Posted on 07/11/2009 4:24:31 AM PDT by Scanian
What if in 2025 a husband and wife decide they want to use old-fashioned incandescent bulbs in the sanctuary of their home? Will the light-bulb left defend their right to privacy and freedom of choice?
Don't count on it. Many Americans may not know it yet, but the federal government has already effectively banned the type of light bulb most of us use today.
In 2007, President Bush signed the Energy Independence and Security Act, mandating that household light bulbs use incrementally less electricity starting in 2012 and culminating in 2020, when they must use less than 70 percent of the electricity conventional incandescent bulbs use today.
Compact fluorescent bulbs already meet this standard. The congressional authors of the law understood they were, in essence, phasing out incandescent bulbs.
They did this, they said, to help save the planet from overheating. But the light-bulb left did not weigh -- or care about -- the unintended consequences of their crusade. One such consequence could be an environment disaster in your family room.
You see, fluorescent bulbs contain mercury -- a bad, bad pollutant and health hazard that the Environmental Protection Agency has been sounding alarms about for years.
This put the EPA in a tough spot. On the one hand, it needed to applaud the politically correct use of fluorescent bulbs to save the planet. On the other hand, it needed to warn people that if they break a fluorescent bulb in their home it could poison the dog, the kid and the wall-to-wall rug. So, the EPA published blatantly self-contradictory instructions about what to do if mercury spills at your house.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
If they can gather that much mercury in one place, how about shipping it back to China to use in more CFLs?
Autistic children don’t do well with fluorescent light bulbs either. Well, the ones I have worked with haven’t. They make a noise that the children didn’t like, and the fact that it wasn’t really bright bothered a few of them. We had them in the lunch room and it was hard for them.
First of all, none of the authors of this tyrannical measure believe the planet is overheating - that is just an obvious lie to fool the ignorant.
Second, the "consequences" of their "crusade" are not unintended, they are the purpose and the goal of the whole scam.
I think the market would make a better regulator in this case.
Without a restoration of the republic? You betcha.
Because a central government with the power to force you to use them can also do a lot of other cool stuff they want to do with that power.
I'm already moving into the use of "white" LEDs and getting real savings on my monthly power bill.
I ear that not only is the COLOR of the light from the new bulbs bad, but that they flicker at a very high rate that bothers your eyes over time.
Some people loved them. I was one. No Jimmy Carter sweater wearer I, but I liked bright rooms while hating the excess heat that came from incandescent bulbs. Even the early Circline adaptors found use in many of my table and ceiling lamps.
We have ELECTRIC coffee pots, washing machines, dryers, refrigerators, , bread machines, pasta machines, computers, radios, TV's, etc, etc....
The fact of the matter is, the change will do little except make room for another electic commodity. We just love our electricity!!!
Compact fluorescent bulbs already meet this standard,except for the mercury part comimg to a landfill near you soon.
In looking up the history on fluorescent bulbs just now I found a little blurb in "the web site that shall never be named" that said by 1951 the US produced more light by flouorescent systems than by incandescent systems.
What that means is that the biederenderen still holding out for incandescent actually lost that war 58 years ago!
At the same time that means the vast power savings Congresscritters imagine to be available by swapping out incandescent for fluorescent systems JUST AREN'T THERE!
Sure, I'm saving on my own power bill, but we have a lot of lights. The poor, with but a single pitiful lightbulb hanging down from a wire run through the ceiling, simply don't have the power consumption necessary to create a basis for savings. (Like that "Depression Era" imagery? With the Obama Depression in place there'll be more of it.)
But, back to the LEDs, we like them because they are not hot.
'Cooling the planet'. . .this 'warming/change' magical thinking is no different than the clear thinking that occurred in Salem, when 'witch burning' made sense. A long-standing tradition of 'scapegoating' while finding as well; poltical advantage.
Of course, all signs point to even greater threats. 'Burn those who dare to burn a light bulb'. . .
I think most people simply didn't realize that except for their home, mosty lighting is/was flourescent. It's a visual thing...The pretty incandescent bulb. The curly bulb still doesn't seem right...Bulbs aren't curly!!! :-)
I have replaced my incandescent bulbs.
In the end, the Congress was the ultimate marketing tool.
They're pulling the same crap with the energy bill and the health bill.
“For anyone who’s not familiar with the Kansas City, this is the old “Bendix Plant” and federal complex that was built on a flood plain”
It’s a federal complex, they worked on some stupid nuclear stuff at that plant. I worked for Bendix and I wondered why we were involved with a great potential liability.
Had to be for the almighty dollar.
Down here in South Florida, incandescents make alot of heat, so not only do you pay once to operate the light, you pay AGAIN in order to power the AC unit to remove the heat, so I started CFLing most of my lights. At $10 for 6, this price is right.
I still use old school bulbs though, for the vanity lights in the bathroom (more natural colors). Garage, attic, and places where I need instant full power lighting that wont be used for long periods of time. I would NEVER agree with banning those things, and when they do, I'll be one of the people in line looking to stock up.
Gosh do I miss Ronald Reagan and his philosophies.
.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57309
Ive got about 100 incandescent light bulbs in my attic now all safely tucked away in a box. Every time we go to Wal*Mart, I get another six pack. I'm 67 years old, so figuring I might reach an average age for longevity, and replacing about 5 light bulbs per year, I've got a lifetime supply. But I'm thinking REAL light bulbs might be right up there with ammo and canned goods a few years from now! :-)
“Down here in South Florida, incandescents make alot of heat, so not only do you pay once to operate the light, you pay AGAIN in order to power the AC unit to remove the heat”
I do the same in MD. I use the incandescents in the winter because I need heat anyway, and swap over to CFL’s for the summer.
Hasn’t worked this year, this global warming crap is freezing our butts off. AC was on one day in early May, a fluke, and hasn’t been on since.
It’s July and I don’t see a need for AC for at least another week.
There is a better solution coming. The LED light bulb. Less power, almost no heat, more pleasing light.
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.