From last week's story about how a white roof can save you $$/energy over time,
"Studies show that white roofs reduce air-conditioning costs by 20 percent or more in hot, sunny weather. Lower energy consumption also means fewer of the carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming.
What is more, a white roof can cost as little as 15 percent more than its dark counterpart, depending on the materials used, while slashing electricity bills."
While "Cash for Clunkers" is being painted by the right as a failure and another example of Governmental confusion, in reality, after you sift through lies, is a program that exceeded expectations in all areas by such a great degree, that you must build on it's success.
The American public, when given an incentive to make the US greener, and make their lives more cost efficient, have chosen the proper and reasonable path. See the quote above regarding white roofs.
The white roof can cost as little as 15% more than it's dark counterparts, as it says. So, why doesn't the Gov't subsidize that difference as well? You wouldn't be forced to do it, you wouldn't be pushed into it, it isn't socialism, it's simply the Gov't looking at a way to spend $$ now, in order to save the people (and the planet) grief and $$ in the long run.
You could take this down to a complete home makeover in a sense, new windows, new doors, new insulation. Subsidize the cost difference between the new technology and the old for the common person, in the hope that the program is wildly successful and all of a sudden, like the 1/4 Million Fuel Efficient Vehicles that are now on the road in place of Clunkers.
This Administration can get it done.
1 comment:
I like the idea, but this one could be a little trickier than cash for clunkers. A white roof in Miami is great, but in Boston, the benefit isn't that big (save a little money on AC in the summer, but higher heating costs in the winter for the same reason).
I'm not really sure where the geographical cut-off is where this would be worthwhile (or whether it's even in the US), but selling a subsidy to only part of the country could be tricky. Though it's possible it would be subsidizing mostly republican states, and could turn out to be a good political incentive too.
Post a Comment