Letters to the Editor
-
No, it is only <b>top loading</b> low water washing machines that did not clean well
And I sure as heck did not need to spend $900 for the front loading Sears-brand clothes washer that I bought two years ago. It cost about $500 and is spin-tastic. My clothes come out clean, clean, clean and so dry that I don't have to hang them very long to dry them.
-
flush your toilet twice
Because those damn water-saving toilets don't do the job.
I haven't done the math, is a water-saving toilet flushed twice, sometimes three times, really more efficient than a real, old-fashioned, functioning toilet?
No matter how stupid people are without government interference, government interference is almost guaranteed to make everything stupider.
-
I had a Bosch washer
Until it broke with the same frequency as the old Whirlpool. And like a fine automobile, getting parts let alone labor for an expensive unit is ridiculously expensive. Nah it's back to the old cheap units and when they break I toss them out. If the clothes don't get super clean, run them longer or prewash them.
-
I'm living in Europe now...
And I have to say, given enough time, manufacturers do a great job with energy efficiency. I bought an A+ rated fridge (appliances are given grades, from G to A+++), which costs about a quarter of what a standard U.S. fridge costs to operate per year, and it's fantastic. My washing machine takes longer to wash clothes (about twice as long, depending on the water temperature), but everything comes out much cleaner, and the machine is much more gentle on everything. And toilets come with two flush types - one for #1, and one for #2. And the #2 level of flush takes care of things no problem. Point is, in the U.S., we may experience a downgrade in service while our manufacturers get up to speed, but eventually energy-efficient machines will probably work just as well, if not better, than their non-energy-efficient predecessors.
Also, if the end goal is reduced energy consumption, I see two means - regulating manufacturers or increasing the cost of energy and water (which is regulation too, if the market would dictate a lower cost for energy/water). I'd prefer the former.
-
This is true of any major appliance
Regardless of energy efficiency. If you don't do your homework and research models and brands before buying something, you have a good chance of getting stuck with a lemon, or at the very least a model with features you don't like.
Also, I try never to buy a first-generation model of anything, whether it's energy-efficient appliances, cars, flat-screen TVs, computers, cell phones, or whatever. Yeah, I lose out on the "cool" factor by waiting ... but the next version will have more of the bugs worked out and is usually cheaper. (Look at all of the early adopters who got smoked on the iPhone!)
As for high-efficiency appliances always being worse than regular ones, that's hogwash. My high efficiency AC works very well, as do my EnergyStar computer monitors and refrigerator and my water-saving toilets. I don't have to flush twice, either, and my water bill's gone down since I got them.
I am hanging on to my old, inefficient dishwasher, washing machine and dryer until they give up the ghost, though. But that's just because I'm a cheapskate who hates to trash perfectly good appliances.
-
If
If poor people have to spend 21% more on energy because of foiled conservation measures, then doesn't that degrade their lives, too?
-
Amazing Efficiency
The efficiency of contemporary appliances compared to the same appliances of 15 to 30 years ago is simply amazing. The government regulations that have lead to this situation are probably the most outstandingly successful government regulations of all time.
Purist libertarians might claim that the efficiency we see today would have happened anyway or might have gone even further without the government making things "stupider." I suppose the oil and automobile companies would have worked together to phase out lead, and the A/C and aerosol manufacturers would have phased out CFCs too thanks to the invisible hand of the market. But I'm glad I didn't have to hold my breath.
While every single new breed of appliances might not always be perfect, on the whole, the system has worked exceedingly well and society (rich, poor, and in between) has benefited enormously.
-
faith in technology, not markets
"...manufacturers are trying to comply with regulations that went into effect in January. Tabarrok and Tierney should have more faith in the market."
I know this is nitpicking, but I think the issue here is faith in technology, not faith in the market (except indirectly).
To make an analogy with Darwin's theory of natural selection, in order for selection to work, there must be variation. In the case of these appliances, selection is applied by consumer choice (the market). But if all appliances are the same, there is nothing to select among. We need technological advancement in order to provide the variation upon which selection acts. Can we just assume that there will be technological advancement?
I've generally held the opinion that technological advancement is serendipitous (at least on the small scale), so there's no reason to believe that there will be technological advancements in any particular field (such as energy-efficient washers).
However, I'm willing to entertain the theory that a firm shift in selection pressures (a new regulation, for example) could trigger the development of a large number of small adaptations to deal with that new pressure. In that case, Tabarrok is confusing short term mal-adaptiveness with long-term (permanent) trade-offs.
So, as I was saying, I don't think this has much to do with markets in themselves, and is more related to the nature of innovation. At least, this isn't the type of stuff taught in Econ 101.
-
Speaking of Technology...
Isn't the real issue here just that people have no way of evaluating the "washing quality" of the unit? They have numbers for the efficiency (thanks to gummit), but no big "WashStar Rated:" sticker on the side.
OK, ok, a bit of a joke there. I don't want the government involved in regulating wash-power.
But hey, the innertoobz is here! And WiFiFoFum!
We have pretty cheap communications and data aggregation technology. Someone might even be able to find a way to make a buck collating all the information from washer-owners into a massive online searchable database which crunches information and generates a WashStar Rating for every washer that's sold more than 10,000 units.
Or something like that.
You'd think guys as smart as Tierney and Tabarrok would already have realized that the brilliance of Free Markets will save us. They're crying crocodile tears over the poor getting ripped off, when they don't see the MARKET OPPORTUNITY to steal...er...earn that extra $400 the rich are paying.
It's not really funny they don't believe their own hype, I guess.