Daily Score Blog

Here's a nice success story from Ontario: The Great Refrigerator Roundup. If you have a fridge, freezer, or a/c unit that's older than 10 years, the province will take it off your hands for free. It's no big deal, really, except that free is an attractive price point compared to the headache of transporting your old fridge, plus paying the disposal charges.

The appliances are then recycled and the refrigerants get disposed of properly. But the best part is simply that they're no longer plugged in. That means big electricity savings:

For every 10 - 12 fridges removed, one typical Ontario home is effectively removed from the grid forever... A typical fridge built in1986 uses 1,500 kWh, costing $180 per year, while a new ENERGY STAR® rated fridge will use approximately one-third of the electricity. 

As of January, residents had disposed of more than 50,000 appliances this way, which is no surprise given that upgrading to a newer appliance can save so much money. It's a win for the climate too because the program yields substantial energy savings. (For more wins like this, read Alan's excellent blog post: Cap and Caulk.)

Now, just imagine how well a program like the refrigerator roundup could work if it were amped up with some auction revenue from cap and trade program. Most obviously, the revenue could simply pay to operate more programs like this, in more places. But we could go further: putting a bounty on old appliances, so that every appliance turned in would earn a reward -- maybe a $100 coupon toward a new energy-efficient one. Going further still, a sales tax exemption for energy efficient appliances could make a new model even more attractive. (In fact, British Columbia's new budget announces just such an exemption, while a similar proposal has been limping along in Washington's legislature this session.)

Combined, a coupon and a sales tax exemption could shave 25 percent or so off the cost of a basic but efficient new fridge. And that new fridge, of course, will save even more money, maybe $100 or more each year. Sweet.

But we could do even better.

Last week I wrote about two studies that cast biofuels production in a worrisome light, and about what that could mean for public policy.

Over at Climate Solutions, researcher Patrick Mazza takes a dim view of the two studies, and a sunnier view of biofuels' potential.

Update 3/13/07: Patrick just posted a second installment. (A third is yet to come.)

In the wake of the most expensive gas in US history (even after adjusting for inflation), the Tacoma News Tribune has a stellar editorial that makes this point:

High oil and gas prices exact a terrible toll on the low-income. They eat into the grocery budget of those who must drive extensively as part of their livelihoods or education. For rich and poor alike, they drive up inflation both directly and indirectly.

Exactly. But I wish the editorial had gone a little further to spell out what this should mean for public policy. To my way of thinking, it means that it is unwise -- and deeply unfair -- to continue with business as usual for road planning. A transportation strategy that centers on roads, long distance driving, and single occupancy vehicles is like asking for economic pain.

Last weekend, when I filled up my tank, I paid $3.45 for the cheap stuff. And that could turn out to be a bargain. Nowadays, both the public and the experts believe that we may see $4.00 gas by summertime. As I've argued before, the cheapest and fairest thing is to get unhitched from oil now --  before things really get ugly.