• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Energy Secretary Steven Chu defends light bulb standards as GOP seeks repeal

Don't care if the new lightbulb blows me and makes breakfast.... if I want an incandescent lightbulb, that's what I want to use. You want to use the foo-foo new bulbs go ahead and have fun.

If I want to dump sulfur into your yard that's what I want to do. You want to not dump sulfur into other people's yards, that's fine, but I'm going to go ahead and dump sulfur into your yard.
 
Don't care if the new lightbulb blows me and makes breakfast.... if I want an incandescent lightbulb, that's what I want to use. You want to use the foo-foo new bulbs go ahead and have fun.

I hear that scientists are working on that one.
 
Considering that the new bulbs last much longer than the old ones.

That's not always true. I bought some CFL's, and a few of them burned out in less than 6 monhts after fairly minimal use. After researching a bit further, I found this is fairly common when used in areas with certain levels of vibration, such as ceilng fans. It cose me far more for those bulbs then I would have saved over the course of a few years.

Once the incandescents are gone, then what?
 
Last edited:
Those fluorescent bulbs are not something you can screw up on in mass production. If a faulty incandescent goes through, it fizzles. When a fluorescent bulb is defective, it can blow up. Mostly because it has electronics in there. They heat up, plus the heat coming from the light source. Those catch fire and the fire can spread.

If it were my choice, I'd keep the incandescent lightbulbs because they don't need to warm up to give their brightest light and they last much longer than the CFLs.
 
Don't care if the new lightbulb blows me and makes breakfast.... if I want an incandescent lightbulb, that's what I want to use. You want to use the foo-foo new bulbs go ahead and have fun.

And baking a chicken in your electric oven for an hour and a half uses the same amount of electricity as a regular incandescent bulb would over something like 6 months of being on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Lightbulbs are not the biggest draws of electricity on the grid, so why bother with them??
 
And baking a chicken in your electric oven for an hour and a half uses the same amount of electricity as a regular incandescent bulb would over something like 6 months of being on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Lightbulbs are not the biggest draws of electricity on the grid, so why bother with them??

81 billion in savings just from that. And yes, there are other things that are being done too, but 81 billion dollars, along with the resulting reduction in Middle East oil imports, is not chicken feed.
 
We switched over to the new bulbs about 8 months ago. While I haven't noticed a difference in my utility bill, I haven't had to replace any bulbs over this time.

Having said that, I think it more important for the government to worry about nuclear plants aging and safety requirements constantly being downgraded just to keep them on line.

Wind generated power is rapidly expanding, and it leaves no waste and is very efficient. That, IMO would do far more to reduce our foreign oil dependency.
 
I completely switched (interior/exterior) from incandescent to CFL and LED a number of years ago. The long-term savings more than compensates for the initial cost.

The accrued savings on a national level is substantial. Even Iraq has passed legislation whereby the government will trade working incandescent bulbs for CFLs free of charge to any business/consumer.

Why folks cling to their incandescent Victrola is beyond me.
 
I completely switched (interior/exterior) from incandescent to CFL and LED a number of years ago. The long-term savings more than compensates for the initial cost.

The accrued savings on a national level is substantial. Even Iraq has passed legislation whereby the government will trade working incandescent bulbs for CFLs free of charge to any business/consumer.

Why folks cling to their incandescent Victrola is beyond me.

Out of curiosity, do you live in Iraq? A friend of mine lives there and the last time I spoke with him they were still having rolling blackouts to conserve power.
 
The House rears it's bat**** crazy head again. Who is for more efficient light bulbs? Consumers, and yes, even the light bulb manufacturers. Who is against it? Energy companies who want to charge you for using more electricity, and who have House Republicans in their back pocket. But did we ever think they didn't?

These Republicans who want to empower the Kochs of the world cite Constitutionality of the new law. However, since the Commerce Clause gives Congress exclusive power over trade activities among the states, this law is indeed Constitutional. Not only that, but will save consumers 81 billion dollars a year, which is money that won't be going into the pockets of energy companies. No wonder Republicans hate this law.

I predict that this bill will die in the Senate, and deservedly so.

Article is here.

Translation:

Stupid People shouldn't be allowed to decide what light bulbs to use.

Thankfully, here in Texas, we can still go on buying and using the Incandescent Light bulb.
Reporting from Washington— It doesn't have the ring of "Remember the Alamo," but a new battle cry has gone up in Texas: "Remember the incandescent bulb."

Texas has become the first state seeking to skirt a federal law that phases out old-fashioned incandescent light bulbs in favor of more efficient lamps — a move that has emerged as a shining example of Republicans' resolve to strike down what many view as excessive federal regulation.
Light bulbs: Texas aglow with effort to save the incandescent light bulb - latimes.com

It only deserves to die in the Senate if you believe you, and the Government know and have the right to dictate to the masses how they should live their lives. Truly, a Conservative Position to be sure.
 
A total conversion from VCRs to DVDs doesn't reduce the amount of uranium and sulfur being spit into the air I breathe.

The amount of energy difference between the two isn't going ot matter to you, and if you were really worried about such you wouldn't waste time worrying about light bulbs you'd be pushing for full nuclear energy power production.
 
We switched over to the new bulbs about 8 months ago. While I haven't noticed a difference in my utility bill, I haven't had to replace any bulbs over this time.

Having said that, I think it more important for the government to worry about nuclear plants aging and safety requirements constantly being downgraded just to keep them on line.

Wind generated power is rapidly expanding, and it leaves no waste and is very efficient. That, IMO would do far more to reduce our foreign oil dependency.

Seriously, really? Wind power cannot, will not and shall not EVER have the ability provide or meet our power needs in any shape, fashion or form.
 
Out of curiosity, do you live in Iraq? A friend of mine lives there and the last time I spoke with him they were still having rolling blackouts to conserve power.
No, I don't live there. My two oldest brothers (US military) each did multiple tours in Iraq. Iraq's power grid is still substandard and cannot satisfy demand. Hence, persistent unreliability and rolling blackouts.

Not my intent to derail so, back to the OP.
 
Seriously, really? Wind power cannot, will not and shall not EVER have the ability provide or meet our power needs in any shape, fashion or form.

Oh really?

As of the first quarter of 2011, the cumulative installed capacity of wind power in the United States was 41,400 megawatts (MW),[2] making it second in the world behind China. In 2010 Wind power accounted for 2.3% of the electricity generated in the United States.[3] This amounted to 94,650 thousand megawatt-hours of electricity.[4]

Driven by state renewable energy targets, fourteen states have installed over 1,000 MW of wind capacity, and a total of 37 states now have installed at least some utility-scale wind power.[5] Texas, with 9,728 MW of capacity, has the most installed wind power capacity of any U.S. state, followed by Iowa with 3,670 MW.[6] The Roscoe Wind Farm (780 MW) in Texas is the largest wind farm in the US as of 2009.[7]

Wind power is a clean, domestic, renewable resource that assists the U.S. in meeting energy, environmental, and economic challenges.[8] The U.S. wind industry generates tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of economic activity.[8] Wind projects boost local tax bases, and revitalize the economy of rural communities by providing a steady income stream to farmers with wind turbines on their land.[1] GE Energy is the largest domestic wind turbine manufacturer.[1]

There are currently 5,600 MW of projects under construction in 2011.[9] The U.S. Department of Energy’s report 20% Wind Energy by 2030 envisioned that wind power could supply 20% of all U.S. electricity, which included a contribution of 4% from offshore wind power.
Wind power in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Funny thing, they built wind farms here in Kansas and a miracle happened. Our power costs went down. Imagine that.
 
The new bulbs pollute the air we breath when broken and land fills and ground water when they are worn out and thrown out.

The new bulbs are made almost exclusively in China.

That costs us millions in lost jobs and taxes.

The upside is few pennies in electric bill savings and there is NO plus to this dumb-ass regulation.

This is straight up Liberal BS.
 
An easy way to increase both jobs and our long term energy sustainability.

Subsidize the cost difference between these bulbs and the old school efficient (CFL) bulbs.

I don't even think they even manufacture incandescent lights anymore.
 
The amount of energy difference between the two isn't going ot matter to you, and if you were really worried about such you wouldn't waste time worrying about light bulbs you'd be pushing for full nuclear energy power production.

The energy difference between half a billion incandescent bulbs and half a billion CFL/LED bulbs is enormous.

The new bulbs pollute the air we breath when broken and land fills and ground water when they are worn out and thrown out.

The new bulbs are made almost exclusively in China.

That costs us millions in lost jobs and taxes.

The upside is few pennies in electric bill savings and there is NO plus to this dumb-ass regulation.

This is straight up Liberal BS.

If your electricity comes from a coal power plant, you're actually releasing more mercury by using the incandescent just due to the extra electricity you burn.
 
The new bulbs pollute the air we breath when broken and land fills and ground water when they are worn out and thrown out.

The new bulbs are made almost exclusively in China.

That costs us millions in lost jobs and taxes.

The upside is few pennies in electric bill savings and there is NO plus to this dumb-ass regulation.

This is straight up Liberal BS.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (the “Energy Bill”), signed by President George W. Bush on December 18, 2007 is an energy policy intended to make better use of our resources and help the United States become energy independent. The law provides important benefits to consumers, industry, our country and our environment.
Part of the law sets energy efficiency standards for light bulbs; the first phase goes into effect January 2012. This document addresses frequent questions and some common misconceptions about the law.
http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/lighting/cfls/downloads/EISA_Backgrounder_FINAL_4-11_EPA.pdf
 
Translation:

Stupid People shouldn't be allowed to decide what light bulbs to use.

Thankfully, here in Texas, we can still go on buying and using the Incandescent Light bulb.

Light bulbs: Texas aglow with effort to save the incandescent light bulb - latimes.com

It only deserves to die in the Senate if you believe you, and the Government know and have the right to dictate to the masses how they should live their lives. Truly, a Conservative Position to be sure.

You should read carefully before making ignorant statements. This was signed into law by the Bush administration.
 
The House rears it's bat**** crazy head again. Who is for more efficient light bulbs? Consumers, and yes, even the light bulb manufacturers. Who is against it? Energy companies who want to charge you for using more electricity, and who have House Republicans in their back pocket. But did we ever think they didn't?

Do you need Gubmint to pick out your lightbulbs and wipe your ass?

.....or were you capable prior to Democrats taking it upon themselves to do it for you?

These Republicans who want to empower the Kochs of the world cite Constitutionality of the new law. However, since the Commerce Clause gives Congress exclusive power over trade activities among the states, this law is indeed Constitutional. Not only that, but will save consumers 81 billion dollars a year, which is money that won't be going into the pockets of energy companies. No wonder Republicans hate this law.

I predict that this bill will die in the Senate, and deservedly so.

Article is here.

And if government deemed $75 LED Green Eco Hope powered bulbs as necessary for all the liberal commoners and democrat serfs..........

.........you would be all for it it seems.........
.
.
.
.
 
The House rears it's bat**** crazy head again. Who is for more efficient light bulbs? Consumers, and yes, even the light bulb manufacturers. Who is against it? Energy companies who want to charge you for using more electricity, and who have House Republicans in their back pocket. But did we ever think they didn't?

These Republicans who want to empower the Kochs of the world cite Constitutionality of the new law. However, since the Commerce Clause gives Congress exclusive power over trade activities among the states, this law is indeed Constitutional. Not only that, but will save consumers 81 billion dollars a year, which is money that won't be going into the pockets of energy companies. No wonder Republicans hate this law.

I predict that this bill will die in the Senate, and deservedly so.

Article is here.

The regulation is dumb, because there is already a decline in incandescent sales.
They're "fixing" something that has already been fixing itself.

Besides, incandescent bulbs are useful precisely because of the reason they're being banned.
People use them for inexpensive heat generating devices.
 
Do you need Gubmint to pick out your lightbulbs and wipe your ass?

.....or were you capable prior to Democrats taking it upon themselves to do it for you?



And if government deemed $75 LED Green Eco Hope powered bulbs as necessary for all the liberal commoners and democrat serfs..........

.........you would be all for it it seems.........
.
.
.
.

Seems that President Bush was all for it too. He signed it into law.
 
Seems that President Bush was all for it too. He signed it into law.

So does that mean your all for it? What does it matter if your George Bush's #1 Fan?

Were you capable of picking out your own light bulbs prior to the Liberal Nanny State doing it for you?
.
.
.
.......were you capable of picking out your own toilet before the Liberal Nanny State starting doing that for you?
.
.
.
.
 
Back
Top Bottom