convex
- 1,193
- 48
The Cost of Going Green
The local electric utility came door to door recently, with gifts of CFL bulbs and low flow faucet and shower heads.
A noble gesture, but a reduction in rates would have been more appreciated.
However, I am sure the utility will get green points and exemptions for the full retail value of these handouts.
The bulbs are 13 watt CFL's, claiming a lifespan of 11 years with a projected savings of $68 per bulb - the other side of the box claims $66 per bulb?!
Oh, made in China I see ...
Some how I cannot see the reduction in carbon footprint when a product is manufactured in a country with substandard emissions control and then shipped trans-ocean. Hmmm ... and contains mercury. The Energy star certification seems not to take this into consideration. Not to mention yet another blow to local manufacturing - shouldn't we at least be trying to support our domestic economy with such a venture?
But I digress.
This post is not about politics or the economy, but the residential cost of being power conscious.
The packaging of the bulb mentioned before has more small print: Savings based on a 60W incandescent @ $0.12/kWh.
Not exactly comparing apples and apples. The 13W CFL puts out comparable brightness to a 60W Incandescent.
At less than a quarter of the power, there are obvious savings, but the practice of 'equivalent watts' is misleading.
Additionally, my utility company charges just over $0.06 /kWh as opposed to the $0.12 used in the savings formula; again, very misleading.
If we take the $68 boasted savings and adjust for $0.06, the savings is closer to $34
$34 savings averaged over an 11 year life cycle is roughly a $3.10 annual savings.
$3.10 annual savings equals about $0.26 per month.
An 11 year investment to net a 26 cent monthly savings.
In theory, savings are great.
The reality is that Mr. and Mrs.Average are on tight budgets.
In my grocers I priced a package of 6 (60W)incandescent for $1.99 vs. 6 pack of 13W CFL's for $22.99.
And despite my hippy 'love the earth' outlook, I regrettably chose the incadescents.
I would rather be able to buy a little bit of meat for my weeks meals and dish out an extra $1.50 monthly for electric, than sit hungry in a CFL lit room.
The point I am trying to make here ( ... yes there is a point) is the ridiculous terms for return on investment.
I find it difficult to rationalize an 11 year investment for $0.25 monthly return, nor am I sure I will be living here in 11 years to fully realize the return.
Granted, it may seem petty to go on about a light bulb, but this opens the door to a couple of other area's in which high initial cost and lengthy return terms prohibit most from plunging into a greener lifestyle.
I will not go into any depth, just supporting observations on my part.
Solar Conversion:
Home depot has a nice little info booth on their solar solutions.
Bottom line - roughly $99,000 investment to bring you off the grid with sell back to utility option.
Their figures show it as 20 year investment. Another vendor sent out fliers - similar pricing.
Solar Hot Water:
Roughly $7000 investment with a 10 year projected return.
Solar Pool Heater:
Roughly $9000 again with a 10 year projection.
The prices are out of reach for most, who will continue to use less efficient sources.
The 10 and 20 year returns are only applicable if you stay with your home the complete time.
Long term investment in new technologies is a gamble at best.
Every week that passes brings newer and more efficient ways of doing things. I highly doubt the current systems will compare to anything on the market in the next 5 years.
Current systems will be no doubt quickly become obsolete.
Try and sell your house in 10 years with an obsolete, unsupported off grid system - I doubt your investment will be reflected in the property value.
Well, rant over ...
Simply put; manufacturing with perhaps government support MUST find a way to deliver these systems at an affordable buy in price and a REASONABLE return term. With the potential risk for obsolescence, these technologies should be held to some standard or design criteria to ensure seamless functionality with future systems for the duration of the return term.
Cheers
The local electric utility came door to door recently, with gifts of CFL bulbs and low flow faucet and shower heads.
A noble gesture, but a reduction in rates would have been more appreciated.
However, I am sure the utility will get green points and exemptions for the full retail value of these handouts.
The bulbs are 13 watt CFL's, claiming a lifespan of 11 years with a projected savings of $68 per bulb - the other side of the box claims $66 per bulb?!
Oh, made in China I see ...
Some how I cannot see the reduction in carbon footprint when a product is manufactured in a country with substandard emissions control and then shipped trans-ocean. Hmmm ... and contains mercury. The Energy star certification seems not to take this into consideration. Not to mention yet another blow to local manufacturing - shouldn't we at least be trying to support our domestic economy with such a venture?
But I digress.
This post is not about politics or the economy, but the residential cost of being power conscious.
The packaging of the bulb mentioned before has more small print: Savings based on a 60W incandescent @ $0.12/kWh.
Not exactly comparing apples and apples. The 13W CFL puts out comparable brightness to a 60W Incandescent.
At less than a quarter of the power, there are obvious savings, but the practice of 'equivalent watts' is misleading.
Additionally, my utility company charges just over $0.06 /kWh as opposed to the $0.12 used in the savings formula; again, very misleading.
If we take the $68 boasted savings and adjust for $0.06, the savings is closer to $34
$34 savings averaged over an 11 year life cycle is roughly a $3.10 annual savings.
$3.10 annual savings equals about $0.26 per month.
An 11 year investment to net a 26 cent monthly savings.
In theory, savings are great.
The reality is that Mr. and Mrs.Average are on tight budgets.
In my grocers I priced a package of 6 (60W)incandescent for $1.99 vs. 6 pack of 13W CFL's for $22.99.
And despite my hippy 'love the earth' outlook, I regrettably chose the incadescents.
I would rather be able to buy a little bit of meat for my weeks meals and dish out an extra $1.50 monthly for electric, than sit hungry in a CFL lit room.
The point I am trying to make here ( ... yes there is a point) is the ridiculous terms for return on investment.
I find it difficult to rationalize an 11 year investment for $0.25 monthly return, nor am I sure I will be living here in 11 years to fully realize the return.
Granted, it may seem petty to go on about a light bulb, but this opens the door to a couple of other area's in which high initial cost and lengthy return terms prohibit most from plunging into a greener lifestyle.
I will not go into any depth, just supporting observations on my part.
Solar Conversion:
Home depot has a nice little info booth on their solar solutions.
Bottom line - roughly $99,000 investment to bring you off the grid with sell back to utility option.
Their figures show it as 20 year investment. Another vendor sent out fliers - similar pricing.
Solar Hot Water:
Roughly $7000 investment with a 10 year projected return.
Solar Pool Heater:
Roughly $9000 again with a 10 year projection.
The prices are out of reach for most, who will continue to use less efficient sources.
The 10 and 20 year returns are only applicable if you stay with your home the complete time.
Long term investment in new technologies is a gamble at best.
Every week that passes brings newer and more efficient ways of doing things. I highly doubt the current systems will compare to anything on the market in the next 5 years.
Current systems will be no doubt quickly become obsolete.
Try and sell your house in 10 years with an obsolete, unsupported off grid system - I doubt your investment will be reflected in the property value.
Well, rant over ...
Simply put; manufacturing with perhaps government support MUST find a way to deliver these systems at an affordable buy in price and a REASONABLE return term. With the potential risk for obsolescence, these technologies should be held to some standard or design criteria to ensure seamless functionality with future systems for the duration of the return term.
Cheers
