rotor wrote:Another example of government mandated stupidity. Saves electricity but you pay a ton more for the bulbs and with fluorescents you have the mercury to deal with as previously noted. Remember when freon was banned? Of course that was only in this country but the whole world was still using it. Cost Americans a ton of money. Then there is ethanol for fuel. Mandated use that ruins older engines, most boats can't handle the ethanol, drives up food costs because corn is the source. Of course Archers Daniels Crooks love it. Then there are wind turbines that cost more to actually build than they will ever create in energy- of course we give them tax credits. Eagles killed by wind turbines are acceptable but birds killed near a refinery are taboo. It goes on and on. A government out of control. You can't even get a decent toilet bowl anymore.
ummm "Freon" was never banned its still available in several forms, please before spouting check your facts
But you do have to have a license now to purchase the older freons.
CFL
Concealed Freon License.
Anygunanywhere
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh
"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
I stocked up on 100 watters some time ago. If discovered and seized by government agents, It would probably be described as an arsenal by the media. 60 and 40 watters are useless when you really need light. Yeah I know you can use two small ones. The new fangled bulbs don't impress me. They are dirty and yeah the specs, say they produce the same output as the slower bulbs, I just don't see it in real world usage.
ss1088 wrote:Say what you will about government interference in the bulb market, it has led to some pretty neat technology in the LED market that would not have happened for many years otherwise. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Prices will become more reasonable as the years go on. We have already seen some major cuts in this market as the manufactures and engineers have been figuring out ways to cut cost.
If you really want to stick with incandescent, you will probably be able to find them if you are creative enough.
Seriously? You support the government taking away our choices and rationalize it based on an assumption of some future benefit? I hope you like Volts and Prius's because the logic of banning incandescent bulbs justifies banning SUVs and pickup trucks as well. Of course, it's unlikely, because that won't help Detroit's bottom line, and they're unlikely to lobby for it. And the logic that the government has a right to tell you what technology you must use is pretty close to the same logic that the gun grabbers use to justify banning semi-auto rifles.
Not that I don't agree with the "legislating a choice", but the difference in efficiency of energy consumed between a car/truck vs prius/volt IS NOT AS GREAT as incadescent vs CFL/LED. Somethings just make sense, especially if we want to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.
Freon R12 was banned I believe in 1995. What facts should I check? Virtually every car air conditioner used R12 prior to the ban. The ban was to "protect the ozone layer" You could go to Mexico and get R12 at any time so I guess we only protected the ozone layer across the US. There were never successful retrofits for R12 cars so if you wanted an air conditioned car in Texas you had to buy a new one. Same thing is happening now with CO2 tax but countries like China can dump as much as they want into the atmosphere.
rotor wrote:......"Abraham".........There were never successful retrofits for R12 cars so if you wanted an air conditioned car in Texas you had to buy a new one...."Abraham"
Not true. Google replacement freon for R12 and you will discover there were many options. The drop in refrigerant was available within a few months of R12 being outlawed. Retrofit kits were/are inexpensive and were/are still available. Regardless, I agree with the spirit of your post.
I have replaced the majority of my bulbs with the compact fluorescent bulbs. Not because the government made me. It was to save money on my electric bill. This would be a free market concept. Would we eventually see most folks making a switch without government intervention? Probably. Many have already changed. It is weird at first(the light is not the same). I hardly notice it anymore.
rotor wrote:......"Abraham".........There were never successful retrofits for R12 cars so if you wanted an air conditioned car in Texas you had to buy a new one...."Abraham"
Not true. Google replacement freon for R12 and you will discover there were many options. The drop in refrigerant was available within a few months of R12 being outlawed. Retrofit kits were/are inexpensive and were/are still available. Regardless, I agree with the spirit of your post.
Many companies came out with retrofits but none of them were as good as R12. I believe R12 used a lower pressure compressor and without changing the compressor the substitute refrigerants were never as good as R12. A non efficient air conditioner just doesn't make it in Texas. My point though is that government passes laws which are very expensive to comply with and 10 feet south of the border are ignored. So Americans get a new tax that really does nothing for the environment. I am sure the car companies were thrilled to sell you a new car with R134 refrigerant. And if you depended on an inexpensive asthma inhaler you too were hurt as these too were phased out.
ss1088 wrote:Say what you will about government interference in the bulb market, it has led to some pretty neat technology in the LED market that would not have happened for many years otherwise. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Prices will become more reasonable as the years go on. We have already seen some major cuts in this market as the manufactures and engineers have been figuring out ways to cut cost.
If you really want to stick with incandescent, you will probably be able to find them if you are creative enough.
Seriously? You support the government taking away our choices and rationalize it based on an assumption of some future benefit? I hope you like Volts and Prius's because the logic of banning incandescent bulbs justifies banning SUVs and pickup trucks as well. Of course, it's unlikely, because that won't help Detroit's bottom line, and they're unlikely to lobby for it. And the logic that the government has a right to tell you what technology you must use is pretty close to the same logic that the gun grabbers use to justify banning semi-auto rifles.
Not that I don't agree with the "legislating a choice", but the difference in efficiency of energy consumed between a car/truck vs prius/volt IS NOT AS GREAT as incadescent vs CFL/LED. Somethings just make sense, especially if we want to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.
You're kidding, right? What is the purpose of replacing one bulb with another bulb of greater efficiency? To spend money? To feel good? The purpose is to reduce energy consumption. The amount of energy you're saving with an LED light bulb is insignificant compared to the amount of energy saved by halving vehicle mpg --the differences in efficiency between light bulbs and vehicles is irrelevant. Furthermore, if CFL/LED bulbs are superior to incandescent bulbs, the government need not do anything. People will replace their incandescent bulbs when it makes sense to them to do so. I'm blown away by how many people today want the government to make decisions for them --or perhaps more accurately, want the government to make the decision for others when it's a decision they like for themselves.
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."
VMI77 wrote:..."Abraham"........ People will replace their incandescent bulbs when it makes sense to them to do so. I'm blown away by how many people today want the government to make decisions for them --or perhaps more accurately, want the government to make the decision for others when it's a decision they like for themselves.
I am with you 100%. Let the free market determine when people choose to replace their light bulbs. I would not want to speculate on the savings in light bulbs vs the savings in vehicles but I can tell you that it made a sizable difference in my electric bill when I changed to CFL. I have a couple rooms where turning a light switch on ignites a new generator at the power plant...LOL. My 75 watt bulbs are now using 13 watts but still providing the same amount of light as the incandescent bulbs. My kitchen alone has 9 of these bad boys. My 40 watt bulbs in my bathrooms are now using 6 watts each. My master bathroom has four 75"s and twelve 40's. It adds up. But... it is based on my decision. The government should not be legislating what kind of light bulbs I use any more than what kind of food I can eat.
Anyone sticking with their incandescent bulb flashlights? Yes the market does take care of it self without the need for new laws.
Fluorescent is only a little worse on energy usage than LED, however LED color is much better. The only disadvantage to LED that I have found is that the bulb cost drops over time. Thus a LED bulb now is cheaper than one you bought last year. Thus you may be able to save more money by waiting to the best buy point to purchase the "lifetime" bulb.
Thus rather than spending unbelieveable amounts of money to replace all the lights in my house with LED, I am using up the fluorescent bulbs I have on hand, before switching to LED. Other bulbs are being replaced with LED as needed.
My 100 watt incandescent bulbs are being saved for my get out bag.
philip964 wrote:Anyone sticking with their incandescent bulb flashlights? Yes the market does take care of it self without the need for new laws.
I still have some incandescent flashlights, but all my new purchases have been LED. I have found the CREE flashlights on Meritline to be very good. They are only about $6 and use one AA battery. They are extremely bright. I haven't used the long enough to know how long a battery will last. I bought a dozen of them to give away for Christmas.
Incandescence is the emission of light from a hot body as a result of its temperature. The term derives from the Latin verb incandescere, to glow white.
