House GOP Set To Repeal Incandescent Bulb Ban...

[ShackledNation]

Not in the least. Lead paint was banned because it had a toxic substance in it to which people were constantly exposed. Unless you break a bulb open and start sucking on the insides, that's not true of CFLs.

And bulbs never break, right? You still seem to be scrambling for exceptions. So answer this question. What is the general quality of an item that justifies a ban? Is it "exposing users to a toxic substance constantly?" Is it "being less efficient than another product?" What is it? What is the belief? Because so far I just see the answer "because I think so" and that wont cut it.

Bulbs break, but it's not a serious hazard if you dispose of them.

I'd like for you to name a product that's been banned for being less efficient. That's not the case with bulbs, as incandescents exist that meet the requirement.

I would say exposing users to a toxin constantly is a pretty different from having the possibility of a toxin spreading. Drinking bleach would be harmful, but we don't ban bleach.

Low efficiency incandescent bulbs have been banned for being less efficient. There are higher efficiency incandescent, yes, but lower efficiency ones that may be cheaper are banned. And you still have not answered my question. "What is the general quality of an item that justifies a ban? Is it "exposing users to a toxic substance constantly?" Is it "being less efficient than another product?" What is it? What is the belief?"

 

[Bill Angel]

Not in the least. Lead paint was banned because it had a toxic substance in it to which people were constantly exposed. Unless you break a bulb open and start sucking on the insides, that's not true of CFLs.

And bulbs never break, right? You still seem to be scrambling for exceptions. So answer this question. What is the general quality of an item that justifies a ban? Is it "exposing users to a toxic substance constantly?" Is it "being less efficient than another product?" What is it? What is the belief? Because so far I just see the answer "because I think so" and that wont cut it.

Bulbs break, but it's not a serious hazard if you dispose of them.

I'd like for you to name a product that's been banned for being less efficient. That's not the case with bulbs, as incandescents exist that meet the requirement.

The National Resources Defense Council is claiming some victories in this area.

They state in their annual report for 2010 that

"Using robust research and strong advocacy, the NRDC helped California draft and approve standards that will slash power use of new flat-screen TVs in half, lowering electricity bills by $1 billion a year. We provided technical and policy guidance to the U.S. Department of Energy on additional new energy efficiency measures, including federal standards for home water heaters that will save consumers $10 billion over 30 years and reduce carbon emissions by 160 million tons."

So it seems that less energy efficient flat screen-TVs and home water heaters are being removed from the market via Federal and state government regulations.