Now is a good time for solar and non-solar Queensland households alike to upgrade a fridge, washing machine or air-conditioner to a more energy-efficient model.
As we mentioned back in December, the Queensland Government’s appliance rebate initiative is offering households up to $300 back on new qualifying appliances purchased from the start of this year.
On Sunday, the Government announced Queenslanders will be able to start applying for the rebates from today.
The rebate applies to new, eligible four-star or higher energy rated washing machines ($200); fridges ($250) and air conditioners ($300 – plus Energex rebate may apply for PeakSmart aircons).
Energy Minister Dr Anthony Lynham said those who have already registered have 30 days to get their applications in and the first rebates should hit the first applicants’ bank accounts by the end of this month.
At the time of writing (early Monday morning), the appliance rebate site was yet to be updated to enable lodging of applications. Those who have already signed up to be notified will receive an email or text to let them know applications have opened.
There’s only one rebate permitted per household and for many with old fridges, a new model may be a good choice. If you have an old clunker of a refrigerator, it could be adding hundreds of dollars to your electricity bills annually.
As SQ’s Ronald pointed out recently, as well as slashing electricity bills directly, an energy efficient fridge can also cut down on air-conditioning costs as the electricity consumed by a refrigerator eventually ends up as waste heat. In his article, he also provides some helpful tips on selecting the most appropriate energy efficient refrigerator under various circumstances – energy star ratings aren’t always the best indicator.
Achieving a near zero-dollar electricity bill is a holy grail for many solar households in Australia. Read more about other energy efficiency strategies for owners of rooftop solar systems.
The appliance rebates are part of the government’s $2 billion Affordable Energy Plan, designed to assist Queenslanders in saving on their power bills. Another element of the Plan is no-interest solar power and battery system loans. Our understanding when it was originally announced is the scheme would kick off in March. However, there have been no further updates and an email sent to the QLD government a couple of weeks ago concerning the scheme has so far gone unanswered.
About Michael Bloch
RSS - Posts
Two added advantages of that rebate scheme –
1) if more efficient air-conditioners are installed, or, if the rebate is used to install air-conditioners where they are not already installed, using them to further lower temperatures in households, can further decrease electrical energy consumption (and therefore, household living expenses), by, through reducing the in-house ambient temperature, reducing the electrical energy needed for running the fridges in the houses
and
2) the rebate scheme could boost sales of whitegoods in Queensland, thereby boosting the state’s economy and increasing employment, further boosting the state’s economy, and increasing employment, … – simple Keynesian economics (which worked until successive feral governments decided it was time to wreck the Australian economy),
If only all the states followed suit, and, similarly, with the ” no-interest solar power and battery system loans” as mentioned in the article (ah, and, if only the WA state parliament hadn’t decided to aggravate the harm from the siphoning off of GST revenue from WA, by bankrupting the state with extravagances (“We do not need stable, safe, and reliable supplies of water and electricity – what we need is a big, flashy, new sports venue, that we can not afford, and that will only be used by a small proportion of the population, and, stuff everyone else”) )…
Note that Keynes only recommended stimulus when there was a shortfall in aggregrate demand.
Ronald – my understanding is that the parliaments, and the unions of trade unions officials, of Australia, had succeeded in one of their main objectives – bankrupting as many Australia households as possible, and had deliberately caused a retail slump due to the people no longer having the disposable incomes to buy such luxuries as necessities, sending a number of retailers, broke, in order to achieve the objective of the parliaments, and the unions of trade unions officials, of Australia – snowballing financial ruin, while the culprits pillage what they can.
Once upon a time, the people of Australia had employment that paid well enough to get by, with money to spend. Then, the parliaments, and the unions of trade unions officials, of Australia, pillaged all of that, so they could cause financial ruin, while making themselves filthy rich and all-powerful.
My understanding is that Keynes was about boosting the economy, rather than just trying to fix devastation.
But, either way, a boost, to try to put wheels back on the cart, would be good.
That’s not my experience. I started legally paid work when I was 12 years old and received $4.10 an hour. I now receive almost twice that much, so things have only gotten better from my point of view.
Ronald – ” I started legally paid work when I was 12 years old and received $4.10 an hour. I now receive almost twice that much, so things have only gotten better from my point of view.”
I started work, when I was ten years old, at about 2 shillings an hour, I think it was. That was great. I bought my first car when I was 14, for $40. I worked in that job until I was 16. My first legal full time job, started at $42 per week. After six months, it rose to $44 per week. My next job tripled that pay. Some time later, in 1978, in Perth, WA, “the streets were paved with gold”. That was 40 years ago. Work was easy to find, and the pay was good. Now, there is only despair.
You might be receiving “almost twice that much”, as when you were 12 years old, but. is the “almost twice as much”, worth “almost twice” the value of the $4.10 that you were getting paid, when you were 12 years old? Does it have “almost twice” the same purchasing power? Those are the important questions, relating to the difference in pay between then and now.
In 1980 the average weekly wage was around $850 in today’s money:
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/wages
https://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/
They are currently around $1,180 which is around a 40% improvement in real terms.
Mind you, if weekly wages had kept pace with economic growth they’d be about twice that now.
I wonder where all that extra dosh went? I’ll have ask my good friend Gina next time I see her. She’s pretty good with money.
Ronald – I think something is extremely wrong with your figures, especially, your “about a 40% improvement in real terms.
From the second URL that you posted; the RBA one;
”
A basket of goods and services valued at $ 100 in March 1980 , would in March 2017 cost $ 435.04
Total change in cost is 335.0 per cent, over 37 years 0 quarters, at an average annual inflation rate of 4.1 per cent.
”
So, an increase from $850 to $1180; of 39%, in the average wage, compared to an increase in the cost of living, of 335%, for (about) the same period, is not really, “around a 40% improvement in real terms”.
Interestingly. I saw in the news today, that “the historic Accord between Labor and the ACTU, signed 35 years ago this week”, is within the period that you mention, when the ACTU and the then ALP feral government, united to destroy the working class.
Well, all I did was look at the average weekly earnings to see that it was about $200 in 1980 and about $1,180 today and then used the Reserve Bank of Australia site to determine that $200 in 1980 would be worth around $850 today. That’s about a 40% increase in average weekly wages after adjusting for inflation.