Of course nothing is free. But if it costs more to implement this then it is the wrong time to implement this. One seeks alternatives when the current method is not efficient. If a new television makes me happier than my current one, it doesn't necessarily cost me more even if the new television is more expensive in strict dollar terms.
So therefore, perhaps someone could argue that the market price of energy is currently not properly accounting for externalities, and so this is an improvement. It might be a good argument, if the data is available. But then it wouldn't be "costing more" to do this.
And, sure we're paying our own companies. Not that I think that matters much in the grand scheme of things. Free markets, free trade, and all. Of course, it is more convenient for our companies to have us take the long view when it costs us more, but the short view to justify them doing it so they can collect.
I guess there's no law to demand consistency in energy policy.
"I'm heading to university next year, and I've purchased a MacBook. I'm also taking my four year old desktop, just in case I'm left with no computers when the MacBook is being repaired or whatnot. With only two USB ports on a MacBook, I want a Bluetooth mouse. Budget is about $100, and of course, it needs OS X support. Thanks for the help!"
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.