Reminder: That incandescent light bulb ban was not a good idea

[Wehrwolfen]

by Erika Johnsen
March 22, 2013


Why? Not merely because government directives might forcibly funnel consumer demand, investment, and R&D toward a product that really isn’t ready for mass consumption, but also because, no matter how great their intentions might be, the free market is always better than politicians at picking efficient solutions. The free market’s only bias is in appealing to people’s rational self-interest; i.e., if people figure out that Product A is more expensive or of lower quality than comparable substitute Product B, people will buy Product B.

In this case, the compact fluorescent bulbs politically favored by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 encountered a lot of resistance because CFLs are impractical, more expensive, and it turns out they might actually be a cancer risk, no big deal or anything. But if the goal is to get people to buy bulbs that use electricity more efficiently, government mandates aren’t nearly as effective as a product that can actually make those electricity savings more pragmatic, more affordable, and more worthwhile, and the market is happy to provide. Via the NYT:

You’ve probably seen LED flashlights, the LED “flash” on phone cameras and LED indicator lights on electronics. But LED bulbs, for use in the lamps and light sockets of your home, have been slow to arrive, mainly because of their high price…

That’s a pity, because LED bulbs are a gigantic improvement over incandescent bulbs and even the compact fluorescents, or CFLs, that the world spent several years telling us to buy.​

[Excerpt]

Read more:
Reminder: That incandescent light bulb ban was not a good idea « Hot Air

 

[TheOldSchool]

It must be nice to be able to devote time and energy to being bitter about such a pithy thing as fluorescent light bulbs

 

[SteadyMercury]

We're pretty much all CFL bulbs in our house at this point, they're a lot cheaper than they were even two years ago and the options are wider with ones that produce fairly warm natural light.

The cancer thing is just the typical scare stuff latched onto by people who would don't feel good unless they are grinding worry beads over something, if their teeth aren't chattering over cfl it would be about the evil smart meters giving them cancer or the chem trails.

 

[Billo_Really]

by Erika Johnsen
March 22, 2013


Why? Not merely because government directives might forcibly funnel consumer demand, investment, and R&D toward a product that really isn’t ready for mass consumption, but also because, no matter how great their intentions might be, the free market is always better than politicians at picking efficient solutions. The free market’s only bias is in appealing to people’s rational self-interest; i.e., if people figure out that Product A is more expensive or of lower quality than comparable substitute Product B, people will buy Product B.

In this case, the compact fluorescent bulbs politically favored by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 encountered a lot of resistance because CFLs are impractical, more expensive, and it turns out they might actually be a cancer risk, no big deal or anything. But if the goal is to get people to buy bulbs that use electricity more efficiently, government mandates aren’t nearly as effective as a product that can actually make those electricity savings more pragmatic, more affordable, and more worthwhile, and the market is happy to provide. Via the NYT:

You’ve probably seen LED flashlights, the LED “flash” on phone cameras and LED indicator lights on electronics. But LED bulbs, for use in the lamps and light sockets of your home, have been slow to arrive, mainly because of their high price…

That’s a pity, because LED bulbs are a gigantic improvement over incandescent bulbs and even the compact fluorescents, or CFLs, that the world spent several years telling us to buy.​

[Excerpt]

Read more:
Reminder: That incandescent light bulb ban was not a good idea « Hot Air

I'm an electrical engineer who actually specifies the particular lamps that go into a building and incandescents are the most inefficient lamp sources on the planet. Here in California, you could never pass Title 24 using them.

 

[Mr. H.]

Sam's KKKlub has 'em cheap. I like the things, and I'm a Republic hydrocarbon whore.
They'll eventually be replaced by LED's as the tech improves.

Ethanol on the other hand... ah don't get me started.

 

[RoadVirus]

Leave it to the governemnt to force us to buy something that is poisonious.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Sam's KKKlub has 'em cheap. I like the things, and I'm a Republic hydrocarbon whore.
They'll eventually be replaced by LED's as the tech improves.

Yup I'd love to go all LED, but still too expensive and I get the feeling I'd regret spending the $$$ to replace everything then seeing the price half as much two years later. I'll stick with CFL until improvements in technology and savings via scale of production make LED more reasonably priced.

Leave it to the governemnt to force us to buy something that is poisonious.

Yes, do not eat them.

 

[editec]

When I get my Maine Medical Marijuana license, I will be growing using LED lights.

The cost to benefit ratio is so much higher than using conventional or sodium lights.

And the cost of LED lighting is still way higher than it will be.

The USA ought to be working hard to make our LED light inductry competitive with
China's.
China has an enormous leads because CHINA's CENTRALIZED PLANNING GOVERMENT made huge investments getting LED lighting industries operating on a large scale.

FYI the cost difference in cost between China's LED and USA made LEDs is about 100%

China is DUMPING LED lighting on the market.

 

[Mr. H.]

At least you could eat the ol' incandescents...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhM75wC2nqY]Eating a 40 Watt Light Bulb - YouTube[/ame]

 

[TruthSeeker56]

The funny thing is that Light Emitting Diodes have been around for DECADES. They were used in early scientific calculators for many years. Anybody remember the Texas Instruments TRS-80? I used one during my college years.

Liquid Crystal Display technology pretty much replaced LED technology, but now LEDs are looked upon as the "latest and greatest" technological advance.

The LED lights have a long way to go before they will ever be a viable alternative for the incandescent or CFL lights. The LED lights don't have the "360 degree" lighting capability of the other two. They are more like "spotlights". The light is more concentrated, like a light beam. That's fine for a flashlight, but not so good for indoor room lighting.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Truthseeker, LEDs aren't new but they've come along way from what they could do for the cost. That is the "latest and greatest" angle.

And you are completely wrong about whether they can be a viable candidate because of the nature of their lighting, go to a store that sells them and take a look. They have LED bulbs that give off warm 360 degree light and look great, but I'm not paying $45 for a light bulb.

They were used in early scientific calculators for many years. Anybody remember the Texas Instruments TRS-80? I used one during my college years.

The TRS-80 was a personal computer, not a calculator. It came with a crt monitor, not an LED display.

 

[tjvh]

I use the old fashioned incandescent bulbs, they give off the best light and the massive carbon footprint they leave pleases me greatly.

 

[mudwhistle]

It must be nice to be able to devote time and energy to being bitter about such a pithy thing as fluorescent light bulbs

In case you haven't noticed incandescent light bulbs were never really banned. The ones we have now all have to be government approved.

It's a false-leader. A bait and switch.

Bulb manufactures say that Obama didn't ban anything. He just changed the regs on what type can be produced and sold in America. Of course the new legal ones cost much more than the old ones. Another one of the wonders of government intrusion into our lives.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

We're pretty much all CFL bulbs in our house at this point, they're a lot cheaper than they were even two years ago and the options are wider with ones that produce fairly warm natural light.

The cancer thing is just the typical scare stuff latched onto by people who would don't feel good unless they are grinding worry beads over something, if their teeth aren't chattering over cfl it would be about the evil smart meters giving them cancer or the chem trails.

Then you don't mind releasing Mercury into the food chain and air every time you discard those CFL bulbs into the environment. Incandescent bulbs don't contain Mercury.


EPA WARNS PUBLIC ABOUT MERCURY HAZARDS IN CFL LIGHT BULBS





By Rosalind Peterson
January 29, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

First EPA News Brief Summary: "WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today updated its guidance on how to properly clean up a broken compact fluorescent lamp (CFL). [1] Included with the guidance is a new consumer brochure with CFL recycling and cleanup tips...CFLs contain a small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing. When a CFL breaks, some of the mercury is released as vapor and may pose potential health risks. The guidance and brochure will provide simple, user friendly directions to help prevent and reduce exposure to people from mercury pollution..." [2]

In switching from incandescent light bulbs to fluorescent light bulbs and CFLs our elected officials opened the door to a massive mercury pollution problem across the United States threatening landfills and drinking water supplies. Our elected officials have been derelict in making this information available to the public and providing the necessary hazardous waste sites available for their recycling and disposal in every local community [9]. And there should have been a massive public education campaign to inform the public about these hazards. It is too late for the fluorescent and CFL bulbs that have already been tossed into dumpsters and landfills. We now can change this process through education and laws regarding the hazardous material disposal of these bulbs [10].

According to the EPA the following list of light bulbs contain mercury: [7]

• Other fluorescent bulbs, including linear, U-tube and circline fluorescent tubes, bug zappers, tanning bulbs, black lights, germicidal bulbs, high output bulbs, and cold-cathode fluorescent bulbs;
• High intensity discharge bulbs, which include metal halide, ceramic metal halide, high pressure sodium, and mercury vapor;
• Mercury short-arc bulbs; and
• Neon bulbs.

It should be noted that several studies have concluded the following with regard to cleanup by Vacuuming [14]. The State of Maine Study Report February 2008:

Rosalind Peterson -- EPA Warns Public About Mercury Hazards in CFL Light Bulbs

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

County landfills grapple with fluorescent bulb conundrum

www.smokymountainnews.com/...landfills...fluorescent-bulb-conundrum

Compact fluorescent light bulbs contain mercury that can end up in the air or water if ... for landfills. A typical compact fluorescent bulb contains about ...

 

[Harry Dresden]

We're pretty much all CFL bulbs in our house at this point, they're a lot cheaper than they were even two years ago and the options are wider with ones that produce fairly warm natural light.

The cancer thing is just the typical scare stuff latched onto by people who would don't feel good unless they are grinding worry beads over something, if their teeth aren't chattering over cfl it would be about the evil smart meters giving them cancer or the chem trails.

do they still have the mercury warnings on them in case you break one and how to properly dispose of them?....

 

[SteadyMercury]

manufactures say that Obama didn't ban anything. He just changed the regs on what type can be produced and sold in America.

Seriously someone is claiming Obama is making decisions about light bulbs? How much time does this guy have in his day?

Then you don't mind releasing Mercury into the food chain and air every time you discard those CFL bulbs into the environment. Incandescent bulbs don't contain Mercury.

They are recycled, within 5 miles of me I have an Ikea, Home Depot, and Lowes that will also handle CFL. If you are against CFL because people might throw them away and harm the environment I can assume you don't use paint, car batteries, plastic bags, etc.

 

[novasteve]

Biggest victim is the EZ Bake oven. They had to redesign it to use a heating element instead of a 100 watt bulb, now it costs twice as much as it did b ecause some sissy liberal knows whats best for you.

 

[editec]

The funny thing is that Light Emitting Diodes have been around for DECADES. They were used in early scientific calculators for many years. Anybody remember the Texas Instruments TRS-80? I used one during my college years.

Liquid Crystal Display technology pretty much replaced LED technology, but now LEDs are looked upon as the "latest and greatest" technological advance.

The LED lights have a long way to go before they will ever be a viable alternative for the incandescent or CFL lights. The LED lights don't have the "360 degree" lighting capability of the other two. They are more like "spotlights". The light is more concentrated, like a light beam. That's fine for a flashlight, but not so good for indoor room lighting.

I think you haven't seen the latest in LED lighting.

Still too expensive for using as standard lighting, but they can throw plenty of light around a room.

I don't think the government needs to ban incandescent lights, I think the market will drive people to use them as their costs drop.

They're so much more efficient than standard bulbs.

No wasted energy making heat nobody wants.

 

[tinydancer]

The funny thing is that Light Emitting Diodes have been around for DECADES. They were used in early scientific calculators for many years. Anybody remember the Texas Instruments TRS-80? I used one during my college years.

Liquid Crystal Display technology pretty much replaced LED technology, but now LEDs are looked upon as the "latest and greatest" technological advance.

The LED lights have a long way to go before they will ever be a viable alternative for the incandescent or CFL lights. The LED lights don't have the "360 degree" lighting capability of the other two. They are more like "spotlights". The light is more concentrated, like a light beam. That's fine for a flashlight, but not so good for indoor room lighting.

I think you haven't seen the latest in LED lighting.

Still too expensive for using as standard lighting, but they can throw plenty of light around a room.

I don't think the government needs to ban incandescent lights, I think the market will drive people to use them as their costs drop.

They're so much more efficient than standard bulbs.

No wasted energy making heat nobody wants.

.

I live north of North Dakota. I like the heat they throw. Not everyone lives somewhere warm.

I have 10 months of winter and two months of bad skating.

 

[rightwinger]

The new bulbs kick the shit out of the old incandescents. They last longer and use 15% of the electricity

I can see why the right wing fought so hard to keep the old bulbs