Our circuitous carbon plans

I’m shaking my head at the moment as we contemplate getting a new furnace for our house.

To be honest, there’s really not much wrong with the existing one.  In fact, it’s substantially better by way of minimal number of parts and such that can break down, but our governments want us to buy new ‘high efficiency’ furnaces that might use a little less gas.

To encourage the replacement of old furnaces most of which are about 70% efficient compared to new ones that are about 96% efficient, our governments GIVE $100 million to Union Gas and similar funding to other companies through the year.

This set amount of dollars is then doled out on a ‘first come, first serve’ basis to homeowners seeking to replace their furnaces.  The resulting grant is about $1250 per replacement, but in the process of getting the grant, you have to spend $500 on an energy audit to get there.

So, the homeowner is spending $500, our government is spending $1250 (through Union Gas) and other programs add to this list, resulting in thousands spent by the homeowner and governments to keep us on gas.

We’re subsidizing gas use, not eliminating it.

And that’s the key issue for me.  Why are we spending ANYTHING on something that perpetuates the carbon cycle?  Why not take these funds and use them for the installation of renewables instead or a heat-exchange pump for your house?

….

Continues to shake head …