
My question is that I am supposed to be delivered a refrigerator this Saturday. I am newly single and could probably spend money on a new seal but the frig I have now is old and pretty bad. If there is something that could or would help me pay for this I would love to know a little more info. I would get a seal if not to expensive to hold on awhile. I have to ask the landlord if rent can be late. For me this is a major purchase and I'm already scared and upset but I don't want food to go to waste one day if I'm at work. I've just heard today of this from the gov. What to do? Try to get by and save a little money or just purchase now? Please help my decision?
Why not just give the money to those that would buy use the rebate and tax those that would not same as cars did .
Many utilities have policies like the one at ComEd for appliace recycling. http://www.comed.com/homesavings/programsincentiv…
For a limited time, through ComEd’s Smart Ideas for Your Home program, ComEd will pay you $25 for your old, working fridge or freezer, pick it up for FREE and recycle it in an environmentally responsible way. We'll also pick up and recycle your old working room air conditioners when we come to get your refrigerator or freezer.
I live in New Hampshire. For a limited time, customers of NH retailers who purchase an energy-efficient ENERGYSTAR®-rated clothes washing machine can receive a $50 rebate … (or) who purchase an energy-efficient ENERGYSTAR®-rated room air conditioner between March 1 and August 31 can receive a $20 rebate by filling out a mail-in rebate form. Refrigerators and stoves – no deal. So in whose pocket is all this supposed stimulus money going?