Finally discovered something good from George Bush

[telcoman]

He signed a positive piece of legislation that was passed by both houses that I am in agreement with.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/12/busin ... lb.html?hp

Who knew?

My electric bill dropped considerably since we got rid of our 38 year old Gibson refrigerator.

The energy savings from new light bulbs should help reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

So yes the government needs to be involved in many things in our lives.
Energy usage, healthcare, food, drugs meat inspection, clean water standards, and building construction in earthquake areas just to name a few.

Let the attacks and flaming begin.

Telcoman

[srellim234]

Sorry, but it is not the federal government's job to tell the children of this country that they may no longer use an E-Z Bake Oven. It has always used an incandescent bulb as the heating element. Same with the original model of the Ronco Food Dehydrator (newer models use an electric element).

Come up with the technology first, make it affordable to implement, and then maybe it will be worth talking about. Until then let's force the ruling class in Washington, D.C. to balance our budget and get Americans back to work! That's MUCH more important.

[AZhitman]

Spoken like an invalid who needs someone, preferably a government employee, to change his diaper. Big surprise.

Did it ever occur to you to get rid of your old POS fridge without some government program? Not likely.

Your "new light bulbs" are a toxic mess, consume FAR more fossil fuels to make than they save, and are subsidized involuntarily by taxpayers.

p.s. GWB hasn't been POTUS for years, Howie. Welcome back from your coma, though.

[mattblancarte]

The law makes sense to me.

There will be no ban or restriction on the sale, purchase, or consumption rate of incandescent light bulbs. The law is essentially telling manufacturers that it's not okay to make a sub-par product that outputs light at low-efficiency. 100W bulbs will be required to output at a 25% increase in efficiency.

In theory, the consumer gets a better product. At a greater cost per unit, perhaps.

I was unaware of the spiral fluorescent bulbs being more damaging to the environment.

[AZhitman]

I was unaware of the spiral fluorescent bulbs being more damaging to the environment.

Spare me the facepalm. There's a reason you're not supposed to throw them in the garbage. There's a reason you have to take them to a designated facility at the end of their useful life. There's a reason they cost more. There's a reason no one wants to deal with them AFTER they're used up.

I'm not damning them completely. I'm saying they're not the 100% net gain that the foolish people believe them to be.

Kinda like the false "green-ness" of a Toyota Prius... it's HYPE.

[mattblancarte]

I wasn't facepalming to say that it wasn't true or I had issue with what you said. I was facepalming to agree that it's a stupid product under that premise. I was just unaware, as I don't buy them and really don't know much about them.

Totally agree that consumers need to be mindful about "green" spins on products. Spiral fluorescent light bulbs (now knowing their consumer/environmental cost) and the manufacturing of some hybrids are choice examples.

[telcoman]

I was unaware of the spiral fluorescent bulbs being more damaging to the environment.

Spare me the facepalm. There's a reason you're not supposed to throw them in the garbage. There's a reason you have to take them to a designated facility at the end of their useful life. There's a reason they cost more. There's a reason no one wants to deal with them AFTER they're used up.

I'm not damning them completely. I'm saying they're not the 100% net gain that the foolish people believe them to be.

Kinda like the false "green-ness" of a Toyota Prius... it's HYPE.

Is that any different from throwing used batteries in the garbage?

Years ago there were people who would pour used motor oil into sewers too.
Wasn't it the government that pointed out the dangers of doing so.
Proper recycling is just being smart and we need the experts in this field to keep us informed. Just because they happen to be government employees shouldn't matter.
We've all seen how some private corporations function with their own inept management.

Telcoman

[srellim234]

telco- given the hugely justified suspicion of ANYTHING done in Washington D.C. for the last 20 years, look for an ulterior motive or follow the money first. I haven't researched this subject yet but my initial guess would be that since light bulb companies aren't complaining too loudly they developed the technology, it was reasonably cheap and they used their lobbyists to get the government to mandate the change in a way allowing the companies to charge more and pad profits.

If it was really about energy efficiency or reducing foreign oil dependence far more would have been accomplished requiring NO change in technology by returning to the national 55 mph speed limit. We know how popular that was.

Once again, this is about the ruling class placing more controls and dictating to a servant class in this country. It is no longer about economic classes. It's about a return to a Middle Ages style feudal system that both major parties and those people of wealth who are trying to protect their power at the expense of all others are accomplishing. Note, too, that it is not all people of wealth; it's a small unscrupulous subset of that part of our population.

[R/T Hemi]

I caught a few clips of him on Oprah from the other day. He mentioned a guy asking him if he knew he looked like G.W. Bush? He said he responds, "Yes, I get that all the time." The guy then asked if it pissed him off when that happened.

[audtatious]

In theory, the consumer gets a better product. At a greater cost per unit, perhaps.

I was unaware of the spiral fluorescent bulbs being more damaging to the environment.

CFL's will be increasing the amount of mercury that will be in our land fills which will eventually leach into our waterways again. When was the last time we had issues with mercury levels, the 1970's? CFL's also yellow things over time. Have something plastic and white, don't keep it under a CFL bulb or it will be yellowed. CFL's are primarily made overseas by low-paid labor in sweat shops and they are having a huge increase in mercury poisoning (like anyone really cares as long as the end result is "green"). There have been thousands of jobs lost in the US due to the closure of plants which make incandescent light bulbs.

I hate CFL's and the crappy light they put out and I'd rather have my incandescent bulbs. The CFL's I've put in my laundry room lasted 6 months at the most, what a great product. I don't waste my time with them.

Now, LED's on the other hand are the way to go. Unfortunately they are quite expensive today (30-40 vs 5...but they do last 10x longer). We need to punt CFL's to the curb and make LED's a priority. They should be manufactured HERE (enviro-nuts would have fits though). Where I have issues paying $5 for CFL's I would not have issues with buying $5 LED bulbs.

[srellim234]

Because you don't like CFLs is that a reason to have the government get involved? Since 1995 we've used CFLs with great success in our household so I could argue the other way but I'm not about to. I will point out, though, that every one of the bulbs we've used up has been removed through a responsible hazmat disposal program here in our town. We've averaged well over 5 years per light bulb and we've never had an electric bill over $100 even in the heat of summer when we've used our a/c. "Yellowing" has not been a problem for us.

If we're outlawing older technologies to try to force companies to come up with new ones, why don't we also force companies to come up with a way to recycle the hazardous substances in the CFLs? After all, apparently all we have to do is have the federal government pass a law or regulation and everything will take care of itself. Make the companies that make CFLs responsible for their recycling.

Let G.E. put out their new and improved incandescent. Let Sylvania put out the old ones. Let whoever put out LEDs. Same with CFLs. Let supply, demand and the marketplace sort it out. I'm for the government regulating the waste stream. I'm not for government directly controlling the supply side. Smells too much like communism.

[audtatious]

Because you don't like CFLs is that a reason to have the government get involved? Since 1995 we've used CFLs with great success in our household so I could argue the other way but I'm not about to. I will point out, though, that every one of the bulbs we've used up has been removed through a responsible hazmat disposal program here in our town. We've averaged well over 5 years per light bulb and we've never had an electric bill over $100 even in the heat of summer when we've used our a/c. "Yellowing" has not been a problem for us.

I've heard a few who like them. I've heard the same number that don't. I've seen the reports where CFL's don't rate what their Energy Start rating says they do. Reports where using them in recessed lighting can shorten their lives to 1/4. Where some lose a percentage of their light within the first hour of use. Where owners have had to step-up wattage because the CFL's didn't perform as they were supposed to. They work for you, that's great. They are simply not working for me and as a consumer I should have a choice. Luckily I am rich (in that I have a job and I have no debt) so I will eventually start upgrading to LED technology once I can no longer find glass light bulbs on the shelves.

It's funny, when my wife and I rent a cabin out in the mountains for vacation she always brings 100w light bulbs with her because they usually have CFL's and the light is too dim for us. Dim lighting causes major eye strain for me.

If we're outlawing older technologies to try to force companies to come up with new ones, why don't we also force companies to come up with a way to recycle the hazardous substances in the CFLs? After all, apparently all we have to do is have the federal government pass a law or regulation and everything will take care of itself. Make the companies that make CFLs responsible for their recycling.

Maybe Obama can simply mandate bulbs that use no energy at all? Cars that get 1 million miles off a "D" battery? Homes that can be heated by moonlight?

Telco will agree that the Gov needs to be involved in every portion of our lives. Environmentalists would agree that those who toss CFL's in the garbage should receive lethal injection because they are poisoning Mother Earth. The Gov should mandate it. You and I agree the consumer should have the option and the Gov should stay out of it.

Let G.E. put out their new and improved incandescent. Let Sylvania put out the old ones. Let whoever put out LEDs. Same with CFLs. Let supply, demand and the marketplace sort it out. I'm for the government regulating the waste stream. I'm not for government directly controlling the supply side. Smells too much like communism.

I agree. As more and more people start purchasing LED bulbs the supply/demand of such will lower their price. It will be pretty neat being able to select not only the amount of light output of a bulb but the coloration as well.

[telcoman]

Luckily I am rich (in that I have a job and I have no debt) so I will eventually start upgrading to LED technology once I can no longer find glass light bulbs on the shelves.

A candidate for a tax rate increase to 39% to help lower the national debt.

Sorry Matt, I couldn't resist

Telcoman

[srellim234]

A candidate for a tax rate increase to 39% to help lower the national debt.

Sorry Matt, I couldn't resist

Telcoman

Good one. Unfortunately the Democrats would spend 3% MORE than that for another unnecessary "Cash for Clunkers" program, the Republicans would spend 3% MORE than that on unnecessary military hardware the military doesn't want and the national debt would go up even more.

[telcoman]

Did it ever occur to you to get rid of your old POS fridge without some government program? Not likely.

The fridge was replaced because it was running continuously and not cold enough in the freezer. The government rebates were welcome as was the rebate from Whirlpool and PSE&G. We would have replaced it even without the rebates.

[audtatious]

Luckily I am rich (in that I have a job and I have no debt) so I will eventually start upgrading to LED technology once I can no longer find glass light bulbs on the shelves.

A candidate for a tax rate increase to 39% to help lower the national debt.

Sorry Matt, I couldn't resist

Telcoman

See, that's something you believe in so you should volunteer to give your 401k and investments to the IRS for redistribution.

[mattblancarte]

In theory, the consumer gets a better product. At a greater cost per unit, perhaps.

I was unaware of the spiral fluorescent bulbs being more damaging to the environment.

CFL's will be increasing the amount of mercury that will be in our land fills which will eventually leach into our waterways again. When was the last time we had issues with mercury levels, the 1970's? CFL's also yellow things over time. Have something plastic and white, don't keep it under a CFL bulb or it will be yellowed. CFL's are primarily made overseas by low-paid labor in sweat shops and they are having a huge increase in mercury poisoning (like anyone really cares as long as the end result is "green"). There have been thousands of jobs lost in the US due to the closure of plants which make incandescent light bulbs.

I hate CFL's and the crappy light they put out and I'd rather have my incandescent bulbs. The CFL's I've put in my laundry room lasted 6 months at the most, what a great product. I don't waste my time with them.

Now, LED's on the other hand are the way to go. Unfortunately they are quite expensive today (30-40 vs 5...but they do last 10x longer). We need to punt CFL's to the curb and make LED's a priority. They should be manufactured HERE (enviro-nuts would have fits though). Where I have issues paying $5 for CFL's I would not have issues with buying $5 LED bulbs.

Setting a manufacturing standard in that LED's are given the chance to dominate the market makes sense to me after reading this and then doing some reading around the net.

There are a few different types of LED's that are similarly hazardous in comparison to CFL's, but they seem to be in a more specialized grouping. Mainly low-emission versions containing high levels of arsenic, lead, silver, and copper.

The normal high-emission white-yellow spectrum for home use is pretty environmentally safe, and could be a better product than incandescent bulbs or CFL.

CFL's sound like bad news because of the mercury, but it seems as though the environmental impact is negligible in comparison to incandescent bulbs. Given the same lumen output, they equal the same amount of mercury emission in areas powered by coal.

In 2007 the EPA ran a calculation which came to the conclusion that if they were to send every single CFL sold (270 million) to the dump and smash them, the emissions output would represent only 0.1% of the total mercury output in the US. Some interesting numbers to consider when weighing the environmental impact.

Either way, I buy incandescent bulbs and will continue to do so unless I see a better offering from either CFL or LED.

[audtatious]

I don't think the Gov should be setting the standards that allow LED to "dominate the market". Let the people decide based on purchasing power.

From a contamination perspective, each CFL has appx 5mg of mercury which is enough to contaminate 6000 gallons of water beyond healthy drinking standards. Low-mercury variants can contaminate 1000 gallons. Might not seem like much but I'm surprised the green party is not having a cow

Per the EPA, if you break a bulb then there are 11 steps to follow which includes:
Air out the room for a quarter of an hour. Wear gloves. Double-bag the refuse. Use duct tape to lift the residue from a carpet. Don’t use a vacuum cleaner, as that will only spread the problem. The next time you vacuum the area, immediately dispose of the vacuum bag.

While we don't really care about Chinese workers: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 211261.ece
"Large numbers of Chinese workers have been poisoned by mercury, which forms part of the compact fluorescent lightbulbs. A surge in foreign demand, set off by a European Union directive making these bulbs compulsory within three years, has also led to the reopening of mercury mines that have ruined the environment."

"In one case, Foshan city officials intervened to order medical tests on workers at the Nanhai Feiyang lighting factory after receiving a petition alleging dangerous conditions, according to a report in the Nanfang Daily newspaper. The tests found 68 out of 72 workers were so badly poisoned they required hospitalisation."

Of course, there are some in that article that say the factories are safe....

[mattblancarte]

I don't think the Gov should be setting the standards that allow LED to "dominate the market". Let the people decide based on purchasing power.

I think it's a fair argument, and I often feel this way. That said, I can be convinced of some regulation on power consumption and manufacturing of household lighting.

From a contamination perspective, each CFL has appx 5mg of mercury which is enough to contaminate 6000 gallons of water beyond healthy drinking standards. Low-mercury variants can contaminate 1000 gallons. Might not seem like much but I'm surprised the green party is not having a cow

Per the EPA, if you break a bulb then there are 11 steps to follow which includes:
Air out the room for a quarter of an hour. Wear gloves. Double-bag the refuse. Use duct tape to lift the residue from a carpet. Don’t use a vacuum cleaner, as that will only spread the problem. The next time you vacuum the area, immediately dispose of the vacuum bag.

Holy crap.

While we don't really care about Chinese workers: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 211261.ece
"Large numbers of Chinese workers have been poisoned by mercury, which forms part of the compact fluorescent lightbulbs. A surge in foreign demand, set off by a European Union directive making these bulbs compulsory within three years, has also led to the reopening of mercury mines that have ruined the environment."

"In one case, Foshan city officials intervened to order medical tests on workers at the Nanhai Feiyang lighting factory after receiving a petition alleging dangerous conditions, according to a report in the Nanfang Daily newspaper. The tests found 68 out of 72 workers were so badly poisoned they required hospitalisation."

Of course, there are some in that article that say the factories are safe....

Well that settles it in my mind. CFL is just bad news. 9 out of 10 workers that help manufacture a product become poisoned? I won't be buying a CFL bulb any time soon.

[srellim234]

I haven't had to buy a bulb in about 3 years; thought I was buying from reputable manufacturers. I should have known better. I don't set foot in Wal-Marts for exactly the fact that they operate and/or buy from sweatshops around the world.

Then again, CFLs don't HAVE to be made in China. They are because corporations are so focused on profits that they will allow that kind of thing to happen and support those manufacturers in countries where they don't give a cr*p about the people. General Electric looked at manufacturing CFLs here in the U.S. and figured they'd have to charge at least double for CFLs made here. So they take advantage of the Chinese workforce as you describe. BUT, General Electric has also done the same with incandescents! They closed their Virginia plant and took the manufacture of incandescents overseas. Sylvania is the only one left in the U.S.

One of the major manufacturers of CFLs in China is willing to come here and abide by our labor protection and environmental laws but he doesn't have the millions required to get such a facility operating. He does, however, believe it would only add about $0.50 per bulb.

Again, let the government regulate the environmental aspect, waste stream and establish the standards for worker protection. Let the companies decide what products to offer and how much to charge for them. The marketplace will determine which ones survive and which ones don't.

[audtatious]

I was in our local Meijer today and they had GU10-style LED floodlight replacement bulbs for $9.99. The didn't have them a month ago when I had to replace a GU10 halogen so the next time I have a bulb blow I may buy the LED's....

Technical Details
* 1.5 Watts, 120 Volts, 155 Lumens (compare: 35w halogen = 300 lumens)
* 70,000 Hour Rating, 5000K Daylight White color tone
* GU10 Base Twists and Locks, 2.25" Maximum Overall Length
* Ideal replacement for 20-30 watt halogen light bulbs in ambient lighting applications
* Contains 21 LED's but consumes just 1.5 Watts of energy



The only issue I have with the above is 5000k is more to the blue side. Standard halogen is in the 3000k-ish range.

[AZhitman]

Is that any different from throwing used batteries in the garbage?

Years ago there were people who would pour used motor oil into sewers too.
Wasn't it the government that pointed out the dangers of doing so.
Proper recycling is just being smart and we need the experts in this field to keep us informed. Just because they happen to be government employees shouldn't matter.
We've all seen how some private corporations function with their own inept management.

Telcoman

All good points, and I'll give you that.

However, the "experts" aren't government employees. TRUST me on this one, Howie.

And "inept management" isn't solely the realm of private industry... Remember, "ineptness" in the private industry means you starve to death. Ineptness in government means you get to try out the Oval Office.

[mattblancarte]

I was in our local Meijer today and they had GU10-style LED floodlight replacement bulbs for $9.99. The didn't have them a month ago when I had to replace a GU10 halogen so the next time I have a bulb blow I may buy the LED's....

These look pretty slick. The house I used to rent had quite a bit of track lighting and I would have bought these, given the chance. Had to replace almost all of the halogen bulbs at least once.

I think Telcoman has a point about the private sector being quite clumsy when it comes to the environmental impact of manufacturing and logistics. This is particularly why I'm softer on government regulation in this area.

It boils down to the motivation of the business managers and their drive to maximize the margins. The managers know that they need to do whatever it takes to win the market. Often, mistakes are made and lies are told to achieve this goal. We should never rely on the "good nature" of people to ensure our environmental health.

srellim's anecdote is a perfect example of the moral conflicts of business managers in motion. The manager of the CFL manufacturing business would love to move his business into a healthier environment, but chooses not too because of the increased cost of production and greater governmental oversight. As a business manager, I can understand that. As a man with no ulterior motives, I disagree with the decision. Good regulation just makes it easier for managers to make the choice.

It backfired, in this case, because China is much more "competitive" in the business manufacturing sense. Shipping/exporting/distributing CFL light bulbs is no hassle, I'm sure.

Without going too far off the line of discussion, this whole mess leads into and helps justify my loathing of lobbyists. **cringe**

Anyways, when there is good science to back up federal regulation of business, I'm often okay with it.

[IBCoupe]

Now, LED's on the other hand are the way to go. Unfortunately they are quite expensive today (30-40 vs 5...but they do last 10x longer). We need to punt CFL's to the curb and make LED's a priority. They should be manufactured HERE (enviro-nuts would have fits though). Where I have issues paying $5 for CFL's I would not have issues with buying $5 LED bulbs.

+1ish. Gotta be careful with which LEDs you choose.

I'm not at liberty to say much about it in this regard, but the drawback to LEDs in certain circumstances is that it makes things look too correct. A white LED will make vegetables look delicious - much more vibrant. But it'll make meat look like crap - all gray and inedible. Under a fluorescent or incandescent, meat looks fine. It's one thing we're having to deal with as we plan for future uses of LEDs as light fixtures.

[audtatious]

Become a vegetarian? It's for Mother Earth ya know

[IBCoupe]

Don't think our customer would like to hear that.

[audtatious]

Evil capitalists?

[IBCoupe]

Military industrial complex.

[srellim234]

Congresspeople who want their federally subsidized filet mignon and prime rib at the congressional cafeteria.

[audtatious]

Congresspeople who want their federally subsidized filet mignon and prime rib at the congressional cafeteria.

Or their open bar tabs....

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=123472