Conserve this…

event_image

I just heard an ad on the radio by National Grid asking its users (I am one of them) to take some sort of pledge to cut my energy consumption by 3% a year for ten years.

That is all well and groovy, but…

I think National Grid should also make a pledge to reduce my energy rate by 3% a year for ten years…the way I see it is if people cut their energy consumption, places like National Grid will lose money…you know what that translates into…you got it…increased rates for schmucks like us to make up the difference for the money they are losing cuz we are using less of their product.

Now about the water bottle bill…

Starting 10/31, we are going to have the privlege of paying 5 cents a bottle of water for deposit…I understand the surface idea behind is to get people to use less plastic.

That is all well and groovy, but…

I think it is just a money grab by the state and the effect it will have on lessening the use of plastic will be negligible at best…the money in it for the state is when people don’t return the bottles.

Though I believe consumer habits are part of the answer in solving the nation’s energy and conservation problems, I think normal everyday people are the easiest to target to pay for it.

6 thoughts on “Conserve this…

  1. I pledge to apply my best effort to become the largest energy consumer that I can be. Levels of energy exploitation have always been, and continues to be, a measure of productivity, success, contribution to the greater good, and has marked the upward surge of mankind since the industrial revolution.

    Energy consumption is a factor of success and growth. Pragmatically cutting energy consumption for its own sake, is the type of logic best reserved for Alice In Wonderland or for those who prefer that civilization and freedom shift into reverse.

  2. During the energy crisis in the late 70s I recall the Carter Administration advocating the rationing of consumer energy usage (gas & electricity) as a smaller percentage of current usage. That immediately prompted many people to use MORE energy in order to compensate for the potential future reductions.

    That’s now just a lesson in behavioral psychology, something I hope the government learned from. What National Grid is attempting is completely voluntary, trying to get us to be altruistic. Do they have an ulterior motive?

    Why, yes, they might. It is also likely that it will make National Grid money in the long run by saving them wear and tear on the existing infrastructure. Every time they have to run new lines, build new substations or *especially* build new power plants it costs the company an arm and a leg, and lots of time fighting the lawsuits. While those costs are eventually passed on to the consumer, in today’s dollars that have an immediate effect as they dampen cash flow and typically raise both labor and capital costs. That’s not good for the shareholders nor for executive bonuses which are tied to things like, you know, profits.

    So there may be some rationale to what they are doing. Certainly, in parts of the country where the population is growing it makes sense for them to squeeze as much out of the existing infrastructure as they can. Not so sure about WNY, though.

    BBD

  3. Buffalo Blood Donor,

    All valid points. I also remember reading that promoting energy efficiency to their customers was mandated by government regulations or a government program. I remember reading in the paper that National Grid is mandated to spend a percentage of their revenue on these green promotions.

  4. BBD & Mr. Bloviator…thank you for the well thought out responses. Both examples of why I like to blog, get comments and read blogs. You get different views on issues that make you think.

  5. The bottle bill makes me mad. It is us the nickeling us to death by New York that drives people away.

  6. Maria,

    Think of the bright side of this. That 5 cent deposit is also going to make you and I “return” to the voting booth and “return” our government back to the people.

Leave a Reply