15 thoughts on “Study: Environmental Labels May Discourage Conservatives from Buying Energy-Efficient Products”

  1. Trust me, Kerosense is inordinately expensive. Use Naptha instead.

    As for CFLs, it’s not the bulb itself, they’re not that bad, though the light quality is a bit harsh, a lampshade makes it practically indistinguishable. The main aversion is to

    A: the hypocrisy. Possess a mercury thermometer in a school and they call Hazmat. However, you are mandated to have things with sufficient mercury to make your garbage can hazardous waste.
    B: They Cronyism. GE pushed the incandescent ban through to get a captive audience, and we don’t like that.

  2. The difference is that movies are not held out to be science, unless you consider those from environmentalists such as about global warming or fracking.

  3. But the study was about subjective feelings. That is done when you go to a multiplex cinema. The ticket sales are very real to movie makers.

  4. “Frequently the green products are exactly the same as the non green ones. They just charge more.” — Ah, kinda like organic foods, just crunchier.

  5. Frequently the green products are exactly the same as the non green ones. They just charge more. I like products that claim – no animal testing was done. Of course because the testing was done long ago by someone else to get your chemicals on an auto approval list.

  6. In CA I pay 26 cents per kWh – which is by design to make incandescents unaffordable

    In the end though the newer CFLs aren’t all that bad. While I support freedom to buy any light, I don’t understand the hyper aversion to them.

  7. On top of which, the higher price and the subsidy practice usually mean that the “green” alternative has a higher environmental impact that the “dirty” conventional product.

  8. “But not everyone values protecting the environment.” The lead author reveals his (surprise!) lefty bent and a makes a gross, unsupported assertion about a large segment of buyers (~40%) based on his assessment of their political beliefs. My observation is that “conservatives” not only “value protecting the environment,” they are better stewards than the sanctimonious left. I do steer away from so-called environmentally friendly products, not only because the claims are usually spurious, but also because they are usually subsidize with my tax dollars, which is a practice that will continue if the product is a market success. Therefore, I choose not to contribute to that success.

  9. “But not everyone values protecting the environment.” What a stupid statement. My views on the envrionment has nothing to do with my purchase of light bulbs. It is almost completely a value for money issue. Of course I’m the guy that pictures eggs with tiny legs poking out the bottom, running around a field, when I read “free range” on the package.

  10. In european countries your house has to have an energylabel if you sell it. It’s a law that everybody except the econuts ignores. Probably also because it can cost up to thousands of $ to get one. Ecoscam

  11. I’ve been personally boycotting GE for years because of crony capitalism from on high. But I was smart and stocked up on incandescent bulbs and will again this year as 60 watt bulbs go bye-bye. Hopefully by the time I run out I’ll either be dead ( thanks to Obamacare) or LED’s might be cheap enough for us poor people to have. Or maybe back to Kerocene!

  12. This is such a bad study on so many levels that the findings are totally subjective.
    I personally no longer donate as an alumnus to any schools that talk about how the institution promotes green initiatives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.