Posted on 04/22/2007 2:13:42 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Assemblyman Lloyd Levine wants California to turn off the incandescent light bulb.
The Sherman Oaks Democrat has introduced a bill that would bar sales of the high-energy bulbs starting in 2012. It's scheduled to be considered Monday by the Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee, which Levine chairs.
Replacing incandescent bulbs with the more efficient compact fluorescent lights would produce a "huge energy savings" and reduce pollution generated by power plants, Levine said.
"It's the equivalent of taking 400,000 cars off the road," he added.
The typical compact fluorescent light costs up to six times more than the standard incandescent bulb, which was perfected in 1879 by Thomas Edison. But the fluorescent lights last eight to 15 times longer, saving $30 or more over the light's lifetime, according to federal government figures.
Australian officials and a trade group of lighting manufacturers in the European Union also have announced plans to phase out incandescents.
And later this year the California Energy Commission will consider requiring more energy-efficient lighting, commission spokeswoman Claudia Chandler said.
"Whether that eliminates the incandescent bulb, I don't know," she said.
General Electric, the nation's largest lighting manufacturer, says the push for more efficient lighting shouldn't eliminate the incandescent bulb. It plans to produce an incandescent bulb by 2012 that would be comparable in efficiency to fluorescents, said Kim Freeman, a GE spokeswoman.
"We feel that energy efficiency should be driven across all lighting products," Freeman said. "By doing that, it eliminates the need for a ban."
Levine said he's willing to make an exception for highly efficient incandescents. His bill currently covers standard incandescent bulbs that range from 25 to 150 watts. It wouldn't cover a long list of other light bulbs, including three-way bulbs.
A spokesman for Levine, Alex Traverso, said there would be too many industries, including Hollywood studios, that could be hurt by a broader ban.
Here are some of the other bills on lawmakers' agendas this week:
FIXED PETS - Another Levine bill would require most dogs and cats to be spayed or neutered by the time they're 4 months old in an attempt to reduce the number of unwanted pets.
"We have a million animals a year going into animal shelters, and we euthanize over 500,000 of them," Levine said. "To me that's not acceptable on a couple of levels."
The bill, scheduled for a hearing Tuesday by the Assembly Business and Professions Committee, would exempt dogs owned by breeders who obtain permits.
BEACH SMOKING - Sen. Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, wants to ban smoking at state parks and on state-owned beaches. Her bill is on the Senate Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee's agenda on Tuesday. Supporters say the ban would mirror steps taken by a number of local governments and reduce litter, exposure to secondhand smoke and fire dangers.
TOBACCO FEE - Smokers would have to pay an environmental impact fee under legislation by Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Martinez, that is on the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee's agenda on Wednesday. The fee, which would be set by the Department of Public Health, would pay for stop-smoking programs, health care and medical research.
FAST FOOD ADS - California law prohibits billboards promoting tobacco products within 1,000 feet of schools or public playgrounds. Assemblyman Jose Solorio, D-Santa Ana, wants similar restrictions on fast-food billboards. His bill is before the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee on Wednesday.
HOMELESS SHELTERS - Sen. Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, is trying again to require cities and counties to designate areas for homeless shelters. Supporters say the measure would counter policies that concentrate the homeless in inner cities and poor communities. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill last year. It's scheduled to be considered by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday.
HEALTH INSURANCE - The two Democratic leaders' bills to expand health care in California face their first tests this week. Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez's bill is on the Assembly Health Committee's agenda on Tuesday. Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata's legislation will be taken up by the Senate Health Committee on Wednesday. Both would require almost all employers to help pay for health insurance.
What are they going to do with the tons of mercury in those flourescent lamp?
Arnold may be no walk in the park, but a Governor Angelides would be rubber stamping all of this crap that is being proposed.
Make more thermometers to measure the global warming?
Incandescent bulbs are more efficient for lights that get turned on for just a few seconds or minutes at a time. Fluorescent lights are efficient for leaving on for extended periods, but you dramatically shorten their lives when you turn them on and off frequently.
LOL....good answer
“The typical compact fluorescent light costs up to six times more than the standard incandescent bulb,::
Dems sure love the poor.
and what party will get blamed as things stand now?
They hadn’t gotten that far because, well, duuuuuh, not many knew that many fluorescent bulbs HAVE mercury in them!
That would require knowledge normally foreign to a politician: real-life experience...of anything.
I think nowadays most flourescent bulbs no longer use mercury, but I’m not a lighting expert. I think the older style bulbs do (or did) and the newer ones use inert gases.
Now, as soon as they can figure out how to store all those electrons they are saving...
This is more true for the older lamps which install in ballasted fixtures with starters. You can sometimes hear them go “ding” when they start — that’s a bit of the hot filament ejecting and hitting the glass, and enough of this will cover the end of the tube with a coating of grey.
I think white LED lights eventually will be more practical than fluorescent lights.
Hmmm... so I wonder if the "energy savings" for these more expensive bulbs is anything like the "water saving" toilet where you have to flush it for every single wipe, so it doesn't stuff up, or the "water saving" showerhead where you have to take a twice as long shower to get properly cleaned and rinsed off.
I don’t think any party is blamed. Politicians just do their thing, people gripe, but then continue to vote for same idiocy.
Wish that was true, but so far nobody has come up with a workable substitute for the mercury. Mercury vapor is quite efficient at emitting copious ultraviolet light when energized by an electrical current passing through it. The special phosphor film on the inside of the tube, when struck by the ultraviolet light, will glow (”fluoresce”) with a visible light. Anything taking the place of the mercury would have to be able to emit similar ultraviolet light with similar efficiency.
A tyranny of “virtue”. It’ll get us where they all have in History.
Thanks. I wasn’t actually certain of that. Good to know, though!
sadly, True, unfortunately California leads the way in No Fault Gubamint and it makes it all the more aggravating for those who have a clue or two. ;-)
The liberal politicians will surely create a clean-up fund with all those "campaign contributions" they receive from General Electric.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.