The California Appliance Rebate program began April 22, 2010.
Three residential appliance categories were selected to be eligible to receive rebates: clothes washers (rebate $100), refrigerators (rebate $200), and room/window air conditioners (rebate $50). These rebates are in addition to existing rebates offered by California’s utilities or appliance manufacturers, found at this link:
http://www.fypower.org/
The Energy Commission used the list of “pre-screened” appliances from the DOE. To qualify, the appliances must be ENERGY STAR-listed, meet CEE tier standards, and certified to the Energy Commission as meeting all state and federal appliance efficiency standards.
Please visit the Cash For Appliances website , linked here, for more information.
Cool! More “free” money. It pays to read your site! I might go get a new refrigerator. Thanks, Jim.
Good for both homeowners and renters, that’s a first.
Like cash for clunkers, this misguided program doesn’t take into account that it takes a lot of energy and resources to manufacture a new car/appliance and dispose of an old one.
These programs are about encouraging mindless consumption.
I thought California was the only crazy state, not even close;
http://www.energysavers.gov/financial/70022.html
Thanks for the info Jim.
Hurry and buy a $10k subzero to get your $200 handout!
WC, not the same thing at all. People with older refrigerators can be using twice the amount of electricity to run those appliances. Unlike newer vehicles where you might get an incremental savings on MPG, refrigerator technologies have made huge strides since the Energy Star program launched. Seals are better, compressors are better, insulation is better. The refrigerator is the number one energy guzzler appliance in the typical household – only a central AC unit uses more. People with really old, poorly insulated refrigerators that have inefficient seals can be throwing away money every month.
In the case of clothes washers, the rebates are all for front loader washers – which use up to 2/3 less water and get clothes cleaner. They also damage clothes less since there is no central agitator.
Yeah, sure there is some economic stimulus here – but this ain’t no useless cash4clunkers program that brings next to no benefits with it other than to move inventory. One of the key components of the program is that you MUST turn in your old appliance for recycling – this keeps people from shuffling the old fridge out to the garage to turn it into a soda and beer cooler.
So, no cheese if you are stocking a new kitchen and don’t have an old fridge to turn in.
Art,
How old would a fridge have to be to make a big difference? I have an old fridge and a top-loader washer and my utility bills are pretty minimal.
I must admit I was tempted to look at new fridges when I saw Jim’s post, but then I see that nice fridges are close to $2000 and so the incentive really only makes up for the sales tax.
Beware. I bought an “energy efficient” GE air conditioner. The energy efficiency came from moving the cooling fins close together which certainly improved energy use. Unfortunately, the cost was a much MUCH louder machine which made it sound like a tornado had entered the room and made it very difficult to sleep during hot nights.
Another item of interest is our new energy efficient dish washer – it uses less water per cycle but takes twice the time to finish. Which means that if you have to clean the dishes during a party you can forget it.
Finally there are the new clothes washers as mandated by Congress a couple of years ago. They also use much less water and energy but require special detergents to do so. Guess what? The detergents make my skin itch so I have to run the cycles a couple of times before the clothes are “done” – actually using more water and energy.
I let you make of this what you will, but going “green” is not meant to improve your standard of living, it will lower it.
WC – there is a handy dandy calculator for that.
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=refrig.calculator
I think $2000 for a fridge is outrageous. Mine was around $1200 and I still cringed when I signed the charge slip at Sears.
Had I to go back again, I’d skip the water through the door and maybe even the ice maker. The filters for the water on the new refrigerators are EXPENSIVE and, frankly, don’t do a very good job. As it turned out, I hated the water quality that came out of the fridge so the water through the door goes unused. I tolerate it when it comes to ice. The cost to run the water line to the area where the fridge sits and the cost of the filters weren’t worth the convenience to having ice churn out on demand, IMHO – your mileage may vary. I was just as happy with the old trays that I filled with water.
If you live in an area with better water, maybe it might be a worthy choice. Or if your family has a high demand for ice, that also would be a consideration. Personally, I found it not worth the extra expense.
Art–I feel the same about the filtered water from refrigerators and R/O systems–it still tastes lousy!!! I am going to yank out my R/O system and go to a water cooler–Costco has a slender modern unit for $169.
Local Boy – that’s exactly what I ended up doing. I drink a lot of water and taste is a big deal for me. I got a water dispenser from Home Depot and get 5 gallon jugs from the water store up on the corner. I think the only time we use the water from the fridge is for filling up a pot to boil pasta in. Big waste of money, for me anyway. That water through the door feature adds hundreds of dollars onto the price.
Pathetic. All of it.
How about “Cash for Oil Rig Tipovers”?
WTF Next?
Of course for central air units there is also the federal tax credit as well. (up to 1500 with the correct seer). Even the el cheapo new units are much better than top of the line units 10 years ago. Today you have to change both the coil and the outdoor unit due to the new refrigerant, but a matched system also gives better efficency.
On Fridges in in 1972 it was 3.84 cubic foot per kilowatt per day to 11.4 in 1997 and today its supposed to be 40% better than that.