To: EBH
If there is a 60 cent charge for the next 3 years for two stinking CFL bulbs, then they are not free.
.60 * 36 = 21.60 or 10.80 per bulb....placed on our doorsteps (mercury included) unsolicited. I blame the PUCO just as much for signing off on this crap. I'm not sure who I blame more.
The state supposedly mandated that First Energy cut the consumption of their customers and set a hard deadline. That forced First Energy to come up with this ridiculous idea as part of an attempt to comply with state regulations.
The PUCO signed off on this some time ago....here come the environmentalists. I guess we are all socialists now.
To: mmichaels1970
The state supposedly mandated that First Energy cut the consumption of their customers and set a hard deadline. Cut power to government offices then. Problem solved.
18 posted on
10/07/2009 6:36:43 AM PDT by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: mmichaels1970
Dear FirstEnergy,
I have already switched to non-incandescent bulbs at considerable personal expense. I am appalled that I find myself on the receiving end of another government TAX. I will be returning any bulbs you attempt to deliver and I will be refusing to pay your TAX added to my bill for services I neither requested nor accepted.
The long-term unintended consequences of foisting CFL’s on the public is irresponsible when there are other far safer and energy saving alternatives out there. The ongoing disregard of the green movement to accept the responsiblity of real stewardship is driving the energy makers to an irresponsible action.
Sincerely,
39 posted on
10/07/2009 7:20:38 AM PDT by
EBH
(it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson