Posted on 05/07/2012 4:09:16 PM PDT by Libloather
Republican to revive lightbulb war
By Andrew Restuccia - 05/07/12 04:43 PM ET
A House Republican is planning in the coming weeks to revive the GOP offensive against federal lightbulb efficiency standards.
Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) will offer an amendment to Energy Department spending legislation that would block funding for implementation of the standards, the lawmaker's office told The Hill. The standards have come under fire from conservatives in recent years.
Republicans won the inclusion of a similar provision in an omnibus spending compromise that House and Senate lawmakers agreed to in December. The provision blocked funding for implementation of the law for fiscal year 2012. Burgess’ amendment would apply to fiscal year 2013.
Advocates of the law, including Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), have said the GOP provision blocking funding for implementation will have little effect.
Bingaman noted in December that lightbulb manufacturers have been working for years to make their products more efficient in anticipation of complying with the rules.
Republicans in Congress, joined by powerful conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, have spent months railing against provisions in a 2007 energy law that require traditional incandescent lightbulbs to be 30 percent more efficient starting in this year.
Opponents often describe the standards as a “lightbulb ban,” arguing that the rules would greatly restrict consumer choice by pushing out traditional incandescent bulbs in favor of more expensive, but more efficient, LED (light emitting diode) and CFL (compact fluorescent light) bulbs.
But the standards do not ban incandescent bulbs. They instead require them to be more efficient. While more efficient lightbulbs are often more expensive at the point of sale, experts note they save consumers money on their electricity bills over the long term.
The House Appropriations committee approved the Energy Department’s fiscal 2013 spending bill late last month. The legislation is expected to come up for a floor vote in the coming weeks.
besides savings are not the only reason for choosing a bulb...
and the savings are hardly there anyway, as explained:
http://dunday.com/p/deception-behind-banning-light-bulbs.html#savings
agree!!
besides savings are not the only reason for choosing a bulb...
and the savings are hardly there anyway, as explained:
http://dunday.com/p/deception-behind-banning-light-bulbs.html#savings
Yes Aerotech too, as linked
http://ceolas.net/#anomaly
But they end up expensive in the long rum, see the calculation...
Thats not the half of it GP!...
The CFL Mercury Issue http://ceolas.net/#li19x
Breakage — Recycling — Dumping — Mining — Manufacturing — Transport — Power Plants
Libloather
you may be interested in a post supporting Michael Burgess new bulb bill amendment, and Answering the Critics:
“Typical of Un-Progressive Republicans to want to hang on to Horse and Buggy technology, rather than support Innovation!”, “How many Times do we have to Keep Saying it’s not a Ban!”, etc...
http://freedomlightbulb.blogspot.com/2012/05/bright-burgess-bulb-bill-block-part-2.html
Energy saving bulbs that are more expensive, so you can use less energy! Great! We use less energy so the energy companies raise their rate BECAUSE YOU ARE USING LESS ENERGY!!!!!!!!!!!! So the end result is the consumer pays more for both! Liberalism truly IS a mental disease.
Bottom line, can we just have a choice and see which bulb is desired. Let the best bulb in the room win.
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.