Posted on 01/30/2007 6:54:26 PM PST by NormsRevenge
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California lawmaker wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs as part of California's groundbreaking initiatives to reduce energy use and greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
The "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act" would ban incandescent lightbulbs by 2012 in favor of energy-saving compact fluorescent lightbulbs.
"Incandescent lightbulbs were first developed almost 125 years ago, and since that time they have undergone no major modifications," California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine said on Tuesday.
"Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about 5 percent of the energy they receive into light."
Levine is expected to introduce the legislation this week, his office said.
If passed, it would be another pioneering environmental effort in California, the most populous U.S. state. It became the first state to mandate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, targeting a 25 percent reduction in emissions by 2020.
Compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) use about 25 percent of the energy of conventional lightbulbs.
Many CFLs have a spiral shape, which was introduced in 1980. By 2005, about 100 million CFLs were sold in the United States, or about 5 percent of the 2-billion-lightbulb market, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
That number could more than double this year. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. alone wants to sell 100 million CFLs at its stores by the end of 2007, the world's biggest retailer said in November.
While it will not give opinion on the possible California law, the EPA recommends CFLs.
"They save money and energy," EPA spokeswoman Enesta Jones said. "They are more convenient than other alternatives and come in different sizes and shapes to fit almost any fixture."
Also, CFLs generate 70 percent less heat than incandescent lights, Jones said.
About a fifth of the average U.S. home's electricity costs pays for lighting, which means even if CFLs initially cost more than conventional lightbulbs, consumers will save, Jones said.
A 20-watt CFL gives as much light as a 75-watt conventional bulb, and lasts 13 times longer, according to the Rocky Mountain Institute, a nonprofit group studying energy issues.
Southern California Edison, an Edison International subsidiary and one of the state's biggest utilities, runs a program that cuts the cost of a CFL by $1 to $2.50. In the past year, SCE has helped consumers buy 6 million CFLs, it said.
California Energy Commission member Arthur Rosenfeld said an average home in California will save $40 to $50 per year if CFLs replace all incandescent bulbs.
While not commenting specifically on Levine's likely legislation, Rosenfeld, winner of the Enrico Fermi Presidential Award in 2006, said the switch from incandescent bulbs became feasible about five years ago when CFL performance improved.
"This is clearly an idea whose time has come," he said.
Levine, a Democrat from Van Nuys in Los Angeles, last year introduced a bill that will become law in July that requires most grocery stores to have plastic bag recycling.
You are so right. I don't look over my neighbors fences for any reason. It does seem that environmentalist seem to have a desire to keep track of numbers, quantities, degrees. We do these things out of necessity, and I just won't pay more than I have to. I do though (and this is my confession) drive to work everyday, and it is only about 5 blocks. I don't believe people cause global warming/cooling.
.....Can the rest of us force California to secede?.....
The term I use is purge. As in "the residents of America purged California (or especially Massachuttes) from the union."
Something else that's worth saying about CF bulbs is that the new ones that are just coming on the market are a whole world of difference from the stuff that was available even a couple of years ago.
There have been big improvements in light quality and brightness, instant-on, and are more compact than before.
Another big step will be new LED lights. Worth watching for. The first few iterations will likely be a little rough, but they promise to ultimately be even brighter, whiter, and still only use a tiny fraction of the power.
50 bucks a bulb?!!! Boy, they better last a long time, save me lots of money, provide perfect lighting, and brew coffee if I'm going to buy any of those!
The problem has nothing to do with the ballast.
It's the coatings inside the tube that produce a band of light that doesn't properly stimulate the retna.
Are you referring to the spectrum, because color rendition has been greatly improved. Tubes are sold with a CRI (Color Rendition Index), and finding a cheap tube with a high number is pretty easy these days.
My husband just bought a bunch of these newfangled bulbs (honey, they give off the same watts at like 1/8 the energy) and he put one in the lamp on MY nightstand. It gives out no light and I hate it. I told him to leave my lamp alone. I think it's going to come to a battle in my house.
What next, we will have to move to the Little Easy Bake Ovens for all cooking (remember the lightbulb, ladies?)
Yes, they're improved, but still nowhere good enough. They're bad for your eyes.
I use florescents far more than most do, but we have to admit their limitations. This bill is a really bad idea.
Thy have already banned having a brain. So a lightbulb is a moot point.
Are there any web sites that show the actual spectra of different fluorescent units? Not sure how the CRI is computed, but I would think it difficult to resolve spectral quality down to a single number (since different applications would attach different levels of importance to different characteristics).
Movie studios require a lot of light, and those studio lights use a lot of power. Theatrical lighting too is usually incandescent.
Perhaps the bill should first be set up to forbid any state legislator or government worker from purchasing or otherwise newly acquiring any incandescent bulbs after July 1, 2007. If they aren't willing to live without incandescent bulbs, why should anyone else?
CRI is a comparison of the spectral output in relation to a typical incandescent lamp. Incandescent is 100, other types show the percentage of spectrum compared to that.
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.