[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Miscellaneous See other Miscellaneous Articles Title: The end of the traditional lightbulb: Forty and sixty-watt bulbs set to be banned from January 1 •On January 1 it will become illegal for American businesses to either manufacture or import the old-style bulbs •Possible alternatives include halogen bulbs, compact fluorescent bulbs (CFL), LED bulbs and high efficiency incandescents •All are more expensive but also more energy efficient •Retails such as Home Depot are encouraging fans of the old-style bulbs to stock up now as they predict supplies will run out half-way through 201 Fans of the country’s most popular light bulbs - the traditional 40 and 60-watt incandescent bulbs - are being encouraging to start stocking up as on January 1 it will become illegal for American businesses to either manufacture or import the old-style bulbs. Possible alternatives to the old-style bulbs are halogen bulbs, compact fluorescent bulbs (CFL), LED bulbs and high efficiency incandescents - all are more energy efficient, but also more expensive. ‘Get them while you still can,’ Home Depot, the nation’s largest bulb retailer, is urging on its website. 'Stock up on incandescent light bulbs before they are completely discontinued.' On January 1 it will become illegal for American businesses to either manufacture or import the old-style 40 and 60-watt light bulbs The move is the result of a 2007 bill, signed by President George W. Bush, that set strict minimum efficiency standards. Many old light bulbs were grossly inefficient with only 10 percent of the energy used converted into light, while the rest was wasted as heat, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The alternatives may be significantly more cost efficient int he long run, but that hasn’t stopped many Tea Party conservatives and Libertarians from voicing their unhappiness at the government trying to tell people which light bulbs they can use. These critics argue that if the new bulbs really are so good, people will buy them on their own without being forced to do so. 'Get them while you still can': Home Depot, the nation's largest bulb retailer, estimates it has enough supply to last another six months Amongst the more energy efficient alternatives are compact fluorescent light bulbs, although they are more expensive too The Republican-controlled House has already tried and failed to overturn the law. For fan of the old-style bulbs, Home Depot estimates that it has a six-month stockpile. ‘Home Depot anticipates running out of their stock of 40W to 60W bulbs six months into 2014,’ Mark Voykovic, the store’s national light bulb merchant, told FoxNews. The retail giant said it has made 'a concerted effort' to educate employees and customers about the phaseout before then. 'In two years, you pay off that bulb,' said Voykovik. And because LED bulbs are expected to last at least 20 years - it's all savings for the next 18 years. Many Tea Party conservatives and Libertarians have accused the government of trying to tell people which light bulbs they can use The beginning of 2013 saw the phasing out of incandescent 75 and 100-watt light bulbs. High efficiency incandescents cost about $1.50 each, compared to 50 cents or so for the old bulbs. But they last twice as long, and use 28 per cent less power. With LEDs, the saving are even greater. While a 40-watt LED goes for about $7.50, it uses 85 per cent less energy than a traditional bulb. Over the course of the year, a LED will consume about $2 in power under normal circumstances, compared to over $7 for an incandescent. Comments Jimmy Green, new mexico, United States, They are NOT "more cost effective in the long run" because they NEVER last as long as they are supposed to and btw: Disposal of CFL bulbs is an ENVIRONMENTAL NIGHTMARE! Just read the disposal instructions on the box of one of those¿ This whole thing is another money grab by pseudo environmentalists and politicians. Plus, the type of light these put off in household applications is far worse for your eyes than traditional bulbs. But nobody reads anymore, so, i guess that's not an issue. Kenneth Elsey, carpentersville, United States, I have been using cfl's for about 5 years with a noticeable decrease in kw-hrs used. Each bulb lasts about 12-15 months while I also have several LED's that have been in use for 18 months and going. Only problem I notice is that the cfls and leds both dimmer than the incandescent bulbs. But I still save more by using more of the cfls and leds. derekcolman, Norwich, I have been using compact fluorescents on my landing for 10 years to save money, as I have to leave it switched on all the time. I find they don't last as long as the old incandescent bulbs, and in fact I'm on my fifth one in ten years. In the previous 10 years I got through only 2 of the old fashioned bulbs. Christopher, Cerritos, United States, For those of you who dislike this law, I am in total agreement. A little too intrusive. This is akin to making everybody buy electric cars, even though the technology isn't ready for prime time. They can't do that yet because so much revenue is tied up in transportation. That cannot be said about light bulbs. Same thing happened with digital televisions (forced everyone to buy new TV's, cable/satellite boxes, or "converter" boxes), and continues with computer products (do we really NEED a new version of Windows ever 18 months?). I was against this law when it was presented years ago, and still am, though very little can be done now. Pay attention people! This kind of thing needs to be stopped BEFORE it becomes law, not after. jacobcalder, Ventura CA USA, United States, This is being done to force consumers to pay for more expensive products that do not live up to the advertised hype. Plenty of Americans bought the CFLs and LEDs and returned to incandescents because they are a better product. Last time I looked at light bulbs at Home Depot- half the LEDs were previously opened/returned items taped back together in their package. Doesn't speak very highly of how Americans like these new 'green' light bulbs. The only solution here is for Americans to flat out refuse to buy these 'green' light bulbs being forced on them. Stock up on incandescents, and let the 'green' expensive alternatives sit on store shelves gathering dust. I sent boxes of incandescents to my family for christmas. Amazon has great deals and they ship rather well. This is being done to force Americans to buy the expensive alternatives. The only way to protest is to refuse to buy them. Gai Bennett, Longview, United States, AND the compact fluorescents and LED's are NOT dimmable unless you spring for the even more expensive self ballasting types. Pipeman, Baccytown, United Kingdom, Stock up now chaps, the replacements are rubbish. JuanValdezzz, Knoxville, United States, Wrong paradigm. It's not coservative vs. "liberal" left vs. right, it's authoritarian vs. libertarian. Bush is authoritarian right, while Obama is authoritarian left. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
This guy got it right. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
I just took delivery of 50, 72watt, Sylvania halogen bulbs from 1000bulbs.com .
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
Heavy duty incandescent are legal and have been upgraded to 130v to extend their lifetime. Some company is now in full production.
Bullshit. The warranty is a LOT shorter than that... Republicans prefer white genocide to paying taxes or paying more for strawberries. Comments Jimmy Green, new mexico, United States, They are NOT "more cost effective in the long run" because they NEVER last as long as they are supposed to and btw: Disposal of CFL bulbs is an ENVIRONMENTAL NIGHTMARE! Just read the disposal instructions on the box of one of those¿ This whole thing is another money grab by pseudo environmentalists and politicians. Plus, the type of light these put off in household applications is far worse for your eyes than traditional bulbs. [My note: Malthusian catastrophe: "precursors in the great army of destruction"] Christopher, Cerritos, United States, ...This is akin to making everybody buy electric cars, even though the technology isn't ready for prime time. ... Same thing happened with digital televisions (forced everyone to buy new TV's, cable/satellite boxes, or "converter" boxes), and continues with computer products [My note: and the insurance racket] Profits Über Alles - Excerpts According to the Neoliberal paradigm, the private sector is supposed to be ruthlessly efficient—yet this “ruthless efficiency” was bilking the government— ultimately bilking us, the taxpayers—of $300 billion a year: Roughly $1,000 a year for every man, woman, and child in America. Could you have used an extra $1,000 last year? Me, I wouldn’t have minded getting an extra grand. But I didn’t get this extra money. It went instead to an “efficient” private contractor that bilked the government. The Neoliberal paradigm might sell the illusion that it’s all about “ruthless efficiency”—but it’s not. Neoliberal economics is in fact all about the pursuit of Return On Investment (ROI): Profits as a ratio of income to capital. That’s it. That’s all Neoliberal economics really is, at its core: Maximizing ROI, and creating the social conditions where that maximization might occur [...] Neoliberal economics—and its cheerleaders—claim as a matter of faith that it is “ruthlessly efficient”. But it’s not. Its efficiency comes as a very welcome byproduct of its pursuit of profits—but Neoliberalism is not inherently more efficient. [...] to apply the Neoliberalist Paradigm to all facets of our lives and our society is creating the mess we have today. [...] The Neoliberal Paradigm is being implemented where it has no business being implemented. And far from improving our lives, it is making our society more inefficient. [...] it was the Neoliberal Economic Paradigm which destroyed American industry, in the guise of “globalization”. [...] It sounded so wonderful—“globalization” this and “globalization” that—but what it ultimately was was closing American factories and exporting manufacturing jobs for the sake of improving ROI, and leaving the American economy a hollow shell. [...] the profit motive cannot be the only motive for a thriving, healthy society. In fact, the profit motive should be a subordinate goal, both for individuals and for society as a whole. Edited for spacing. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||