More dim bulbs: California banning 100-watt incandescent light bulbs
- Jennifer of Cubachi
California is moving forward on the ban of incandescent light bulbs.
Starting January, they are phasing out 100-watt bulbs from sale in stores.
 |
|
|
|
- Jennifer of Cubachi
California is moving forward on the ban of incandescent light bulbs.
Starting January, they are phasing out 100-watt bulbs from sale in stores.
Amazon: SYLVANIA 12709 100-Watt 130-Volt A19 Household Bulb, 24 Pack 100A CVP 24PK
and while you’re at it, get your Trisodium Phosphate to make your dishwashing detergent work again:
http://www.cqconcepts.com/chem_tsp.php
For those with their lighting controlled by dimmers, you NEED incandescent.
But the Collective witch-doctors don’t care. Not about reality. Not about people. Not really about the environment.
http://www.leftcoastrebel.com/2010/12/california-decline-watch-carb-forcing.html
That link will take you to further proof.
I have been stocking up. Lowe’s has a deal on the double-life incandescents. Already have a lifetime supply of spots for the kitchen. I’ve been a bit dimmer happy, but I won’t apologize.
Then there’s this: http://www.eveningtribune.com/newsnow/x1882979636/Compact-fluorescent-light-bulb-to-blame-for-Hornell-fire
When lightbulbs are outlawed, only outlaws will have lightbulbs.
I quit using incandescents about 36 years ago when I learned about Thomas Edison, the tinkerer who took 5000 tries before he got one to work and Nickola Tesla whose FIRST fluorescent light worked. Fluorescents take less current and put off less heat.
I’ve used fluorescents ever since and I was not taken in by twisted bulbs with mercury in them.
I have hope for LEDs
If fluorescent lights were superior to incandescent light bulbs for all applications, there would be no reason to force consumers to buy them. I use lots of fluorescent lights save money, especially for background and anti-theft lighting, but incandescent light bulbs are superior for lights in the pantry and laundry room that are only used for a few minutes at a time. Compact fluorescent lights take several minutes to warm up and reach maximum light output. I also like to have some incandescent lights around the house to help fill in the lumpy color spectrum from fluorescent lights.
bg…I think you’ll find that ALL fluorescents have mercury in them.
As I noted elsewhere, I’ve used CF since they came out…where I CHOOSE to use them.
I will happily defy the unconstitutional religious light bulb mandate.
For commercial freezer warehouse applications, fluorescents will not work. It’s too cold for them.
Too cold… You mean like 70% of the US today????
Our rulers want us to be as dim as they are. Equality above all!
Californians do not deserve light!
Ahh, you do relize how flourescent lights work don`t you? mercury is vaporized and that is how the current flows from one side to the next…. in other words, EVERY, flourescent light has mercury in them. And BTW, they suck, the light sucks, they don`t come right on, and you can`t just throw them away. That said, I do have high hopes for LED’s as well
Steven, thanks; I did not know that. Good, all the produce in CA will rot (have they outlawed meat, yet?). Serves them right.
I guess nobody reads anymore. The only thing that current CFs are good for is hall lights, outdoor lights and similar. Those they are ideal for, but for reading or room illumination they bite.
I guess they figure that if they ban 40- and 60-watt bulbs first that people will put 100-watt bulbs in hall lights, but this is very short-sighted. Time to stock up.
But the witch-doctor religion of the Collective WANTS you colder/hotter, shorter lived, sicker, more ignorant, less traveled, and VASTLY less prosperous.
If you’re at all serious about conserving energy and yet providing high quality illumination, you’ll pony up for the LED units which are now being sold. Sure the acquisition cost is high, but with useful life spans of 30,000+ hours, trust me, you’ll recover that cost quickly enough. Incandescent bulbs typically last ~1,000 hours. It’s conceivable that if you’re a Baby Boomer, LED fixtures installed this year will outlive you.
I switched my indoor horticultural lighting over to LED a few years ago and I couldn’t be happier – lots less heat, one-quarter the operating cost, longer unit life, more efficient light spectrum for horticulture – I’m still not seeing the downside.
Martin…does it foil those infrared imaging gizmoes the DEA uses, too…???
Martin Hale wrote:
“If you’re at all serious about conserving energy and yet providing high quality illumination, you’ll pony up for the LED units which are now being sold.”
Nine months a year I heat my house. The only energy savings will be the 3 months a year I am not heating my house. Those 3 months are when the days are longer and therefore indoor lighting is needed even less. You see, the extra heat from incandescent bulbs is not waste heat during the heating season. It is heat that my heating system doesn’t have to supply to keep the inside warm.
Saw it comin’ WAY down the road. Cases of 100 and 60 watt bulbs in the attic.
If the Good Lord had wanted Californian’s to have light, he would have created the Sun.
Instead, we’ve got The Moonbeam!
I’m another Tesla fan and have used various gas bulbs (Halogen, Xenon, Krypton, Metal Halide, Argon and Sodium Vapor – all have their uses) for years until the CF bulbs arrived to complete my boycott of Edison light technology (I never had to endure Edison Direct Current power thank goodness). I like the CF bulbs and the newer ones are getting better all the time with regards to light quality.
Incidentally there are Cold Cathode tube bulbs that work just fine with a dimmer and are available to 20 or 40 watt equivalent light output (two models). I found them at Home Depot so they aren’t too difficult to find, although they are a bit pricey.
If you are worried about the mercury contained in the fluorescent powder, buy the bulbs that have a plastic bulb-like housing mounted over the curled fluorescent tube. Sure, a bit more costly but much easier to ensure safe cleanup in the case of a broken CF tube.
I’m not a greeniac, but instead I’m lazy and cheap. The bulbs last long enough to be nearly cost equivalent with incandescents once Edison bulb replacement (which takes effort thus the CF bulbs appeal to my slothful side) and ConEd juice savings are added together (cheap side satisfied).
Its also long belated nod to Tesla’s genius by the general population … although most still think that Marconi invented radio … but that’s another topic.
When will the people of California rise up and rid themselves of these clowns?
@MassJim:
When we fence them in so they’re forced to deal with the clowns instead of running from the dimbulbs they voted for.
It seems the Tesla-fetishists are in favor of government regulating what consumers can use to light their homes. I’ll tell you what, you groupies can have my dimmer switches when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
I’ve stocked up on enough of those evil “Edison bulbs” to last until LED fixtures come down in price, and more importantly, are available for every application. At present, the spot light over my kitchen sink is an LED.
For what it’s worth, my garage/workshop is illuminated by Vita-Lite daylight fluorescent tubes, and the one over my work bench has been on continuously for almost 7 years. Fluorescent lighting has its uses. However, there is not a single CF bulb in my home. Nor will there be…
Hmmm, might be an opportunity in this…
I recall how, a few years ago certain of my relatives were engaged in the smuggling into the mouldering Golden State California-banned high water volume flush toilets.
Light bulbs don’t take up as much space as toilets.
Rise up and smash your compact fluorescents, you have nothing to lose except the sickly yellowish-green color of your skin.
Well, I, for one, welcome our higher wavelength Overlords.
(I know, I know, you were fixin’ to write that yourself…)
I’ll never forget the description I read from someone trying out a CFL bulb. He said it gave his home all the ambience of a men’s bathroom in a Greyhound bus station at 2 o’clock in the morning. I tried one in my living room and I had to agree with him. Good riddance to all the bulb nannies.
They came first for the asbestos,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a wingnut.
Then they came for the DDT,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a wingnut.
Then they came for the lead based paint,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a wingnut.
Then they came for the old light bulbs and replaced them with new ones that saved me money on my power bill.
and by that time I was really glad I wasn’t a wingnut because only idiots would complain.
salvage wrote:
“Then they came for the old light bulbs and replaced them with new ones that saved me money on my power bill.”
That explains alot. Some people are so dim they need the government to tell them what to do. They therefore assume everybody else is as dim as they are.
The power of the government and its control over the individual citizens’ lives continues grow because their are so many dim bulbs like salvage enabling and encouraging it: expecting the Nanny State to provide for their needs, with someone else paying for it.
We’re becoming a nation of 10-year-olds.
*their are* = *there are*.
Phooey. :^P
“Then they came for the old light bulbs and replaced them with new ones that saved me money on my power bill. and by that time I was really glad I wasn’t a wingnut because only idiots would complain.”
They’ll come for the sh1t next, GarbageAss. You might wanna keep hiding behind that moose you’re humping.
Last American out of California please tell Arnold to turn out the…….
So, california is now officially a state fill of dimbulbs. How appropriate.
>That explains alot. Some people are so dim they need the government to tell them what to do. They therefore assume everybody else is as dim as they are.
Ha! Ha! Yes! The guberment went and told me to use these bulbs because they’re evvvvviiil! This is totally have Hitler started!
Or the government and the majority of the population understands that energy conservation is a good idea for long term policy and that the new bulbs would be a cheap and easy way to help achieve it.
I’m sure when they were planning it someone said “Hey, this is a great policy, it’s green, it’ll save consumers money, who could possible complain? A real uniter!” and then someone laughed and said “Remember fluoride in the water? Idiots will complain about anything.”
And here we are!
“Or the government and the majority of the population understands that energy conservation is a good idea for long term policy and that the new bulbs would be a cheap and easy way to help achieve it.”
Then people will CHOOSE to buy them, as I have chosen to buy them since they came out, and they will be used, as I have CHOSEN to use them when and where I ELECT. I need…and will tolerate…no “benign” policy-making dictator. I will seek my own self-interest.
That is the market working. As was the development of the CFL in the first place.
BIG GOVERNMENT ruins.
Markets innovate, and raise the standard of living for everyone.
>Then people will CHOOSE to buy them
Instead Big Brother had put his foot on the neck of the American People and forced them to buy by making them cheaper and plentiful with legislation.
In all seriousness, this is the worst thing that any government has ever done to any people at any time. I think you need to go to your bunkers and wait until the revolution when we can bathe in the sweet liberty of regular light bulb light.
“…forced them to buy by making them cheaper and plentiful with legislation.”
Geez, sewage… First, that isn’t what they did. They OUTLAWED alternatives. They TOOK choice out of the market. (I thought Collectivists were pro-choice…???)
Second, government CANNOT make anything “cheaper and plentiful” with legislation. It CAN create surpluses and shortages…market distortions…by TAKING money from some and giving it to others, or, again PROHIBITING choices.
That void of understanding inside your skull is a dark, fearful, and hateful place. You must really hate and distrust people.
salvage wrote:
“I’m sure when they were planning it someone said “Hey, this is a great policy, it’s green, it’ll save consumers money, who could possible complain?”
I am sure they were a simpleton that doesn’t understand either economics or physics. I am sure they were a simpleton that doesn’t understand that during the heating season incandescent bulbs are 100% efficient. I am sure it was a simpleton like salvage that thinks one size fits all.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/03/04/mb-light-bulbs.html
Oh, and I am sure that people like salvage are less interested in solutions that work then they are in convincing themselves of their own moral superiority. Its the green religion.
>Geez, sewage… First, that isn’t what they did. They OUTLAWED alternatives.
And how did they do that? Oh yeah, legislation.
>They TOOK choice out of the market. (I thought Collectivists were pro-choice…???)
Ha!Ha! Yes lightbulbs are like having babies.
>Second, government CANNOT make anything “cheaper and plentiful” with legislation.
Really? What about the new light bulbs? You can’t get any of the old ones.
>It CAN create surpluses and shortages…market distortions…by TAKING money from some and giving it to others, or, again PROHIBITING choices.
So… what you’re saying is that the government cannot make anything cheaper or plentiful but it can create surpluses and shortages? And that has no effect on prices or consumer behavior?
Are you sure you’ve given this enough thought? Why don’t you try again, this time maybe apply some logic… real logic not the wingnut brand.
Greg F:
So Americans shouldn’t have more energy efficient light-bulbs because Canadians use them to heat their homes not in America? Not sure if that makes much sense. Like do you think Southern Californians (or anyone Southern whatever State) want to heat or cool their homes? So a light-bulb that gives off less heat… would that be good or bad?
Self-defeating wingnuts, the best kind really.
“So… what you’re saying is that the government cannot make anything cheaper or plentiful but it can create surpluses and shortages? And that has no effect on prices or consumer behavior?”
Poor, poor stupid sewage.
Government CAN ORDER prices set at a given level.
Government CAN forbid consumption. (Like of a certain light bulb).
It cannot make anything cheaper or more plentiful by legislation.
(Here’s a hint: the PRICE of something and its COST are not the same. And even in command economies, legislation is too slow to order production).
I know that is WAY the freak beyond you…but I’m being charitable in honor of the season.
salvage constructs a straw man:
“So Americans shouldn’t have more energy efficient light-bulbs because Canadians use them to heat their homes not in America?”
Excuse me salvage but where did I say “Americans shouldn’t have more energy efficient light-bulbs”? Hmmm … didn’t now did I? Are you just a lying little green fanatic or is your reading comprehension not very good. Having just discovered that your simplistic view of energy efficiency is … well … not really grounded in reality must be a blow to your intellectually challenged ego.
salvage then admits that climate does matter:
“Not sure if that makes much sense. Like do you think Southern Californians (or anyone Southern whatever State) want to heat or cool their homes?”
I am sure you are a simpleton that doesn’t understand either economics or physics. I am sure they you are a simpleton that doesn’t understand that during the heating season incandescent bulbs are 100% efficient. I am sure if you think about really really hard you will understand what the “heating season” is and where it might be applicable. I am sure if you think about it really really hard you will realize that what is a good idea in California might not be such a good idea in Michigan or New York. I am sure if you think about really really hard you will realize that the priests of the green religion are over selling the energy savings from changing light bulbs. I am also sure that if you are really concerned about energy that you will abandon the silly name calling and engage in an intellectually honest discussion.
Greg: “Excuse me salvage but where did I say “Americans shouldn’t have more energy efficient light-bulbs”? Hmmm … didn’t now did I? Are you just a lying little green fanatic or is your reading comprehension not very good.”
Greg, over time you’ll notice that barfo, salvage, nishner, itsMike2cents etc are very very good at constructing and tearing down strawmen.
It’s so much easier than engaging in actual debate on the merits of an issue!!
Salvage knew perfectly well what you said or didn’t say. He simply lacks the capacity to engage you on your points, so he makes up new ones.
It’s what obambi does all the time. It’s laughably transparent, and given the results of the recent election, it appears the majority of Americans are no longer willing to give the benefit of the doubt to such dubious practices!
Greg: ” I am also sure that if you are really concerned about energy….”
He’s not.
He’s concerned with supporting ever-increasing state control over the economy. LOL! Isn’t that obvious?
Greg: “…. that you will abandon the silly name calling and engage in an intellectually honest discussion.”
Now you’re just being overly optimistic Greg!!
“intellectually honest discussion” is the absolute last thing in the world salvage wants! LOL!
“Greg, over time you’ll notice that barfo, salvage, nishner, itsMike2cents etc are very very good at constructing and tearing down strawmen.”
Plus the use of the logical disjunction.
As in…
“So… what you’re saying is that the government cannot make anything cheaper or plentiful but it can create surpluses and shortages? And that has no effect on prices or consumer behavior?”
Greg F, the first thing you said to me:
>I am sure they were a simpleton
Then you said simpleton a bunch more times showing what a witty lexicon you posses and then:
>you will abandon the silly name calling and engage in an intellectually honest discussion
Self-awareness like wit is something wingnuts often lack.
>”Americans shouldn’t have more energy efficient light-bulbs”
>Hmmm … didn’t now did I?
No you didn’t but I was trying to work out why you’re talking about the Canadian heating season as somehow being relevant to California so I asked you if that was your point, hence the “?”. If you would stick to the topic perhaps you’ll start to make more sense. So now you’re saying that heating seasons do matter and that in some cases the old bulbs might be better because they give off more heat.
Not really sure about that, it would seem to me that if bulbs could compete with a centralized heating system in terms of efficiency and cost savings we wouldn’t have centralized heating systems in our homes but rather lots and lots of warm glowy bulbs. Now the link your provide seems to be an interesting thought experiment but I suspect falls apart when practically applied. You can tell by the fact that the article has an awful lot of mushy language:
Questions are being raised about whether so-called energy saving light bulbs might (OR IT MIGHT NOT) cause cold-weather Canadians to burn more energy to heat their homes than if they were to use regular light bulbs.
CBC News has found that in some cases (SO NOT ALL, WHAT IS THE CRITERIA USED? HOW MANY CASES OUT OF HOW MANY? THEY NEVER SAY) compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) can have the adverse effect of increasing greenhouse gas emissions, depending (ONE OF THE MUSHIEST WORDS EVER!) on how consumers heat their homes.
“the reduction in the lighting energy use was almost (ALMOST MEANS IT WASN’T) offset by the increase in the space-heating energy use,” the study said.
But Canadians, depending on where they live and the severity of the winter, may (OR MAY NOT) still benefit from using CFL lighting, despite the higher cost of the new bulbs and the additional heat energy consumed, said the CCHT study, conducted in 2008.
Indeed, when everything is factored in, Blunden says the real energy saving for Winnipeggers using CFL bulbs is probably (THAT MEANS THEY DON’T KNOW) closer to 17 per cent. Blunden said energy saving results will vary across the country, depending (ONCE AGAIN!) on how consumers heat their homes.
If you live in Newfoundland, for example, where many people use expensive heating oil “it might (OR IT MIGHT NOT) even cost you money” to use the new, cooler, efficient, CFL bulbs for lighting, Blunden suggested.
—
See wingnuts you claim to be suspicious of the MSM but in reality you’re only suspicious of anything that doesn’t tell you what you want to hear. The media does like to manipulate facts with language not because they work for George Soros (ALL HAIL SOROS!) but because more interesting stories sell more advertising. This is an interesting story but so light on hard data that only a fool would think it a point in an argument.
Please, sewage…!!!
NOBODY is saying CFLs should be OUTLAWED. We LIKE choice. If you want to burn recycled fry oil for your light…knock yourself out.
Again.
Some more.
Repeatedly. The damage to your “brain” is clearly permanent, so no down-side.
Just don’t try to dictate what others do.
Oh, BTW, support your “majority support the CFL ban” BS.
NOW.
>. We LIKE choice.
I know, it’s so sad, because it’s important that North America uses less energy that FREEEEDDDDDOOM! has been taken away, you can no longer choose the old bulbs.
Like you can’t chose to buy a VHS or a rotary phone, or an 8-track or a phonograph.
Things change Sparky and sometimes there is no choice. Adults of of intelligence accept that, children and wignuts get upset and throw fits.
>Oh, BTW, support your “majority support the CFL ban” BS.
I’m not sure if I said that, I think my point was more no one really cares save wingnuts because using less energy is a good thing. If the majority of consumers had a legitimate gripe we would most certainly hear about it, think New Coke.
Or just, think, for once.
“Like you can’t chose to buy a VHS or a rotary phone, or an 8-track or a phonograph.”
Um….MARKETS idiot. NOT GOVERNMENT. People making FREE choices. To buy INNOVATIVE products that the MARKET brought them.
Good grief. You REALLY ARE THAT stupid!!
“Like you can’t chose to buy a VHS or a rotary phone, or an 8-track or a phonograph.”
Didja see the word “like” there? As in kindof but not exactly?
Fine, literal then, forgot wingnuts have a dreadful lack of extrapolation in their thinking.
Like how you can’t drink water without fluoride, like how you can’t buy cars without catalytic converters or without seat belts.
The government interferes with the market all the time, usually it’s so under the hood the average consumer is unaware on occasion it’s blunt. America needs to use less power, these bulbs (and the countless other energy efficiencies mandates by legislation) are a quick and easy way to do it. No one cares except wingnuts.
Funny thing is this policy stretches back to Bush and if it were Bush who had done it you wingnuts would be indifferent. Anything no matter how ludicrous that supports your paranoid fantasies about Obama’s destruction of the American Way of Life is pounced on. I know, I know, it’s how the NaziStalinistMuslimFacists started.
Lame…even for you, sewage.
And crazy, WRT Booooooosh. I criticized him plenty.
Who says “America needs to use less power”? You? The environmental witch-doctors?
BTW, you CAN buy rotary phones and phonographs…part of the miracle of the MARKET.
And VHS and 8-tracks are ALSO available, and people WANT them.
Diesels don’t have catalytic converters…and millions of cars have converters that don’t work.
I wear seat belts when I decide to, BTW.
Like this Nanny State DEEMOCRAT who caused a traffic death….
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/bob-parks/2010/12/28/guess-party-affiliation-suzanne-williams
Funny…
>And crazy, WRT Booooooosh. I criticized him plenty.
What? He didn’t kill enough Muslims for you? Didn’t invade Iran?
>Who says “America needs to use less power”? You? The environmental witch-doctors?
Sense? Logic? Reason? I know you think the Baby Jesus will always make oil for America but not everyone is so optimistic.
>Diesels don’t have catalytic converter
Yes they do, they’re not as good is all. Of course that’s not germane to my point. Pollution is bad, making cars have catalytic converters reduces pollution, that is good so the government legislated laws making them part of cars.
>and millions of cars have converters that don’t work.
Oh so that means there wasn’t any legislation forcing them on the helpless market removing CHOICE making America yet another fascist dictatorship of nanny socialism?
It’s sad how you don’t even get the arguments you’re making much less anyone else’s.
>I wear seat belts when I decide to, BTW.
I know Gramps, in your day you just braced yourself on the steering wheel AND YOU LIKED IT BY GUM!
But that doesn’t change the fact you can’t buy a car without seatbelts and you can be fined for not wearing them.
This is of course how freedom dies and Hitler loved seat belts.
Just too clarify … I also disagree that the choice of light source should be by government fiat. Heck light a fire in your living room for light if that works for you.
I also plan to continue to use incandescent lighting where appropriate for as long as possible. The reason Edison lighting was so successful is that the bulbs were cheaper by far than anything offered by Tesla designs until many years later (more than thirty IIRC).
I am a big Tesla fan but one’s personal choice of lighting device is simply another free market choice and should remain so.
I want a toy in my happy meal, I want hot coffee, I want my grandkid to have a mini-bike, (that one really bugs me). The nanny trolls have again inundated the conversation with their typical blather and nonsense, which wouldn’t be so bad except that they keep getting their way … and this stuff keeps making its way … into law.
“This is of course how freedom dies and Hitler loved seat belts.”
Correct. Nazis were (like you) big anti-choice freaks, hated tobacco, processed foods, meat, markets, and individual liberty.
By your same “logic”, what resource should we NOT be compelled by government NOT to use? Hmmm….???
Why are you using a computer if there is some kind of imperative to “use less power”?
Why are you using ANY finite resource (which is all of them)?
Just do the right thing and get off this planet!!!
>” know, it’s so sad, because it’s important that North America uses less energy that FREEEEDDDDDOOM! has been taken away, you can no longer choose the old bulbs.
Like you can’t chose to buy a VHS or a rotary phone, or an 8-track or a phonograph.”< You are really a caustic ahole. The market, not government mandate, decided that VHS, rotary phones and 8 track tapes were not in demand and none of them were banned by govt. You can still buy them. Google “buy+rotatary+phones” or “buy+VHS+player” to see that these items are still available to anyone who wants to buy them. Run from my facts you talkingpoint-reciting-leftwingnuts!
The eco bulbs have a lot of shortcomings compared to the "old" incandescent light bulb - CFL's can't handle dimmers which is a huge problem.. and they cost more up front. If switched on and off very often they have a shorter bulb life and the light that CFLs put out is inferior to incandescent bulbs. It’s a crappier bulb. Not to mention the CFL danger of mercury vapor inhalation if one of the bulbs breaks http://gourl.gr/evx . For these reasons, sensible people continue to buy the incandescent bulbs.. until govt bureaucrats dictacte otherwise. It’s really no different than govt. bureaucrats dictating to gasoline car owners that they must immediately switch to electric cars. You can laugh about concerns over loss of freedom as if those concerns are not 100% valid, but in doing so you demonstrate that you’re just another deluded leftist fool with nothing of substance to add.. Your worldview is completely ideological, not factual
Wow, my last post was truncated. I’ll remember to use preview.
salvage wrote:
>” know, it’s so sad, because it’s important that North America uses less energy that FREEEEDDDDDOOM! has been taken away, you can no longer choose the old bulbs.
Like you can’t chose to buy a VHS or a rotary phone, or an 8-track or a phonograph.”< You are really a caustic ahole. The market, not government mandate, decided that VHS, rotary phones and 8 track tapes were not in demand and none of them were banned by govt. You can still buy them. Google “buy+rotatary+phones” or “buy+VHS+player”. Run from my facts you talkingpoint-reciting-leftwingnuts!
The eco bulbs have a lot of shortcomings compared to the "old" incandescent light bulb - CFL's can't handle dimmers which is a huge problem.. and they cost more up front. If switched on and off very often they have a shorter bulb life and the light that CFLs put out is inferior to incandescent bulbs. It’s a crappier bulb. Not to mention the CFL danger of mercury vapor inhalation if one of the bulbs breaks http://gourl.gr/evx . For these reasons, sensible people continue to buy the incandescent bulbs.. until govt bureaucrats dictacte otherwise. It’s really no different than govt. bureaucrats dictating to gasoline car owners that they must immediately switch to electric cars. You can laugh about concerns over loss of freedom as if those concerns are not 100% valid, but in doing so you demonstrate that you’re just another deluded leftist fool with nothing of substance to add.. your worldview is completely ideological, not factual
Great, Mook.
sewage (just another deluded leftist fool with nothing of substance to add [tm]).
Brilliant, succinct.
>Correct. Nazis were (like you) big anti-choice freaks, hated tobacco, processed foods, meat, markets, and individual liberty.
Wow, not even sarcasm can escape the black hole that is your brain.
>Why are you using a computer if there is some kind of imperative to “use less power”?
Because it’s how I make my living and my computer is as energy efficient as it can be in part due to government mandated standards at the OEM level.
I know as a wingnut you see everything in black and white but the reality is we need to use power but the idea is not to waste it, too look for to cut consumption, like with more efficient bulbs.
>Why are you using ANY finite resource (which is all of them)?
Ha! Ha! Yes! We will run out of wind, gravity and sun light.
NExt tell me how often Gore flies and he’s such a hypocrite because he tells people that they shouldn’t fly!
“Because it’s how I make my living and my computer is as energy efficient as it can be in part due to government mandated standards at the OEM level.”
Support that.
My use of the lighting I prefer is not a “waste”. Your use of a computer…????
“We will run out of wind, gravity and sun light.”
Yes. We will. Also, some day you will die. Sorry.
“NExt tell me how often Gore flies and he’s such a hypocrite because he tells people that they shouldn’t fly!”
OwlGore is not merely a hypocrite…he’s a criminal.
http://hindenblog1.blogspot.com/
Great!!!!
I wanna try this incandescent lighting,I heared that its safety and will come for longer …http://www.winterizemyavsystem.com/ Great idea!!!!
Really? VHS, rotary phones, 8 track and phonographs have been banned by legislation? No, they are still available, but have become mostly obsolete in the free market system. Consumers chose to make a different choice. Adults of intelligence don’t “accept” their choices to be made for them.
salvage: “Ha! Ha! Yes! We will run out of wind, gravity and sun light.”
Yes, we will. Admittedly on a massive timescale, but true (per the “science” nonetheless)!
LOL!!
salvage, you truly have no understanding of, training or experience in any actual science or technology, do you?
LOL!
Don’t worry, you don’t have to answer.
The answer is apparent to anyone who reads your posts!!
You truly are that ignorant! LOL!
>”Because it’s how I make my living and my computer is as energy efficient as it can be in part due to government mandated standards at the OEM level.”
>Support that.
http://www.nema.org/gov/energy/Energy-Legislation.cfm
No, sewage.
Your computer could be MUCH more efficient.
I know that will hurt your “brain”, so don’t worry about it.