Republicans Seize Momentum, Set Sights On . . . Light Bulbs?

Well, now I see why Switched has no blogosphere buzz whatsoever.

Snark, snark, snark. Aren't we precious. Aren't we hip. Aren't we oh so clever.

Meanwhile, these enviro-Messiah CFLs have mercury and are an environmental disaster and toxic menace whenever you drop and break one. Our suicidally destructive policy on this has destroyed thousands of US jobs as factories shut down and move offshore.

All for nothing. We should just add energy production capacity with new power plants, not try to choke and throttle down power consumption.

Amen, Carney.

I guess we should all just shut up and lay down for the enviro-nazis and buy crappy, low quality pseudo-"green" products at an inflated price.

Most people think those new "energy efficient" bulbs are "better for the environment" and we should just do away completely with the old ones...but what they ~don't~ realize... is that those "energy efficient" bulbs are effectively nth level environmental hazard bombs just waiting to be tossed into the garbage.

Until every person fully comprehends that you simply *CANNOT* throw those things into the garbage and until they setup collection bins for dead ones at every place that sells them...yeah, the old incandescent should not be regulated out of existence.

LED light bulbs on the other hand use WAY less electricity than those "energy efficient" bulbs, aren't harmful to the environment when tossed out, last *FAR* longer, are much more robust (almost impossible to break unless you're really trying) and are simply better all around...except in price.

The *REALLY* good ones are still upwards of a $100 bucks and the cheapy, shit-grade $20 ones you can find on Amazon and other places, yeah they're just crap as far as how much light they put out (like the equivalent of a 30 watt light bulb).

They basically cost as much as the "energy efficient" bulbs did when they first started hitting the market, so likely in about 10 years or so they'll finally be affordable.

And the voters in texas keep returning to congress, maybe we should give texas back to Mexico,

Be it known that ALL of these cfl bulbs are
manufactured in CHINA in coal burning factories.

You do know right that the burning of coal to power up an incandesant and the amount of incandesants to equal a cfl bulb releases billions of times more mercury then the cfl bulb does . You also save money by doing a cfl bulb plus replace the bulb less meaning it's safer to use a cfl then a regular bulb (quite a number of people have accidents when changing a bulb which for elderly can be fatal) and most cfls these days are brighter and look nicer then incandesants. Plus due to less heat you have far less chance of causing a house fire with a cfl bulb.


Also the cfl mercury in the landfill is localized instead of being dumped into the air as with burning coal that then said mercury also gets in the water supply and you also breathe it in and guess what there are tons of batteries in landfills which also have toxic metals in them.

From http://www.popularmechanics.com/home/reviews/news/4217864

How much mercury do power plants emit to light a CFL?
About 50 percent of the electricity produced in the U.S. is generated by coal-fired power plants. When coal burns to produce electricity, mercury naturally contained in the coal releases into the air. In 2006, coal-fired power plants produced 1,971 billion kilowatt hours (kwh) of electricity, emitting 50.7 tons of mercury into the air—the equivalent amount of mercury contained in more than 9 billion CFLs (the bulbs emit zero mercury when in use or being handled).

Approximately 0.0234 mg of mercury—plus carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide—releases into the air per 1 kwh of electricity that a coal-fired power plant generates. Over the 7500-hour average range of one CFL, then, a plant will emit 13.16 mg of mercury to sustain a 75-watt incandescent bulb but only 3.51 mg of mercury to sustain a 20-watt CFL (the lightning equivalent of a 75-watt traditional bulb). Even if the mercury contained in a CFL was directly released into the atmosphere, an incandescent would still contribute 4.65 more milligrams of mercury into the environment over its lifetime

Put on a Hazmat suit while changing bulbs in case you drop one.

Well I don't know about the rest of you, but I am already scraping funds as it is. It is hard enough already being able to afford cable and the internet.In order to watch tv, I am forced to buy that digital box.Now in order to have lights, I have to buy these bulbs? What is next? The tv and fridge and oven and furnace? Government intervention is necessary sometimes but not inside my house.The government subsidized coupons for these boxes.But who pays for it when it breaks?Is the government going to subsidize these bulbs to?Doesn't matter because when it needs replacing, I am the one who foots the bill. Whatever happened to putting a product on the market and let it fly?

Are u people stupid enough to think these bulbs will stop coal burning plants? Regulate the power plants not the light bulbs. I use $50 worth of electricity a month, my friend uses $500 a month. Why should I be forced to buy this over priced, headache causing product? My friend tried them, half were defective out of the box and is still trying to get them replaced. That was 6 months ago and for the savings on his bill, He said it didn't drop enough to make it worth the BS he's going through with the new bulbs.

What the enviro Nazi's also do no tell the public is that all of the data they use is based on Gov. scientists assuming static conditions with old school long straight round bulbs like the ones in your old elementary school classroom.

They project life of bulb and efficiency of those to the new tightly bent small bulbs. The result is we cannot generate enough light in our house to read at night and the old incandescent bulb outlasts its replacement by far.

Just because someone testifies before congress does not make what they say Law as in natural law.

Actually, to be more efficient, we should use energy-saving incandescent light bulbs in the winter to support heating up or homes, and then switch to the pig-tails in the summer to also keep our homes cooler. Besides, if we completely do away with the incandescent light bulb, how will we bake our cakes in a Easy Bake Oven?

>Despite the incandescent bulb's obvious environmental drawbacks, <

How about the obvious environmental drawbacks of mercury in CFLs?
How about the obvious health hazards inherit in mercury in CFLs?
How about the dangers of mercury in the household — from CFLs?

Apparently the lobbyists who pushed and the politicians who passed laws are more interested in making a buck over the health of the people.

LEDs could have just as easily been pushed and lawed into use, and they have NONE of the poisons of CFLs.
NO mercury at manufacturing sites.
NO mercury in your home.
NO mercury in stores you shop.
NO mercury in schools (remember, when asbestos was used in schools it was the best available fire defense, and health hazards were unknown. We know about CFLs and are using them anyway!)