Bright Idea? FirstEnergy Customers Paying for Light Bulbs

Like it or not, FirstEnergy Corp. will distribute nearly 4 million low-electricity light bulbs to its residential customers in Ohio. Full Story
Kit

Cleveland, OH

#22 Oct 7, 2009
We should take them to the Post Office to return them..Also they have mercury in them and that makes them unsafe.
Aztec Warrior

Dearborn, MI

#23 Oct 7, 2009
There needs to be an investigation of the PUCO!!
angryOhioan

Westlake, OH

#24 Oct 7, 2009
It is absolutely unthinkable that First Energy is not only forcing us to accept something we did not request, but also charging us a fee to receive them and "save energy" at the rate of $.61 per month for three years. That is $21.96 for two bulbs. To me, that is absolutely consumer fraud. This program should be stopped before it even begins.
Cheryl L Goshorn

Erie, PA

#25 Oct 7, 2009
2 years ago we installed fluorescent bulbs in our household to conserve energy. Why should I be forced to pay $60.00 for 2 bulbs that I can purchase at Lowes for $6.98? I can not see how we can be FORCED to accept them. Also, can someone tell me how to dispose of them when they do burn out? Are we to call Hazmat out? I will be going to higher levels since I will not comply with this.
asylum

Cleveland, OH

#26 Oct 7, 2009
WHO THE HELL VOTED FOR THIS?? Names please, every one of them.
R Thomas

Lorain, OH

#27 Oct 7, 2009
What if we refuse the shipment of the two bulbs? We have replaced many incandescent other than one on dimmer switches.
Gussie

Akron, OH

#28 Oct 7, 2009
I already have low-energy light bulbs in my light fixtures. How are they going to know who already has them or not?
stroppy

Broadview Heights, OH

#29 Oct 7, 2009
I can appreciate not wanting to be forced to use the bulbs. I'm right there with you. However, this makes no sense to me at all. First Energy is in the business of PRODUCING AND SELLING power. Why would they WANT to encourage - or in this case FORCE - consumers to use less power? Something doesnt sit right with this. Is this a legislative thing beign pushed on the electic company, or the company's bright idea?(no pun intended)
Frustrated_Citiz en

Medina, OH

#30 Oct 7, 2009
Cheryl L Goshorn wrote:
2 years ago we installed fluorescent bulbs in our household to conserve energy. Why should I be forced to pay $60.00 for 2 bulbs that I can purchase at Lowes for $6.98? I can not see how we can be FORCED to accept them. Also, can someone tell me how to dispose of them when they do burn out? Are we to call Hazmat out? I will be going to higher levels since I will not comply with this.
Amen-
Will be watching this thread- please post who you take your concern to so we can bombard them with complaints.
JWD

United States

#31 Oct 7, 2009
I have those light bulbs already in my house to help reduce my cost, not boost the company's profits. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Why should i have to pay for something I already have? I hope that the other area reps will get involved and try to stop this. Let the people who don't want these bulbs in their houses pay more for electricity. That's their right to do so.
In4aryde

Hayward, CA

#32 Oct 7, 2009
This is crazy. The BMV wants to charge $20.00 renewing late, whether the customer has the money on time or not. Now this!!! Ohio is one of the worst states to live in. The government just keeps taking the little money we do have. I'm tired of voting. It gets us nowhere. When will Ohio stop it's gangster mentality and leave us poor folks alone?
Gussie

Akron, OH

#33 Oct 7, 2009
Anti-Obama wrote:
Another Communist Obama Plan.
Don't you think you're being a little ignorant to blame everything you don't like on Obama. Don't be an idiot. The country was sold out long before Obama came along.
Player

Cleveland, OH

#34 Oct 7, 2009
Hey - what about disbanding the PUCO since they are not doing the job to protect the consumer? Secondly let's all call FirstEnergy and tell them we didn't get the first 2 bulbs and we want 2 bulbs since we are being changed for them.

“Lohio Bound”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#35 Oct 7, 2009
stroppy wrote:
I can appreciate not wanting to be forced to use the bulbs. I'm right there with you. However, this makes no sense to me at all. First Energy is in the business of PRODUCING AND SELLING power. Why would they WANT to encourage - or in this case FORCE - consumers to use less power? Something doesnt sit right with this. Is this a legislative thing beign pushed on the electic company, or the company's bright idea?(no pun intended)
SB 221.
Little Tyree

Cleveland, OH

#36 Oct 7, 2009
Hey! old "fake norm" is a low-watt bulb!

and he's TOXIC!
Tired of Utility Traps

Dayton, OH

#37 Oct 7, 2009
CFLs have mercury, which means that they need to be recycled under controlled situations. They also take longer to “warm” up than traditional bulbs and rarely have dimming capacity. The now familiar “curly cue” or “cork screw” bulbs are also deemed less attractive by many homeowners.

Cash for Clunkers – Light Bulbs
Given the incredible response to the “Cash for Clunkers Cars” program and then the “Cash for Clunkers Appliances Program,” it is only natural that there is now a Cash for Clunkers Light Bulbs” program. The offering includes buy backs for both incandescent and CFLs as well as the typical four-foot fluorescent tubes found in most commercial offices, schools, hospitals, and buildings across the country.

“Unhinged”

Since: Aug 09

Oberlin

#38 Oct 7, 2009
Gussie wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you think you're being a little ignorant to blame everything you don't like on Obama. Don't be an idiot. The country was sold out long before Obama came along.
Equally as ignorant as blaming everything one doesn't like on Bush. One year anniversary is coming soon for the annoited one. I'd say Mmmm Mmmm "owns it" come January.
flutterby

Mentor, OH

#39 Oct 7, 2009
It is a shame what companies do to make money. It would be OK if they gave customers an option, but to make it mandatory is just a way of increasing profits. Some of us have already switched to compact fluorescent lights. We are just getting an increase in our bill.
mehere

Olmsted Falls, OH

#40 Oct 7, 2009
I bought 2 packs of these bulds about 1 year ago, 2 bulbs have already burned out and one broke for no reason, still in the package. These bulbs do not fir in fixtures with glass globs on them unless you but larger globs. I do not want or need them as I cannot use them at this time and if I do I will but them alot cheaper then FE can sell them.
Little Tyree

Cleveland, OH

#41 Oct 7, 2009
Nolita wrote:
<quoted text>
Equally as ignorant as blaming everything one doesn't like on Bush. One year anniversary is coming soon for the annoited one. I'd say Mmmm Mmmm "owns it" come January.
WHY DO YOU HATE OBAMMY?

or is it the Gin Speaking???

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

FirstEnergy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
double bill (Jan '14) Jan '14 H Sig 1
FirstEnergy hydroelectric statio... (Nov '13) Nov '13 ndact 1
Lawsuit against FirstEnergy claims wrongful ter... (May '08) Aug '13 pam 3
Closing of Western Pennsylvania power plants le... (Jul '13) Aug '13 Joe 2
Pipeline To Be Built Within Mile Of Nuclear Plant (Nov '12) Nov '12 Greg 1
Nuclear Cracks Tied to Lack of Coating (Mar '12) Mar '12 Dan 1
FirstEnergy plans job fair (Jan '08) Mar '12 Former Nuke 24
More from around the web