[dalereed]

Screw efficiency, generate more fossil fuel power!!!

[greeneyes]

Well, they already outlawed the regular light-bulb hoping to force usage of a CFL bulb, which contains mercury(talk about pollution - those are really gonna be a problem in the land fills).

They ignored the fact that the bulbs were more costly. I know people who started using candles picked up at yard sales, because they couldn't afford light-bulbs for all there rooms. Betcha that's some more pollution they ignored.

It's really all about enriching some crony company or person. Then they just make stuff up to make it sound good.

I plan to stock up on the lights I want. There's probably not going to be a return to sanity in my lifetime. I also have lots of antique type oil lamps, alcohol lamps, and candle holder lamps.

[Fitzy_888]

Lighting is a product of electricity you can see, hence the simpleton’s fixation with bulbs, lamps, etc. Otherwise, as a percentage of electricity use, that spend for lighting is very-very low.

[lacrew]

I know somebody who accidentally installed these lower rated lamps in his basement, with regular bulbs.

The wiring in the lamp melted faster than the circuit breaker could activate. Unless you install some 5 amp breaker (do those exist?), the filaments of wire in the new lamps will be rated lower than the breaker.

Not good.

[BitWielder1]

If it was economically advantageous to buy the newfangled bulbs, people would do so without coercion.
The fact that they have to force us, proves all by itself it's a bad deal.

[SevenofNine]

All due respect I replace my light blubs with LED some of them are quick starts

[Chickensoup]

The government lies. Every new rule is a coercion for increasing control

[Paladin2]

Libtards running UN Agenda 21.

I want to keep my heat balls and reflector heat throwers.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

I looked at the referenced proposed regulation file. 457 pages on ... light bulbs ... Our government at work.

[rlmorel]

I did this analysis a couple of years back, but I'm not sure anyone even cares about this anymore. A lost battle not worth fighting. And liberals of all stripes (including many non-democrats who wanted an environmental feather to put in their "I'm Green too" hat, emboldened by that victory, turn the screws tighter.

I don't have an issue with the lights themselves. If people want to use them, that is their business if they want to pay the money and a manufacturer thinks they can make money by producing them. What I take issue with is government bureaucrats taking my money via confiscatory taxes, TELLING me how to spend the money they leave me, then passing legislation to DRIVE up the cost of energy so we are FORCED to spend more money to drive our cars, heat our homes and turn on our lights, whether they be incandescent or CFL. These bastards think they are doing us a big favor because they think they know best, and are trying to twist our arms to accept their utopian crap. They think if energy costs go up high enough, their plans to harness unicorn flatulence or whatever will become economically viable.

Well I don't care to take part in their damned experiments. If my town wants to purchase LED based traffic and street lights because it saves the town money and is a guaranteed return on investment, then power to them.

If people want these CFL lights in the marketplace as an alternative to make their homes more energy efficient, then I think is is fine and would never say boo to anyone so inclined.

Actually, my issue is not even residential lighting. Making citizens purchase stuff we don't want and don't need is NOT going to solve any kind of energy shortage. It is the equivalent of selling carbon credits or putting a magnetic sticker on the back of a car. It is Jimmy Carter wearing sweaters and telling us to turn our thermostats down.

So to make my point that forcing all of us to use these things, have to pay MORE money to buy them (even though most of us have found they don't last nearly as long as the government says they do)

Here an the original unaltered graph from Livermore Labs/DOE which I think is a very, very good graphical representation (reflecting the situation in 2009):

As shown below, I cut out a part of that graph and marked it up. Of the four major sectors, residential is the second smallest using just 4.65% of generated electrical power as shown by the graph. Government statistics say lighting consumes 12% of 4.65% of electricity flowing into a house. In the inset (enlarged) part shows the 4.65% pipeline with the red stripe on it showing the lighting share, and the green stripe showing what it would be if we assume 10% efficiency compared to CFL for incandescent bulbs. (The orange pipe leading into the box signifies the RESIDENTAL SECTOR of the energy grid and is representative of energy generated from all sources)

I didn't get this image from some anti-enviroweenie website. I made it myself after analyzing the data on the graph and government data such as estimates of how much lighting uses. And it illustrates the point I make, backed up with the government's own data, that forcing us to do this via statist legislation is basically ANOTHER camel nose in the figurative tent...BECAUSE THEY CAN.

If the market really wanted these lightbulbs, they would have made it on their own without government legislation. But, in my opinion, buying into this without a fight just exacerbates this statist mess we are in covering everything from legislation against transfats and salt in the diet to the amount of water we can flush down our toilet. Liberals think this is great because it is their pet thing that they have bought hook, line and sinker, running around screaming that we are running out of energy. Surrendering to this just invites the government to intrude into EVERY facet of our life.

I don't disparage people for choosing CFL's as a stand to take. I believe I have the data (shown graphically here) to indicate that using CFL's in houses isn't going to save us from anything. It is just a piece of do-gooder legislation that only does just that...makes guilty people feel good. I readily admit that one can make an argument for commercial/industrial building codes and so on, and I might buy into it and agree, the same as I agree with towns purchasing led-based traffic lights. However, building codes are so top heavy with bureaucracy now that I would fight against mandating these in commercial use on those grounds alone.

By my home is my home. And we have gone far too long allowing the government to dictate what we can and cannot do on our own quarter acre of land, small as it is. I am sick to death of it.

[ElkGroveDan]

First damn thing Congress needs to do in the event the Senate flips is repeal this light bulb insanity.

[unixfox]

Start with turning out all the lights in Washington!

Hell, just turn off all the electricity and let them starve to death in the dark.

[broken_arrow1]

No Lamps and No Fires!

[Georgia Girl 2]

Eventually we will all be back to candlelight.

[cva66snipe]

The most efficient thing I know to do is close the parasitic Department of Energy Nazism down. It would save this nation hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars over the next decade or two. The worst thing is it was a Republican Moron {Congressman???} who started all the light bulb laws.

[IamConservative]

It would be so refreshing if the free market could decide. If there is a lightbulb that will save me money, won’t poison me if I break it and I can dispose of in my trash, I’ll by the damn thing.