First WATER
Now, this: 
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.
First WATER
Now, this:
I understand he was a prickly character at times (just read his Wiki bio) with an ego (understandable). He resorted to dirty pool with the AC-DC debate.
However without his contributions we might not be communicating in this manner.
That was Federal, not State. It was a bill sponsored by algore...
Nevertheless, there isn't a thing the government can't ruin if it gets its hands on it.
ping
also, incandescent works better when burning the bulb for the heat, like incubators, well tank warmers, etc.
ping to you, too.
So true. So very true.
I was thinking the same. Sadly, I doubt it would ever happen. I think the most liberal areas of California would rather not be a part of our country anyway. Instead of forcing all of California to succeed, we should allow the deep blue areas on the '04 electoral map by county to succeed and form their own country, leaving the 'good' parts of California remaining in America. It could be called Fairyland. With their socialism and other government give aways in their newly newly found socialist utopia, lazy people, illegal aliens, and virtually every other lowlife would go there in droves from all over our country to live there. Eventually we would probably have to assist them with foreign aid as they go bankrupt after a few years.
None.
Somebody turned the lights off, but there still isn't anyone home.
Well, there's still kerosene lanterns or producing light by burning the NY Times in the fireplace.
Can we just ban California ?
Those claims are overly optimistic. First off, when I've bought CFLs for my house, I've found that the light equivalency is WAY low. It seems that what they compare to a 60 watt bulb is about the same amount of light that a 40w bulb puts out. And I've had to replace 2 bulbs in less than a year.
Mark
Well, all I can say is that Arnold better veto this one!
About 5 years ago I started replacing all my incandescents as they burned out with CFLs. The electricity in my neighborhood is terrible, it goes off for a second or two almost daily and it fluctuates. Incandescents only last a few weeks. Since I put in my first CFL I have only had to replace one CFL. I am watching as LED bulbs come down in price.
Ever looked at an antique chandelier with candle bulbs replaced with fluorescents?
They are also one of the large makers of incandescent bulbs.
I have no interest in saving energy, i'll use as much as I want.
It is a case of the law trying to get ahead of the reality. Leftists like to believe that nothing useful gets accomplished unless liberals "cause" it to happen by enacting it into law.
They might as well decree “fire bad” and have done with it.
LOL I wondered if anyone else would pick up on this. Unintended consequences...
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.