Those Bulbs Aren’t Free
2008 January 12
I got some spanking new energy saving light bulbs from Allegheny Power a little while ago and I thought, great idea. Well it turns out that Allegheny Power pulled an okie-doke on us (or me at least).
An electric company in Maryland, Allegheny Power, sent its customers some CFL light bulbs as part of a consumer education program. Sounds nice until you find out that they customers were charged $0.96 a month (about $12 a year) for the two light bulbs.
Way to charge me for something I didn’t even ask for. This little tidbit came via Darren @ FredRock.
~Guy~
Oh. My. God! I hope that’s not true. That is way too slimy for words!
For those of us who are elderly and on a low, fixed income this is just one more deduction from our grocery list…the only place left for us to “rob Peter to pay Paul”.
I heard this on WFMD on Friday and was so angry! I don’t need the power company “educating” me. What a joke.
I have seen a lot about this in the papers recently. I think I’m going to call them and register my opinion…and request that they remove the charges from my bill. I may also cite them the federal law that says that you cannot send someone merchandise and charge them for it without their consent. I am anxious to see what will happen now that the local elected officials are getting into it.
So, can we mail them back to Allegheny, and say no thank you?
They should not have charged…that’s ridiculous. But hopefully people WILL get educated through this without automatically discounting the bulbs.
It’s estimated that you can save 30-45 bucks over the life of only 1 CFL Bulb vs 1 of the old traditional ones. Add up the bulbs in your house and do the math.
Even if you are on a fixed budget, if you could find a way to get these things into your house for cheap- you could have more money in your pocket at the end of the year.
As the literature says: If every home in America replaced just one incandescent light bulb with an ENERGY STAR qualified CFL, in one
year it would save enough energy to light more than 3 million homes and prevent greenhouse gas emissions
equivalent to those of more than 800,000 cars.
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=cfls.pr_cfls
I wonder if the State Attorney General’s office and Public Service Commission are aware of this situation, assuming what we’ve heard thus far about this move by Allegheny is factually accurate. If it is, it would seem mighty questionable from a legal standpoint as well as outrageous beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I’m sure the postal carriers aren’t real thrilled that they were hauling around a toxic substance (there’s mercury in these light bulbs) as well. No, don’t send them back. Even if you don’t use them, you will most likely still be charged. Hopefully citizen outrage will force a change. In the mean time, use them if you want and recycle them correctly. Don’t throw them in the trash. I believe I heard that the Common Market recycles these bulbs.
Anyone know of any other places that recycle CFLs?
~Liz~
Only the most starry-eyed bureaucrat could believe the public will recycle these bulbs responsibly. Compliance even at an astronomical 90 percent level still introduces vast cumulative amounts of mercury into the air and landfill. Those in the know have been writing about the mercury in CF bulbs for more than 2 years. Trading a reduction in greenhouse emissions for a giant increase in a dangerous neurotoxin is a fool’s bargain–and precisely what one would expect from Annapolis and corporate America.
This is truly rotten! I have received two packs of those bulbs in the past six months. Since they were unsolicited isn’t there something we can do to get back at the power company to get this payment they are “stealing” rebated? (I mean besides a full blow class action ) It’s only a small amount but it is the cotton pickin’ prinple of the thing!
My bill will be cut short by .96 every month for a year. I refuse to pay for them. If everyone does this, I doubt they will send us all to collections for
~
.96!!!!!
Besides, you are right, you can not ship merchandise to someone with out their consent.
I relize that they did do it so that people would save energy. However, while walking down the isle at Walmart the other day, I saw it costs $4.93 for 4 light bulbs…so they are not that expensive.
BUT…I agree…I wont be charged that….My bill will be short…sorry…
I agree! I just purchased these same bulbs at lowes for ALOT less then what they charged me also. I bought 8 of them to equip the lamps in my home before i received these for the same amount or a little more then what they are charging us.
I called adn asked if I could send them back also – was told either way we would charged.
Be careful if you plan on going toe to toe with Allegheny Power. I had a billing dispute with them a few years back. It’s takes very little for them to turn your power off with almost no notice. Their customer service is horrible because they have no reason to provide good customer service. What are you going to do..go with another power company?
If Marylanders howl loud enough, political muscle in Annapolis will pressure Allegheny to rescind the charge, thus incurring a huge operating loss on their books, thus prompting Allegheny to get approval from the Maryland Services Commission to raise rates to offset this loss, which it will eventually get. In short, Allegheny will recover the money, one way of another, but will first have to waddle through a muddy PR fight. Ultimately, the overcharge for the bulbs was just a way for Allegheny to get an indirect, if short-term, rate hike, and be able to wrap it up as a gift to the public. I guess they didn’t expect the media to run with the story–and the public to see through their ruse. Idiots.
FNP FINALLY got around to reporting on this issue, and even then barely covered the real issue of the legality of this program. Check it out at http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display_Comments.htm?section=a1&storyID=69972#postComments
Allegheny’s way of “selling “us fluorescent bulbs was slimy, but the savings and moral necessity outweigh their sneaky business practice. We have used CFLs for about six years now at our house. So we have paid for the bulbs already and reap the benefits of a lower electric bill every month. I find it annoying to see friends, neighbors and co-workers (some of whom are in expensive new houses) burning regular bulbs. Ban incandescent bulbs. Save the planet for our children one CFL at a time. CFLs are clearly environmental and budgetary winners. Too bad we haven’t already switched, then Allegheny would have no reason to sell them to us in such an odd way.
OK – so what is the line item that shows this charge? Is it “Energy Conservation Surcharge”? I see a .93 cent charge on November’s bill, .96 cents on December’s bill and $1.15 on January’s bill. Is this correct? or another line item? This line item did not appear on my bills prior to November. I too will begin to deduct this going forward if this is what the charge is for. Where is Lenny Thompson when you need him?
Ban incandescent bulbs? Save the planet for our children one CFL at a time? Let not be maudlin. You need to do some research about mercury as a neurotoxin, then extrapolate the risk across hundreds of landfills and millions of households nationally. Trading mercury contamination for a reduction of fossil fuels isn’t sound public policy, especially when the science on global warming is still quite fuzzy, and the health effects of mercury exposure are far more compelling.
It looks like “public outcry” has been heard by the Public Service Commission:
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=70008
Im going to check my bill because I didn’t receive any bulbs. I wonder if they charged everyone.
As for the mercury – Even disregarding global warming concerns- I’ve read more mercury (neurotoxin) is released into the atmosphere through the extra burning coal at the power plants powering the regular bulbs (in addition to all the other contaminants from coal). Mercury within these bulbs can be recycled safely.
Properly cleaned up and recycled and there seems to be barely any risk at all…but you’re right – plan for worst case scenario and our landfills would be massively toxic and would run off into the water. Most people still dont recycle on their curbside, let alone the extra step for the bulbs.
You’ve connected all but the last dot. People do not recycle, and will not recycle more than the smallest fraction of tens of millions of CFBs. Adding more neurotoxic mercury to the air, soil and water mix is bad public policy and brain-dead science. Let’s not rely on textbook solutions in this highly imperfect world. Most landfills and certainly virtually all rural dumps are not lined. Mercury thus leaches from compacted trash into the soil and water. The multiplier effect is a nightmare.
But here’s another problem: CFBs bring mercury inside the home, where ignorance and indifference will combine to potentially hazardous effect. Kids like to break things. Breaking things with mercury in them is a very real possibility. In less than 5 years, manufacturers will likely introduce LED bulbs that will replace incandescent bulbs. Let’s not jump on the wrong bandwagon.
Unfortunately, it will be illegal to sell incandescents beginning in 2012, so in effect, they will be banned:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119923837885161397.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
I am worried about the mercury, too. Many people will not dispose of them properly and mercury poisoning will become a problem.
Imagine the huge black market for incandescent light bulbs. People meeting in DARK alleys, as they stock up on 60, 75, 100, and those highly prized 3-way bulbs.
shhhhh!