• 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!

Kiss your 100-watt lightbulb goodbye

Jerry said:
Reduce the total load afforded to the home. If you want to run your AC at max all day every day, fine, but don't expect to also have computers, dishwashers, ovens and TV running at the same time.
Click to expand...

Ah, the Green Acres method, limiting devises that curtail total power usage in a home. Is that what you are suggesting as a better alternative to a thermostat limiiting during an emergency? Cool with me but I think you will find the general public will oppose it more than they did the thermostat method proposal from 2008 you linked.
 
Last edited:
Zyroh said:
now it makes sense. i was curious why you were denying the obvious. then you push a cfr report. enjoy your chains fool.
Click to expand...

I do not know who cfr is but this report was conducted and released by Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force comprised of his fellow oil company executives.
 
Catawba said:
I do not know who cfr is but this report was conducted and released by Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force comprised of his fellow oil company executives.
Click to expand...

CFR

Council on Foreign Relations

Probably the most influential think tank in the US
 
Gill said:
What possible benefit is there to turning off the HVAC during an emergency while leaving the electricity on to the rest of the house ????

Explain that !
Click to expand...

It reduces loading of the system without leaving customers completely without power altogether.
 
Catawba said:
I do not know who cfr is but this report was conducted and released by Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force comprised of his fellow oil company executives.
Click to expand...

can't think of anyone more apt to lie to the public than a group of energy executives.
 
Jerry said:
Regulation like this is the foundation for things to come, such as government controlled thermostats and requiring registration of appliances.
Click to expand...

Myself, I'm all for giving government agencies all the support I can, a little protection is better than none, especially since the sellers hold all the cards.

Caveat emptor (let the buyer aware) is a license for sellers to steal, another court approved perk for sellers, and another way to screw the buyers who have no lobbyists, or representation of any kind, to plead their cases. Yes, you can sue, but court cases cost more money than most people have.

ricksfolly
 
PeteEU said:
Sensible. Has happened in Europe.. hard to get the old style bulbs now days and good. In this case government should mandate such things as people would never switch over to energy saving bulbs because they are more expensive than "old type" bulbs. Now the fact that energy saving bulbs last longer on average (way longer) and cost way less to run should factor in, but as we all know, the consumer is ignorant of such things and only want short term visible results. I think I have one old type bulb in the house, but that is due to the lamp ("it looks pretty" is the comment in this house).. and as soon as the lamp can be replaced then it goes.
Click to expand...

Are you literally unable to not bash the USA? Holy ****ing ****, it is in every post you make...
 
ptif219 said:
Now we will be told what size light bulb we can use. More government control over our lives.

Kiss your 100-watt lightbulb goodbye - San Jose Mercury News

As of Saturday, what used to be a 100-watt light bulb manufactured and sold in California will have to use 72 watts or less. The 72-watt replacement bulb, also called an energy-saving halogen light, will provide the same amount of light, called lumens, for lower energy cost.

Similar new standards for traditional 75-watt, 60-watt and 40-watt incandescent bulbs will go into effect in California over the next few years, with wattages reduced to 53, 43 and 29 respectively.

The new rule does not ban incandescent light bulbs; it just requires those bulbs to be 25 to 30 percent more efficient. And it only affects incandescent light bulbs manufactured in 2011 or later, not those already in use or on store shelves.
Click to expand...

I haven't purchased one of those for at least 5 years... Easy. Bye.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Are you literally unable to not bash the USA? Holy ****ing ****, it is in every post you make...
Click to expand...

How is that bashing the USA, exactly?
 
ricksfolly said:
Myself, I'm all for giving government agencies all the support I can, a little protection is better than none, especially since the sellers hold all the cards.
Click to expand...

quite a statement from someone claiming to be 'independent'.
 
ricksfolly said:
Myself, I'm all for giving government agencies all the support I can, a little protection is better than none, especially since the sellers hold all the cards.
Click to expand...

Even when the government may not have the best solution? Do you give them a blank check of support regardless or do you have some standards?
 
Deuce said:
How is that bashing the USA, exactly?
Click to expand...

If said by just about anybody else other than he or Maximus Zeebra, it would not be. Unfortunately, within the context of him being him, it is though... as others seem to agree upon. It is in this seemingly benign statment in bold:

Originally Posted by PeteEU
Sensible. Has happened in Europe.. hard to get the old style bulbs now days and good. In this case government should mandate such things as people would never switch over to energy saving bulbs because they are more expensive than "old type" bulbs. Now the fact that energy saving bulbs last longer on average (way longer) and cost way less to run should factor in, but as we all know, the consumer is ignorant of such things and only want short term visible results. I think I have one old type bulb in the house, but that is due to the lamp ("it looks pretty" is the comment in this house).. and as soon as the lamp can be replaced then it goes.
Click to expand...

It is just more of the "Europe is ahead of, better than, more progressive than... the United States." crap that he spews...
 
Catawba said:
Ah, the Green Acres method, limiting devises that curtail total power usage in a home. Is that what you are suggesting as a better alternative to a thermostat limiiting during an emergency? Cool with me but I think you will find the general public will oppose it more than they did the thermostat method proposal from 2008 you linked.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet they'll find the Green Acres method more agreeable then rolling black-outs.
 
Bodhisattva said:
If said by just about anybody else other than he or Maximus Zeebra, it would not be. Unfortunately, within the context of him being him, it is though... as others seem to agree upon. It is in this seemingly benign statment in bold:



It is just more of the "Europe is ahead of, better than, more progressive than... the United States." crap that he spews...
Click to expand...

Ok, here I thought you had a legitimate reason to think that. Thanks for the clarification.
 
Jerry said:
I'm willing to bet they'll find the Green Acres method more agreeable then rolling black-outs.
Click to expand...

Having the choice of having my ac knocked back a few degrees versus reduced power through the whole house, which is what we were talking about, I think most people would choose the thermostat method.

In the meantime the new lightbulbs will light the way with the same light for less money and put less of load on the whole system. :sun
 
Catawba said:
Having the choice of having my ac knocked back a few degrees versus reduced power through the whole house, which is what we were talking about, I think most people would choose the thermostat method.

In the meantime the new lightbulbs will light the way with the same light for less money and put less of load on the whole system. :sun
Click to expand...

If this were about power usage and not government infringement I would agree.
 
Jerry said:
If this were about power usage and not government infringement I would agree.
Click to expand...

As one of the things that can help lower the load on an already overloaded system without costing taxpayers more money and saving them money on their electric bills, it seems to me, they are doing their job of helping to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people.

To each his own of course. I respect your right to see it differently.
 
Catawba said:
As one of the things that can help lower the load on an already overloaded system without costing taxpayers more money and saving them money on their electric bills, it seems to me, they are doing their job of helping to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people.
Click to expand...

They say the same thing about ObamaCare. Crossing the line into the home is a no no. Accomplish your goals another way.

Catawba said:
To each his own of course. I respect your right to see it differently.
Click to expand...
That's just what people say to run away when they can't deal with reality anymore and fear conflict.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
They say the same thing about ObamaCare. Crossing the line into the home is a no no. Accomplish your goals another way.

Originally Posted by Catawba
"To each his own of course. I respect your right to see it differently."

That's just what people say to run away when they can't deal with reality anymore and fear conflict.
Click to expand...

What's to run away from? You gave your opinion, I gave mine. Game over. I will keep in mind however that you prefer not to be treated respectfully.
 
Catawba said:
What's to run away from? You gave your opinion, I gave mine. Game over. I will keep in mind however that you prefer not to be treated respectfully.
Click to expand...

More avoidance, no evidence. Typical. Thank you for proving my point.
 
Catawba said:
I'm right here. Evidence of what????
Click to expand...

My example of the threshold of your front door being a critical legal boundary. You claim it isn't. Provide evidence. You say the state is in fact just. Provide evidence. Not opinion, evidence. What is the "Compelling State Interest" in breaching your right to privacy? Demonstrate this I beg you.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
My example of the threshold of your front door being a critical legal boundary. You claim it isn't. Provide evidence. You say the state is in fact just. Provide evidence. Not opinion, evidence. What is the "Compelling State Interest" in breaching your right to privacy? Demonstrate this I beg you.
Click to expand...

The light bulb requirement does not require anyone entering your front door. If you are talking about the 2008 proposal you brought up that was voted down, who gives a ****? Its a moot point, it was voted down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom