dagblog - Comments for "In the Small Print: Tax Bill Eliminates Credits for Energy Savings"

Your point is well-taken

wws — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 17:12:03 +0000

In reply to This is beyond stupid. Like

Your point is well-taken about the oil lobbists, LULU -- this regressive move probably had nothing to do with them, particularly since oil companies themselves are trying to hedge their bets with investments in natural gas and, so they would have us believe, in solar and/or wind.

I do find this move so discouraging, though, no matter what industry it benefits -- what we know for sure is that it doesn't benefit us, either in the near future or long-term.

This is beyond stupid. Like

A Guy Called LULU — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 17:00:30 +0000

In reply to In the Small Print: Tax Bill Eliminates Credits for Energy Savings

This is beyond stupid. Like the article says, it is a move in the wrong direction. Tremendous gains in efficiency is something that can be achieved right now. Imagine if over the last fifteen years that all new houses had been built under regulations requiring a twenty percent improvement in heating and cooling efficiency, a goal that is very easy to reach. The pay-off would continue for as long as the house was occupied. The more expensive the fuel, the greater the pay back and anyone who doesn't expect the relative cost of fuel to rise is just not paying attention.
This might be the only energy topic where I would be inclined to not put blame on the oil lobby, but I certainly might be wrong. Maybe there is just some sort of inertia that makes them attack everything they have always attacked. I expect them to lobby for tax breaks and cheap mineral leases etc, so as to make every possible penny on every drop of oil they produce, but I also expect that they will, from now on, always have a high demand for every drop produced regardless of whether it is burned efficiently or not. I don't see why they would have spent any "energy" on doing away with efficiency credits.
Right now, or at least last month, it would cost me twenty-five dollars to take a refrigerator to the landfill. The cost was for them evacuating the freon. Alternately, the electric company will pick up an old refrigerator and pay you forty dollars if you show that you replaced it with a modern, more efficient, one.

Excellent question, Stardust.

wws — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 16:20:44 +0000

In reply to Hard not to be uber-cynical

Excellent question, Stardust. And if homeowners (and landlords) no longer perceive any incentive (as you say, it was low enough already) to invest in energy saving appliances and heating systems, what, then, are the implications for the manufacturing jobs that currently exist to produce them?

This strikes me as being the same sort of insane giveaway as the inheritance tax -- I read yesterday that the Republicans didn't even ask for it; rather, Obama offered it.

How do you spell OIL LOBBY?

Hard not to be uber-cynical

we are stardust — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 15:51:45 +0000

In reply to In the Small Print: Tax Bill Eliminates Credits for Energy Savings

Hard not to be uber-cynical about cutting energy-saving credits for homes. Christ; the former maximums were low enough! Why is this President helping us walk backward on so many issues?