I switched to CFLs in 2005 I think. I have had those same bulbs since then. Made the Navy move the ones I had everytime we moved (I saved the boxes). Of course here in housing, they have the LED lights anyway, so I really don't need the bulbs I have. I put them away. Might donate them or just turn them in to whereever.
"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt
Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.
I don't like being told what kind of lightbulb I can buy under law... this is something the free market could have taken care of in time.
I've been buying the curlies (Compact florescent bulbs) for ten years now, though. Not for any environmental reasons, nor even mainly for the electric bill savings, but because they last for YEARS and I hate changing light bulbs.
Last edited by Goshin; 01-03-11 at 08:38 PM.
Fiddling While Rome Burns
Carthago Delenda Est
"I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."
So, to conserve energy and protect the environment, we're going to outlaw, "old school", light bulbs in favor of light bulbs that are overflowing with mercury, that will be disposed of in our landfills, so that mercury can seep into our water supply, ingested by the fish we eat, then into us?
On a scale of 1-to-10, the stupidity level here, is?
Compact fluorescent lamp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaEnvironmental issues Mercury emissionsCFLs, like all fluorescent lamps, contain small amounts of mercury as vapor inside the glass tubing. Most CFLs contain 3–5 mg per bulb, with the eco-friendly bulbs containing as little as 1 mg. Because mercury is poisonous, even these small amounts are a concern for landfills and waste incinerators where the mercury from lamps may be released and contribute to air and water pollution. In the U.S., lighting manufacturer members of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) have voluntarily capped the amount of mercury used in CFLs. In the EU the same cap is required by the RoHS law.
In areas with coal-fired power stations, the use of CFLs saves on mercury emissions when compared to the use of incandescent bulbs. This is due to the reduced electrical power demand, reducing in turn the amount of mercury released by coal as it is burned. In July 2008 the US EPA published a data sheet stating that the net system emission of mercury for CFL lighting was lower than for incandescent lighting of comparable lumen output. This was based on the average rate of mercury emission for US electricity production and average estimated escape of mercury from a CFL put into a landfill. Coal-fired plants also emit other heavy metals, sulfur, and carbon dioxide.
Net mercury emissions for CFL and incandescent lamps, based on EPA FAQ sheet, assuming average US emission of 0.012 mg of mercury per kilowatt-hour and 14% of CFL mercury contents escapes to environment after land fill disposal.In the United States, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimated that if all 270 million compact fluorescent lamps sold in 2007 were sent to landfill sites, that this would represent around 0.13 metric tons, or 0.1% of all U.S. emissions of mercury (around 104 metric tons that year)
Some information on the mercury in CFLs
Conservatives believe the government is incompetent, and seek to elect people who will prove it
Ignorance is Bliss Bliss is the same as happiness US Christian conservatives are the happiest in the US according to studies Do you see a connection?
that this option hasn't been gaining track on it's own seems indicative, then, doesn't it?Personally, I buy those light bulbs already. That said, it probably shouldn't be the government's business as to how I light my surroundings. It would be far better to allow the company to produce the superior product and then let it compete on it's own against the less efficient model. Some people don't seem to realize that they won't have to force their agenda on others if they can just legitimately provide a better option.
generally speaking though, this kind of nanny-statism is intolerable. it's like when they started regulating toilets and showerheads. the federal government does not belong here.
Last edited by cpwill; 01-04-11 at 03:07 AM.
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump
IT hasn't affedcted mmmeeee much..
I believe our nanny govt has assured us that the occasional whiff of mercury won't make us vote Democrat, so I will worry about more serious matters.
Example, is there enough potable water for us to drink, or will we have to buy the overpriced "spring" water in non-recyclable plastic bottles made from the waste chemicals left over when we refine oil?
Should I report my neighbors for overwatering their lawns using that potable water when using gray system water (shower and washing machine water) would conserve all that clean water and fertilize the grass at the same time?
Is the air relatively clean, or is there enough octane boosting lead in it to make some of our kids become right wing ubercons?
And what industrial wastes being dumped into the air and our rivers is creating all these pesky libertarians?
Oracle of Utah
Truth rings hollow in empty heads.
What the govt doesn't know......
Oracle of Utah
Truth rings hollow in empty heads.
But our old washer and dryer were 15 years old - if they were more recent - say maybe 8 years old - I'd say the 'savings' wouldn't have been noticable.
A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow
Like it or not, the consumers and the "free market" is not fast enough more than often to implement better technology for safety or conservation. If it was not for laws and rules then things like seat belts in cars would not be mandatory. Even to this day, the generation that grew up during the "optional" period has a damn hard time in remembering the belt, which is why many cars have the "beep beep beep" alarm (which some turn off.....) to remind people to put on the seat belt.
And like it or not, old style bulbs might be cheap (for now) but energy wise they are pigs. Add into that, the fact that they last far shorter than energy saving bulbs, then an energy saving bulb is very quickly "earned" back despite that the bulb it self is more expensive. But consumers do not think like that in most cases. Hell the UK had the problem last year when the bulbs were banned for sale... people complained about the light from energy savers being "not good enough" to "did not like it" and all sorts of excuses. When presented with the energy saved and money, then very few actually continued with the same tone. Those that did continue with the tone were usual 50+ in age.
So while you might think this is another intrusion by government on the lives of people, this intrusion makes a whole lot of sense. Think about the energy save if everyone went to energy saving bulbs? Aint it a right wing platform to get rid of energy dependence on foreign oil? Well this is one of many ways of doing it.
Last edited by PeteEU; 01-04-11 at 11:33 AM.