Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill to Ban Regular Light Bulbs Introduced in [U.S.] House
CNSNews.com ^ | 3/21/07 | Nathan Burchfiel

Posted on 03/21/2007 8:23:31 AM PDT by CNS

(CNSNews.com) - A Democratic lawmaker has introduced a bill that would ban the sale of traditional incandescent light bulbs - which are less energy-efficient, prompting claims that they contribute to "global warming" - one day after a colleague told a press conference that legislating a ban would be a "last choice."

As Cybercast News Service reported last week, Rep. Don Manzullo (R-Ill.) and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) held a news conference Wednesday calling for more efficient lighting options, and Manzullo said "the last thing we want to do is force legislation down people's throats."

One day later, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) introduced legislation that would set target dates for certain types of light bulbs to be prohibited for sale in the United States.

Harman calls the bill "an important first step toward making every household, business and public building in America more energy-efficient."

"This legislation, while a small step, could have an enormous impact," she said in a posting on the liberal Huffington Post blog. "And hopefully, it can help transform America into an energy-efficient and energy-independent nation."

An average traditional incandescent bulb based on a filament emits 12-15 lumens per watt (a measurement of the bulb's lighting output.) Harman's bill would require all bulbs to produce 60 lumens-per-watt by January 2012; 90 lumens-per-watt by January 2016; and 120 lumens-per-watt by January 2020.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dimbulbs; energy; house; lightbulbs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-178 next last
To: swatbuznik
Aren't the "efficient lightbulbs" filled with toxic chemicals?

Fluorescent light bulbs have a small amount of mercury in them.

21 posted on 03/21/2007 8:33:34 AM PDT by MarineBrat (My wife and I took an AIDS vaccination that the Church offers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HotTubDave
Florescent lights wont come on in really cold weather. They would be worthless for outdoor use in the northern states.
22 posted on 03/21/2007 8:34:01 AM PDT by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super Walmart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CNS
legislating a ban would be a "last choice."

If the information on the packaging of these bulbs were clearer, more people would be happy with their purchase and would use more of them. Right now you need to know how to check the package to see what the color temperature is so you get a bulb that does what you want it to do.
23 posted on 03/21/2007 8:34:09 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CNS

Cripes they messed with toilet tanks , now light bulbs!


24 posted on 03/21/2007 8:34:26 AM PDT by tiredoflaundry (The greatest danger to our troops is the Congress of the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
Stock up now!

Black market in lightbulbs.
Who'da thought?

25 posted on 03/21/2007 8:35:07 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Walkingfeather

How many Kennedys does it take to change a light bulb?

Three.

One to hold the bulb and two to drink until the room spins around.


26 posted on 03/21/2007 8:35:12 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: oldbill
Brought to you by the same clowns who gave you low-flush (no-flush) toilets.

Even when people are forced to act one way they tend to do something to make up for it. For example, I notice that when flushing I tend to hold the handle down until the entire flush is done instead of the old method of just giving the handle a push and release. I doubt that saves as much water as the environmentalists said it would.

Similarly I expect that people will come out with "yellow" shades to adjust the harsh color of the fluorescent light which will also dim the light some and require higher wattage bulbs to give the same total light. Now if they could just come out with a DC fluorescent bulb which doesn't have that just noticeable flicker.

27 posted on 03/21/2007 8:35:52 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (Parker v. DC: the best court decision of the year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MarineBrat
Aren't the "efficient light bulbs" filled with toxic chemicals?

Fluorescent light bulbs have a small amount of mercury in them.

Light bulb disposal legislation coming.

28 posted on 03/21/2007 8:35:59 AM PDT by stayathomemom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CNS

Fluorescent light bulbs contain a drop of mercury. I wonder if they take that into account?

I have a few of these dim bulbs. I use them for desk lamps where you need little light and the heat is not welcome. I tried them in overhead lights, Walmart had a sale recently, they now reside in unused closet areas. The costs are high.


29 posted on 03/21/2007 8:36:39 AM PDT by Tarpon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon

The cost is high & I bet that the cost of disposal will be also.


30 posted on 03/21/2007 8:37:47 AM PDT by tiredoflaundry (The greatest danger to our troops is the Congress of the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CNS

"An average traditional incandescent bulb based on a filament emits 12-15 lumens per watt (a measurement of the bulb's lighting output.) Harman's bill would require all bulbs to produce 60 lumens-per-watt by January 2012; 90 lumens-per-watt by January 2016; and 120 lumens-per-watt by January 2020."

120 lumens per watt? Is that even physically possible? OK, just went and looked it up, and it is. No currently commercially available home lighting source reaches that level of efficiency, however, unless you want to light your house with arc or gas discharge lamps. In fact, apparently even current compact fluorescent bulbs come up a little short of the 60 lumens per watt figure, you'd have to go to fluorescent tubes to reach that.

Politicians should be banned from sticking their fingers into the technology pie like this. They're not qualified to make such decisions, nevermind the fact that they're grossly overstepping the proper bounds on their power.


31 posted on 03/21/2007 8:38:02 AM PDT by -YYZ-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CNS

$2000 to dispose of a broken florescent bulb

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1802727/posts


32 posted on 03/21/2007 8:38:25 AM PDT by ProfoundMan (Money is the mother's milk of politics but righteous indignation is the drug of choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

We have some white LEDs in use but they are EXPENSIVE right now but the cost is well worth it for what we need them for. But those early florescent bulbs were so ugly and the light was so bad that their modern cousins face an uphill battle. I use some of the old style ones in globe fixtures where the bulb does not show. You can easily get by with a 100 watt equivalent where normally only a 60 watt traditional bulb could be used.


33 posted on 03/21/2007 8:38:31 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CNS
One day later, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) introduced legislation that would set target dates for certain types of light bulbs to be prohibited for sale in the United States.

Well - if they can't pass legislation to set target dates for withdrawal from Iraq - maybe they can set target dates for withdrawal from Walmart.

34 posted on 03/21/2007 8:39:11 AM PDT by capydick (Better to Fight for Something Than to Live for Nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

How many Kennedy's does it take to replace a lite bulb?

Only one to hold the bulb, but you need the others to drink enough to get the room to spin


35 posted on 03/21/2007 8:39:14 AM PDT by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CNS

What about those smaller candelabra type bulbs? Do they make a florescent version of those?


36 posted on 03/21/2007 8:39:25 AM PDT by JZelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CNS
Every light in our house except for the one outside the front door is LED studio lighting. I personally didn't plan it that way for any 'green' purposes. I like it a lot. The whole place is lit by mini aimed Streamlights.

I would never go back to big clunky 1910-technology bulbs.

37 posted on 03/21/2007 8:39:56 AM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CNS

All of my lights are CLF except for one LED desk lamp and six four foot fluorescent bulbs. I like low electric bills.


38 posted on 03/21/2007 8:40:31 AM PDT by A. Morgan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CNS

Word in Kalifornia is that the cost of throwing them away will be very expensive- They contain more Mercury than the regular bulbs, thus making them toxic waste and this kind of surcharge will lead to illegal dumping of the used bulbs.
Sooooo-- we get to pay for them over and over again. Very expensive in the first place, surcharge to dispose of them, and they don't work in large outdoor applications, especially in cold climates. So what happens to my security lights?
You heard it here first....


39 posted on 03/21/2007 8:40:42 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rod1

Yes, I had a colleague who had to disable the lights in his office and use a couple of incandescent lamps he plugged in. Otherwise the lighting made him ill.

We use nothing but energy saving bulbs in our house, but I would really resent having the government force this on us. One thing for certain is that it will adversely impact the market and probably end up making the new bulbs more expensive. Moreover, it will take away the incentive to keep improving them, which they have been doing up to now.

Remember when AT&T had a monopoly on telephones, and either you used their phones or you lumped it? Needless to say, there was not a lot of innovation going on in new phone products, despite Bell Labs.


40 posted on 03/21/2007 8:40:53 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-178 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson