I don’t think I’ve ever done an If All You See… post featuring a washer (or dryer), but, I’ve done plenty with refrigerators in them, because the Cult of Climastrology feels that they are Bad for climate apocalypse. And have stated that they will come after them. Cue the Let’s Go Brandon admin
Biden admin cracks down on washers, fridges in latest climate action: ‘Overregulation on steroids’
The Biden administration proposed sweeping rules Friday to boost energy efficiency standards for clothes washers and refrigerators in an action it claimed would save consumers money and “significantly reduce pollution.”
The Department of Energy (DOE) said the two regulations, which would be implemented in 2027 if approved, are projected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 233 million metric tons over the next 30 years. The agency also estimated that the energy-efficiency standards taking certain appliance models off the market would save $3.5 billion on an annual basis.
“With today’s proposals, we’re building on a decades-long effort with our industry partners to ensure tomorrow’s appliances work more efficiently and save Americans money,” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in a statement.
It’s not the first time, as the Obama admin tried this schtick several times, once even trying to push to use refrigerants that were not commercially available or feasible.
Experts, though, have argued the appliance regulations are unnecessary and that consumers are already able to freely purchase more efficient appliances.
“This is overregulation on steroids,” Ben Lieberman, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told Fox News Digital in an interview. “These are appliances that have already been subjected to multiple rounds of successively tighter standards.”
“There is just not much there there anymore,” he said. “There’s a great risk of doing more harm than good in the form of appliances — refrigerators or washers that cost more upfront than you’re ever likely to save in the form of less energy and water use.”
Seriously, they already have seen many regulations to be more energy efficient and use less water. This will make them more expensive, much like the new SEER regulations have made air conditioning units several thousand more than they were last year. Washers and fridges probably won’t jump that much, but, consumers are already suffering under Bidenflation, so, why do something that will make them more expensive? And, it will most likely jump up the price of the lower price units, hurting the working and lower middle class folks the most. All for a scam.
Appliances are not and cannot be evil. OK, maybe guillotines, gas chambers or racks.
Refrigerators, stoves, washers, driers, dishwashers, hot water heaters can be made more energy efficient. The big energy users in homes are the HVAC systems.
Live in a smaller house, insulate, use LEDs, ceiling fans, passive solar etc. Save money and cut emissions.
Government regs aren’t developed to offend and punish conservatives, but to improve the quality of life. And they also often stimulate economic activity. If you’ve ever had remodeling at your house, sometimes you have to “bring it up to code” (although many contractors are happy to not do it “to code”). More electricians and plumbers and insulators, oh my.
The transition away from coal and gas power plants will support the transition to lower CO2 emission standards.
Good Lord, you’re a moron. However, this is not news.
Regulations like these are written by bureaucrats to satisfy their own desires for power, control and virtue-signaling. Are you truly naïve enough to believe they have YOUR interests at heart?
In the accurate and immortal words of Frank Zappa: “‘Cause what they do, in Washington, they just takes care of Number One. And Number One ain’t you – You ain’t even Number Two”.
…which will have ZERO effect on CLIMATE CHANGE! as long as China and India continue to build coal power plants.
Look up the Yiddish term “schmuck”. That’s the climate crazies in a nutshell.
The Feds are likely going to force us to use the trash appliances that are used in Europe. A dryer there tosses the clothes for a few hours then you have a damp mess.
They won’t quit until we are washing our cloths down by the stream with rocks and hanging out to dry, unless the HOA prevents that. Detergent will not be allowed since it is bad for the environment. Don’t worry you won’t have many cloths to wash because you won’t be able to afford them.
That’s just it: this statement assumes that consumers are free to choose, but some will choose unwisely, and therefore the government should take that choice away from them.
I’ve said it before: the left are pro-choice on exactly one thing.
Some will choose unwisely, but not just unwisely for themselves but unwisely for others.
We’re a society, not just a collection of individuals. Your air pollution is not yours alone. Nor is your water pollution. Your CO2 pollution does not stay over your homestead.
When a woman chooses an abortion she is not affecting you.
Our socialist from St Louis proves that he is, in fact, socialist:
So, for the distinguished Mr Dowd, society, in the form of government, has a right to take your decisions for you.
And here we have Mr Dowd claiming that other people should have a say in what I do. Got it!
She isn’t? If I happen to be the father of said child, she is killing my son or daughter. When a woman has an abortion, she is choosing her convenience over the life of her child, and he just might choose not to die, except his choice has been taken away.
But it’s more than just that; it affects society as well. As our population ages, we need more and more children born to pay into the ponzi scheme that is Social Security and Medicare. A woman’s abortion means yet another potential worker who will not be paying taxes, taxes which support all sorts of government programs, including, but not limited to, Social Security and Medicare.
Since black women commit prenatal infanticide at five times the rate of white women, it is arguable that abortion has reduced black political power. If it weren’t for abortion, it is quite probable that we would have a country completely controlled by Democrats, so that has certainly affected you!
We have seen a tremendous rise in violent crimes, including murder, among juveniles. I am persuaded that legal abortion is partially responsible, in that we have taught children that it is perfectly legitimate to kill someone whose existence is inconvenient. Children are pretty smart, actually, and they can see that lesson even if the left do not want to admit it.
The reactionary Mr Dana wants to be able to do whatever he desires, whenever he desires. We doubt that he believes in directly stealing from others, but the Bible says little about carbon dioxide and global warming. But Mr Dana may think it’s OK to dump his used motor oil in the nearby river. What are his feelings about upstream neighbors dumping their waste in the river? And like most cons he supports the state control of female reproduction.
Since the 80s the US homicide rate has plummeted. In fact, the homicide rate in the US, although much higher than any European nation, is lower than many nations with bans on abortion. Coincidentally, the US homicide rate has increased since the states started fugging around with reproduction. Florida is considering mandating menstrual cycle details for high school female athletes. A few years ago, the anti-abortion director of the Missouri state health department, Dr Randall Williams, admitted to keeping a spreadsheet that monitored the menstrual periods of Planned Parenthood patients. Cons are batshit crazy about the sex lives of women.
There’s little to support Mr Dana’s hypothesis that juveniles are killing their peers with handguns because they’ve been “groomed” for violence by Roe v Wade. He offered no evidence other than his “feelings”.
Back to the topic at hand. Do American citizens have ANY obligation to each other? I say yes. Do we have ANY obligation to future Americans? I say yes. Many connies feel that humans’ only obligation is to themselves, and that exploitation of all resources is desirable, even when it has significant impacts on others. He considers environmental regulations socialism. Social Security, the military, Medicare, Medicaid, road/bridge/airport/dam construction are all elements of socialist society, but environmental protection, to Mr Dana, is beyond the pale.
As I’ve said before, white nationalists believe in freedom of choice except for women. And blacks and browns and LGBTQs.
What “CO2 Pollution”?. You mean the greening of the earth? No one can point to anything being “polluted” from CO2 with any verifiable evidence
The Repubs need to restrict any rules and regs until we have a legitimate government.
This isn’t complicated. Want to ban something without outright banning it?
Simply create standards the thing has to meet that are IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET.
Then since nobody can build the thing to meet the standards the thing ceases
to be available for sale. They are doing the exact same thing with ICE vehicles
by arbitrarily setting MPG standards that are IMPOSSIBLE to achieve.
They want you cold, hungry, homeless and eventually DEAD. This is part of the
process to get you there.
This isn’t complicated. Want to ban something without outright banning it?
Simply create standards the thing has to meet that are IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET.
Then since nobody can build the thing to meet the standards the thing ceases
to be available for sale. They are doing the exact same thing with ICE vehicles
by arbitrarily setting MPG standards that are IMPOSSIBLE to achieve.
They want you cold, hungry, homeless and eventually DEAD. This is part of the
process to get you there.