Are clean shirts and energy efficiency only for the rich?
Some new washing machines don't work very well. Is it the government's fault?
Topics: Environment, Globalization, How the World Works, Politics News
“Energy-efficiency really means that the government is going to choose how white your shirts are gonna be,” expostulates Alex Tabarrok, an economics professor at George Mason University who co-writes the “Marginal Revolution” blog with Tyler Cowen. He’s riffing off a June Consumer Reports appraisal of washing machines that found that cheap energy-efficient washers did a bad job of getting out those nasty stains. From Consumer Reports:
Not so long ago you could count on most washers to get your clothes very clean. Not anymore. Our latest tests found huge performance differences among machines. Some left our stain-soaked swatches nearly as dirty as they were before washing. For best results, you’ll have to spend $900 or more.
What happened? As of January, the U.S. Department of Energy has required washers to use 21 percent less energy, a goal we wholeheartedly support. But our tests have found that traditional top-loaders, those with the familiar center-post agitators, are having a tough time wringing out those savings without sacrificing cleaning ability, the main reason you buy a washer.
For Tabarrok, who leans decidedly to the libertarian side of the spectrum, the data point on washing machines is sufficient grist to undermine the very notion that the federal government should attempt to mandate energy efficiency. He’s not alone in this view. The New York Times’ John Tierney seized upon the same Consumer Reports tidbit several months ago, and his gist was identical: Ham-handed government regulation is making life worse for consumers! Only the rich can afford to be environmentally conscious!
That’s routine stuff from Tierney. But now that Tabarrok has joined the bandwagon, we can consider it a full-fledged meme: Energy efficiency equals a degradation in the quality of life, especially for poor people.
Before challenging this point of view directly, let me hasten to acknowledge the self-evident truth that yes, tradeoffs do exist and there ain’t no free lunch. I personally have a top-of-the-line, front-loading, energy-efficient washer dryer combo. It works great. I also have a bottom-of-the-barrel energy-efficient dishwasher. It is the worst major appliance it has ever been my displeasure to be acquainted with. I am not sure, but I suspect, that corners were cut to satisfy California’s stringent energy efficiency requirements, and that because I did not do the proper pre-purchase research I got stuck with a lemon.
Andrew Leonard is a staff writer at Salon. On Twitter, @koxinga21. More Andrew Leonard.




Connecticut Senator Suffers Through Food Stamp Challenge
White House Correspondents Association Remains Silent On Justice Department Spying Scandal
Obama Pledges Support To Moore, Oklahoma
What Will The "Game Change" Sequel Be About?
Comments
15 Comments