Los Federales To Regulate Gas Fireplaces

This is part of the Hotcoldwetdry push, but dovetails nicely into the notion of Progressives being “nice fascists”, ie, they’re being heavy handed in controlling the lives of everyone for your own good

(Daily Caller) Better go out and buy a gas fireplace and stove soon before federal regulations make them more expensive. Federal officials are looking to regulate the energy usage of fake fireplaces as part of the Obama administration’s effort to fight global warming.

The Energy Department has proposed new regulations that would mandate that “gas-fired hearth products” like decorative fireplaces and stoves be more energy efficient and produce fewer carbon dioxide emissions. DOE says its rule would save $165 over the lifespan of the average hearth and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 11.1 million metric tons through 2030.

The DOE also notes that the price of gas hearths will likely go up because of its mandate. For example, smaller hearth producers could see the costs of making an outdoor hearth increase by $65 per unit. The cost of a vented indoor hearth could increase by $31 per unit because of the electronic ignition system.

I know what Warmists/Progressives will say: “hey, it’s ONLY $165 over lots and lots of years. It’s a small price for (Other People) to pay to save Earth from certain doom!!!!!!” Yes, it is only $165, and these appliances can be in place for 10 years, 20, 30, and longer. But, you add this to all the other Hotcoldwetdry regulation/rules/laws caused price increases, directly and indirectly, and this becomes a huge chunk of change. And that is getting beyond the notion that any cost increase due to regulations/rules/laws based on junk science is absurd. And, we must remember that all these dink and dunk freedom restrictions add up.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

13 Responses to “Los Federales To Regulate Gas Fireplaces”

  1. Jeffery says:

    DOE says its rule would save $165 over the lifespan of the average hearth and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 11.1 million metric tons through 2030

    See that? The DOE says the rule would SAVE consumers $165 over the lifespan of the device by reducing fuel consumption.

    Teach pulls a Watts and changes that to SAVINGS to a COST.

    Or are you concerned that this will reduce the consumption of natural gas and hurt the gas suppliers?

    So it’s speculated the increased upfront COST would be $31 to $65 and the SAVINGS over the lifespan would be $165. I’ll leave the calculations of opportunity costs and lost interest income on the $31 to $65 to math wizards like Watts but it seems like a win-win, doesn’t it? More efficient burners, reduced long-term COSTS and less CO2 emitted.

    But shouldn’t a free Amurricun be able to burn whatever the f*ck he wants whenever the f*ck he wants, regardless of the damage it does to others??

    Anyway. You misread the blurb and should correct your post so that no one reads it and gets the wrong message.

    Your opinions are your own. The facts belong to the world.

  2. Jeffery says:

    How do you draw the line on regulations?

    Were the reductions in smokestack soot, auto emissions and acid rain OK? The air is certainly “cleaner” and less toxic now than 40 years ago. Conservatives opposed these.

    How about clean water regulations limiting raw sewage and raw chemical waste being dumped into rivers and streams? The water is certainly cleaner now. Conservatives opposed these.

    How about requiring seat belts and air bags in cars, and highway safety regulations? The roads are much, much safer now than before. Conservatives opposed these.

    Or do you primarily oppose regulations related to global warming since you and a tiny minority Deny it?

  3. Kevin says:

    I’m very curious how they are going to make gas fireplaces more energy efficient. They are already 100% efficient. There is air vent so 100% of the heat stays in the house. You can’t do better than 100% efficiency.

    It might make sense to look at making gas and wood furnaces more efficient (by using a countercurrrent heat exchanger on the effluent, for instance), but not gas fireplaces.

  4. Kevin says:

    Grrrrr. There is NO air vent, not ‘there is air vent’.

    I really have to start reading what I write before hitting the post button. Sry.

  5. gitarcarver says:

    See that? The DOE says the rule would SAVE consumers $165 over the lifespan of the device by reducing fuel consumption.

    The problem is Jeffery that there is no data to support that assertion other than the DOE regulations that makes things cost more. For example, the DOE has changed regulations of wood pellets raising the price of the pellets. So the new regulations will cost consumers more simply because the regulation costs have gone up.

    Of course, the DOE is looking to outlaw the old furnaces and hearths. That means that people will have to purchase new units at the cost of thousands of dollars. Suddenly that $165 isn’t looking so great now.

    So while you want to say that the unprovable $165 savings in fuel is great, the fact of the matter is that these new regs are going to cost the average person – the average middle class person – thousands of dollars.

    Only liberals can think that costing people money that much money is a “savings.”

  6. Jeffery says:

    qc,

    Yikes, more word salad under your moniker. What has happened to you?

    Why would you defend Teach’s error or lie by changing the subject?

    Why hasn’t Teach corrected his mistake?

    Why not just tell the truth?

    I suspect the DOE has a better handle on their numbers than you have on your “thousands of dollars”.

  7. gitarcarrver says:

    Why would you defend Teach’s error or lie by changing the subject?

    I know that complex ideas baffle you, but the fact of the matter is that the new regulations are all part of the same set.

    Why hasn’t Teach corrected his mistake?

    Ummmm….. because he made no mistake to correct? Why should someone have to correct your misreading of what was said?

    Are you still afraid of taking responsibility for your own failures?

    Why not just tell the truth?

    We have wondered that about you for some time now.

    I suspect the DOE has a better handle on their numbers than you have on your “thousands of dollars”.

    What would give you that idea? The DOE does not take into account replacement of units that are required under the new proposed regulations. You don”t think the government would lie or not tell the truth, do you? After all, there are more people like you in the government.

  8. Jeffery says:

    OK. I’ll try one last time, you lying POS, then you can go back fantasizing about Anthony Watts.

    The DOE claimed consumers would SAVE $165 in fuel costs over the lifespan of the units.

    Industry shills claimed the regulations would add $31 to $65 to the up front costs of the units.

    Teach mistakenly claimed that the regulations would add $165 to the up front costs. It’s possible he just made a repeated typo and meant to type $65.

    You claimed that Teach’s error is inconsequential in light of the overall costs of all regulations of all kinds, and that the regulations require replacement of all old units.

    The DOE does not take into account replacement of units that are required under the new proposed regulations.

    Let me get this straight. Are you claiming that the federal government will enter your home, determine if you have an older version of heating unit and then force you to replace it with a new, more efficient version?

    Do you have ANY evidence to support your claim that the government is requiring homeowners to replace their old gas fireplaces?

  9. drowningpuppies says:

    Little Jeffery getting a might touchy?

  10. Teach mistakenly claimed that the regulations would add $165 to the up front costs. It’s possible he just made a repeated typo and meant to type $65.

    Jeff is correct. I made a mistake on the initial post, went back and corrected prior to posting with costs, but the correction did not save (long story about plugin interference and copy and paste and such).

  11. Jeffery says:

    gc,

    I made a mistake on the initial post, went back and corrected prior to posting with costs…

    And that is how an honest writer makes a correction.

  12. Very good blog! Do youu have any recommendations for aspiring writers?
    I’m hoping to start my own site soon but I’m
    a littlpe lost on everything. Would you propose starting with a
    free platform like WordPress or go for a paid option? There are so many choicess out there that I’m coimpletely confused ..
    Anny ideas? Thank you!

  13. Yes, I’ll admit when I made a mistake. That said, much of the point remains. These government enacted mandates artificially increase costs, which end up costing the consumer. Yet, typically, the people who impose the mandates rarely ever suffer any of these costs themselves.

Bad Behavior has blocked 5807 access attempts in the last 7 days.