On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 2:52:46 AM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 1:42:34 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I know this is a bit late to reply to this one, but the answer is simple: "It's because the destructive, unsustainable energy we consume is ridiculously & artificially cheap". This is because not only are the many, destructive, externalizer costs (think oil wars & spills, nuclear waste disposal, air & water pollution, climate change, etc) of this energy not figured into the price, but these energies are all subsidized by our backwards gov. policies. That's right, they take "our" hard earned money (to the tune of 800 billion + globally per annum), and give it to oil companies alone. If instead of paying the taxes we pay regardless, we only paid more for the energy we used.., and only when we used it, then we'd demand more efficient appliances, homes, cars, etc. Now add to that if our gov. rightly incorporated into fuel costs the "true" cost of every oil spill (not there worthless attempts to "remediate" them, but actually paid for the damage done to the ecosystem, economies, etc.), the costs of every oil war (trillions?!), the costs of all the air pollution (think hospitalization, premature deaths, etc).... Nuclear catastrophes and hazardous waste dumping (see Hanford nuclear waste site for but one example) then and ONLY then would appliances,,homes, vehicles etc. be made as efficiently as possible. So there you have it... The "truth" as to why these seemingly common sense efficiency improvements don't enter the market... Because our unsustainable energy is "ARTIFICIALLY" cheap! Fur anyone reading this post, do your part to help solve this crisis of idiocy and write, call or at least email your representatives and let them know that you demand that unsustainable energy sources are taxed to incorporate their "true" costs. Don't worry, your energy bills will not increase because viable, sustainable energy sources and efficient technologies will take over more quickly than you can possibly imagine. Here's to a just and peaceful future based on logic and sanity.

If you want to give up 90% of your income for your moonbat ideals, you go right ahead, just don't tell me that I must do the same. That's the problem with Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks, they want to use the force of government to push their codswallop on everyone else at the point of a gun. It never ceases to amaze me how anti gun nuts want the government to point guns at people to force them to surrender to moonbattery. O_o

[8~{} Uncle Earthling Monster

Yeah, another clueless hippie, with a silly political conspiracy tale
when it's obvious that the real reason is that it's not practical or worth
it to use outside air for a fridge. The amount of energy a fridge uses in
total isn't much, what it uses in winter helps heat the living space. Even
if it worked perfectly, the difference would be small. Running
ducts outside would not only be a pain in the neck, but it would require a
more powerful fan, cost a significant amount of money, and introduce it's
own energy losses, eg the ducts would be leaking heat into the living space
in summer, taking it out during winter, any protrusions through the walls
wind up leaking air too, etc.