Page 1 of 78 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 771

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

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,737

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

    Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Friday defended rules designed to boost light bulb efficiency as a group of Republicans led by Texas Congressman Joe Barton prepared for a House vote next week to repeal the regulations.

    At stake is a 2007 energy law requiring that incandescent light bulbs be 30 percent more efficient by 2012.
    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.
    Last edited by danarhea; 07-09-11 at 09:28 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

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

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea
    Who is against it?
    I'm against the government forcing it on the people. In case you missed it this was an unneeded power grab for an action that was already taking place.

    However, since the Commerce Clause gives Congress exclusive power over trade activities among the states, this law is indeed Constitutional.
    No it doesn't. That is a twisting that has happened. I can quote one of my past posts if need be.
    Last edited by Henrin; 07-09-11 at 09:37 PM.

  3. #3
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,418

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

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    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 consumers want to pay twice as much for a light bulb? I don't buy that. Are you excited about paying 5 times more for freon for your a/c, too?

  4. #4
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,737

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

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The consumers want to pay twice as much for a light bulb? I don't buy that. Are you excited about paying 5 times more for freon for your a/c, too?
    Considering that the new bulbs last much longer than the old ones, and use much less electricity on top of it, consumers are actually saving money. the savings for consumers is estimated to be about 81 billion dollars.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

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

    I have a shelf full of the old bulbs. The light emitted is better. They are far cheaper (even considering electic costs) and my lamp shades don't fit the swirly bulbs.

    One day if the price has come down (which will likely happen) I'll switch. Oh yeah, I can also simply throw away the old bulbs.

    You know, it's odd that the government didn't have to pass a law to force people to switch from VCR's to DVD's.
    Last edited by 1Perry; 07-09-11 at 10:39 PM.

  6. #6
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,785

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I have a shelf full of the old bulbs. The light emitted is better. They are far cheaper (even considering electic costs) and my lamp shades don't fit the swirly bulbs.

    One day if the price has come down (which will likely happen) I'll switch. Oh yeah, I can also simply throw away the old bulbs.

    You know, it's odd that the government didn't have to pass a law to force people to switch from VCR's to DVD's.
    A total conversion from VCRs to DVDs doesn't reduce the amount of uranium and sulfur being spit into the air I breathe.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  7. #7
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I have a shelf full of the old bulbs. The light emitted is better.
    Not quite. There's a new LED on the market which in blind (LOL) tests cannot be determined to be different from old incandescent lights.

    They are far cheaper (even considering electic costs) and my lamp shades don't fit the swirly bulbs.
    Depends how often you use your lights. To be cheaper then LEDs over any considerable time frame, you have to barely use your incandescent bulbs. Meaning less than an hour or two a day.

    You know, it's odd that the government didn't have to pass a law to force people to switch from VCR's to DVD's.
    The law doesn't ban incandescent. It just requires a level of efficiency. Which some incandescent bulb manufacturers are working on.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  8. #8
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

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

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Considering that the new bulbs last much longer than the old ones, and use much less electricity on top of it, consumers are actually saving money. the savings for consumers is estimated to be about 81 billion dollars.
    SHssh. Don't throw facts into Adpst's brain. You know it doesn't do him any good. You should see the savings on some of the LED comparisons. It's something like $150 a bulb over 15 years. So if you have 15 bulbs in the house...
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    A total conversion from VCRs to DVDs doesn't reduce the amount of uranium and sulfur being spit into the air I breathe.
    The point being, people switched to the new technology all on their own.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

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

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Not quite. There's a new LED on the market which in blind (LOL) tests cannot be determined to be different from old incandescent lights.
    I hope so. I'll certaintly take your word for it that some test claims this. I'll see for myself at some point. Might be awhile if these bulbs are $6.00 or more.

    Depends how often you use your lights. To be cheaper then LEDs over any considerable time frame, you have to barely use your incandescent bulbs. Meaning less than an hour or two a day.
    Any single bulb uses very little electricty in a year.

    The law doesn't ban incandescent. It just requires a level of efficiency. Which some incandescent bulb manufacturers are working on.
    Still, if it's a good deal, people will switch on their own.

Page 1 of 78 1231151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •