Posted on 11/13/2011 4:34:23 AM PST by Kaslin
Why Americans are hoarding incandescent bulbs before darkness envelops us all on January 1, 2012.
As the pale, weak sun rose beyond a charcoal gray cloud bank on Sunday, November 6th, the first day of the country’s dismal return to Standard Time, it was clear that the moment had come to lighten up.
Soon I was at Home Depot making a beeline for the light bulb aisle. Why? Because the end of days is drawing nigh. Not in the Biblical sense, but in the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. As of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be 25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent bulb.
There are a few exceptions, but the next 49 days are the last for the sale of 100-watt incandescent bulbs.
An excellent summary of this disaster-in-the-making and the grim options that will follow in its wake is here.
In July, the House of Representatives voted to repeal the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. As the House debated the ultimately failed repeal, Republican Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, who had introduced the doomed measure, argued:
The 2010 elections demonstrated that Americans are fed up with government intrusion. The federal government has crept so deep into our lives that federal agencies now determine what kind of light bulbs the American people are allowed to purchase.
This vivid report from England in 2009 on the last days of the sale of incandescent bulbs there — ordained by a similar European Union ban on traditional bulbs — is a cautionary tale of what we can expect at lighting retailers in the United States on New Year’s Eve 2011. There could be more people at Manhattan’s two Home Depot stores than in Times Square.
As I’ve written here before, part of the meaning of freedom is freedom of choice. Every green American who wants to read by mercury-ignited compact fluorescent bulbs is free to do so. Every environmentally-motivated citizen who desires energy-efficient halogen bulbs should enjoy that choice, too. But many of us desire incandescent bulbs, just the way Thomas A. Edison invented them.
You know something nefarious is afoot when the Obama administration trundles out its own personal Nobel laureate (other than the incumbent himself), Energy Secretary Steven Chu, to lecture us — us, the pathetic, scientifically uneducated, financially ignorant, unwashed, energy-profligate, unable-to-balance-our-own-checkbooks fools he takes us to be — on light bulbs:
“Right now many families around the country are struggling to pay their energy bills, and leaders in the House want to roll back these standards that will save families money.…
“You’ll still be able to buy halogen incandescent bulbs. They’ll look and feel the same, but the only difference is that they’ll save consumers money.”
Of tea partiers’s philosophical argument that the law would deprive consumers of the choice of lighting products, Chu said, these standards are not taking choices away, they are “putting money back in the pockets of American families.”
Contrary to Secretary Chu’s disingenuous statement in July, viz., “They’ll look and feel the same,” they neither look nor feel the “same.” He may be able to fool some of the people some of the time, but I regret to inform Secretary Chu that he can’t fool me — or tens of millions like me– any of the time.
These ghastly light bulbs casting their ghoulish, glary light — all gussied up to appear to resemble the older, familiar bulbs — are the light bulb equivalent of a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
I, for one, did not elect President Obama, nor did I insist that he select Steven Chu to tell me how to “put money back in” my pockets. My pockets are my business, not his. You look out for your pockets, Secretary Chu, and I’ll look out for mine.
Where do you get off telling me and my fellow Americans, “these standards are not taking choices away”? It’s obvious you think we’re idiots, but idiots of that magnitude? These standards are unquestionably taking choices away: that’s why 100-watt incandescent bulbs are flying off the shelves at Home Depots nationwide. Here’s a photo of my purchases from last Sunday alone — not my last foray by a long shot:
All the bulbs I bought were incandescent. Secretary Chu’s vaunted halogen bulbs hurt my eyes. And the highest wattage compact fluorescents available at Home Depot last Sunday were the equivalent of 40 watts of incandescent bulbs. Maybe Secretary Chu can read by 40-watt bulbs but I can’t. If you’d like to read the Department of Energy’s guide to compact fluorescent bulbs, try reading it by daylight, here.
Contrary to this president’s view of his compatriots, many of us are adults. We were children once, but not recently. We can take care of our pocketbooks all by ourselves. My checkbook is balanced. Is the federal government’s?
The most tragic part of this tale is that it didn’t have to come to this. No sooner had the Republican Congress announced it would vote to repeal the 2007 law this past July, than the light bulb lobby swooped in to protect the manufacturers’ interests — not, of course, those of the incandescent bulb-loving public:
[The] manufacturers … had begun producing the new bulbs, and feared the rollback of the standards would undermine their investments in developing energy-efficient bulbs. Bulb-maker Philips began an aggressive lobbying campaign, meeting with lawmakers and staffers on Capitol Hill, urging them not to roll back the light bulb law. They brought along samples of the new bulbs, similar in appearance to the old bulb.
No member of Congress should have been fooled.
The Senate voted against the repeal, and Obama would have vetoed a repeal, but the manufacturers’ heated lobbying was not in the public interest — of course.
Soon, if the Obama administration has its way, we’ll move seamlessly from the diminished light bulb to the energy-efficient vacuum that will take 90 minutes to clean a carpet that now takes five, and an energy-efficient hair-dryer that will require an hour to dry a head of hair now dried in three — in order to “put more dollars in your pocket” as Secretary Chu likes to say. Of course, vacuuming carpets and drying hair may not be high on his to-do list on any given day.
Which leads us back to Home Depot. After checking prices on Amazon.com, eBay and a wide variety of online lighting specialty firms, the lowest prices I found were at Home Depot. They charge $3.97 for an eight-pack of 100-watt incandescent bulbs, with each bulb enjoying a double-life of 1,500 hours.
A word to the wise is sufficient.
—Belladonna Rogers
kjo said:
“We were told after a couple years to no longer waste our time trying to sell something on one wanted...we were told that some time in the future the government would mandate these...then we’d clean up.”
WorkingClassFilth said:
“I believe I read here on FR that in Europe (where incandescents were banned long ago)”
King Ludd said:
“By the way, the Italian presidential palace (Quirinal Palace) has beautiful chandeliers and they have those ridiculous compact florescent lights.”
Seems to me that the America’s shift to CFLs was forced on us quietly by Europe via the District of Criminals. The inevitable Euro-peon-ization of America rages on!
I have turned mine on and off almost daily for the last 24 years. After all this time, if it ever burns out, I'm going to be quite sad!
As usual, we are stuck in sh!t creek and Feds replace our paddle with a toothpick because the “toothpick” is more environmentally friendly.
When LEDs are practical, I'll be the first to buy them.
I already have. Many months ago.
I have a lot of three way lamps. Use the 50-100-150 or 50-200-250 bulbs.
Will these still be sold? I’d hate to see the death of my three way lamps because of this.
Also question for the Utah art gallery owner, do your very expensive LED’s actually cast warm light? Every LED I’ve seen is very cold and will not pull out colors in items.
Yep, you flick the switch and it takes a minute or two for the light to ramp up. During that time everything looks dank and Soviet, which for the lefties is probably part of the charm. For greenies, the loss of instantaneous bright light feels like a sacrifice, which makes them feel virtuous. For control freak liberals, the knowledge that the goverment has forced a daily behavioral adjustment on millions of people (you have to wait a minute or two before reading your book or whatever) is delightful. It makes them feel like things are as they should be.
Liberals are liars, cheats, and fools. You KantianBurke gave us one more example. Dubya should have given the finger to the liberals who made the idiotic case for creepy lights. Never forget.
Same experience here — the CFLs I’ve had have lasted about as long as incandescents. I don’t think they handle cycling very well. That is, if you just leave them turned on they’ll last forever, but turning them on and off with any regularity kills them quickly. That’s true of incandescents too, but I wonder if it’s even more true of CFLs.
I expect Democrats to suck. But it was the Bush family and their RINO allies who rejected the winning ways of Reagan. The one Reagan policy they truly embrace was Reagan's greatest mistake, amnesty. No wait, picking GHWB to be his VP was Reagan's greatest mistake.
Soon, "Pedro" will not only sell firecrackers...
"Its a good thing freepers forgot about my veto power on legislation. If they didn't, heck they'd have to hold me accountable!"
Needs repeating...
We sought every source possible for about four years and were not able to find any that cast warm light. Everything was terrible. But this particular brand is fabulous, is well made and casts a 25 degree pattern. We replaced 35 Halogens with 20 LED's. Right now there are about twenty five artists in our group that have changed to much praise. Also this week two Carmel CA art dealers have started switching over.
Our only concern is this: Will they indeed last 50,000 hours. If so, I will never need replace them again. And if in ten-fifteen years we need to, the prices will have fallen dramatically. In the meantime we will now be saving about $300 per month in the electrical bill. We have spent about $1,500 for the LED's so we will break even quite quickly.
Come to the picnic next summer and see for yourself.
I would try out the new LED bulbs for lighting, but the strongest I've seen so far in stores is a whopping 70 or 80 lumens, which I think would be equivalent to a night light or something along those lines. Try to read by one of those!
I love the LED Christmas lights. I have a rope light of them on the back of my house, completely lighting up the back yard. Our yard has never been lit so well. Just call me a “Redneck Woman.”
My proofer for dough rising will be disabled as well. Not happy about it at all.
‘07, U.S. House of Representatives(D), U.S. Senate (D).////
But, It required an R signature.
If incandescent bulbs were marketed as heaters, they would get an EnergyStar rating.
Keep on running against Bush, you can’t lose.
I hope you don’t think that was the ONLY thing on the bill!!! They load up crap like this on a military bill so they KNOW he would have to sign it. Please don’t be so naive.
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.