Light Bulb Ban?

[kenf]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

 

[Trajan]

search the forum Ken we have a thread on this already running...

here

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/174993-mcconnell-offers-3-stage-last-choice-debt-option.html

 

[wirebender]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

Typical of the unintended consequences of "do gooders", they mandate that we use a product that is inherently more dangerous than the product previously available and in the long run, far worse for the enviornment.

What kind of thinking mandates that we put lightbulbs loaded with neurotoxins in our homes? What kind of thinking reaches the logical conclusion that putting these bulbs in landfills is a good idea?

 

[skookerasbil]

Its fascinating how many people think the government is actually in the business of being genuine about "steering people in the right direction". How do people get to that level of naive? The growth of government is the greatest threat to our republic.......yet people are continually duped beyond the pale.

Light bulbs...........HOLY MOTHER OF GOD!!

 

[uscitizen]

Umm the government is our republic.
Study definitions a bit.
We elected them and keep re-electing most of them.

Even when they sell out to corporations and special interests.

The key here is WE.

 

[Flopper]

There's another tread on this.

Washington • House Republicans on Tuesday failed to stop the enactment of new energy-saving standards for light bulbs they portrayed as yet another example of big government interfering in people’s lives.

The GOP bill to overturn the standards set to go into effect next year fell short of the two-thirds majority needed for passage. The vote was 233-193.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/52178036-68/bulbs-standards-energy-government.html.csp

 

[Flopper]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

Typical of the unintended consequences of "do gooders", they mandate that we use a product that is inherently more dangerous than the product previously available and in the long run, far worse for the enviornment.

What kind of thinking mandates that we put lightbulbs loaded with neurotoxins in our homes? What kind of thinking reaches the logical conclusion that putting these bulbs in landfills is a good idea?

Sorry, but your're wrong on all points. The government isn't mandating that use any product. You can use high efficiently incandescent bulbs, CFLs, LEDs, or nothing at all or stock up on the old bulbs and use them as long as you like. The CFL bulbs are less dangerous than most currently fluorescent bulb. The new bulbs contain less than 1 mg of mercury. And no, they are not far worst for the environment. That's been shot down several times.

 

[chikenwing]

they are not far worst for the environment. That's been shot down several times.


And where do you come up with this tidbit??

Florescent bulbs are way more NOT enviro friendly then incandescent,from manufacture right on to disposal.

 

[Flopper]

they are not far worst for the environment. That's been shot down several times.


And where do you come up with this tidbit??

Florescent bulbs are way more NOT enviro friendly then incandescent,from manufacture right on to disposal.

103 metric tons of mercury are being dumped in the atmosphere, half of which comes from coal fired electric power plants. Worst case estimates put the CFL contributions at .12% and that's worst case assuming there is no recycling which there is. This assumes bulbs will contain 4mg of mercury. The newer CFLs contain about 1.6mg. which lowers the amount to the point of being negligible. The savings in energy when all homes are using CFS, LEDs, and high efficiency incandescent is enough to power several large cities, NY, Chicargo, and Los Angeles. This will reduce the amount of mercury and other pollutants in the atmosphere.

CFLs are just one option. High efficiency incandescent bulbs and LEDs also meet the standard.

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf

 

[wirebender]

The CFL bulbs are less dangerous than most currently fluorescent bulb. The new bulbs contain less than 1 mg of mercury. And no, they are not far worst for the environment. That's been shot down several times.

I am sure that you wish, and perhaps even believe that cfl bulbs were safer and more environmentally friendly but alas, they are neither.

 

[CitizenPained]

 

[RetiredGySgt]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

You are aware that the bulbs we will be forced to buy are anything BUT safe for the environment? And that at present are not made anywhere in the US?

 

[sparky]

they are not far worst for the environment. That's been shot down several times.


And where do you come up with this tidbit??

Florescent bulbs are way more NOT enviro friendly then incandescent,from manufacture right on to disposal.

evident in the disposal laws for them.....

 

[sparky]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

You are aware that the bulbs we will be forced to buy are anything BUT safe for the environment? And that at present are not made anywhere in the US?

You are aware that the majority of lighting fixtures are via 3rd worlders as well?

 

[konradv]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

Typical of the unintended consequences of "do gooders", they mandate that we use a product that is inherently more dangerous than the product previously available and in the long run, far worse for the enviornment.

What kind of thinking mandates that we put lightbulbs loaded with neurotoxins in our homes? What kind of thinking reaches the logical conclusion that putting these bulbs in landfills is a good idea?

The amount of mercury in those bulbs is about 1/100th of that in an old time thermometer. We use mercury in all sorts of things. What's so special about this case? I've never seen people so angry about saving money?!?! No it's NOT a good idea to put them in landfills. RECYCLE. Why couldn't you think of that?

 

[Oddball]

Why couldn't you think about minding your own fucking business?

 

[Granny]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

Typical of the unintended consequences of "do gooders", they mandate that we use a product that is inherently more dangerous than the product previously available and in the long run, far worse for the enviornment.

What kind of thinking mandates that we put lightbulbs loaded with neurotoxins in our homes? What kind of thinking reaches the logical conclusion that putting these bulbs in landfills is a good idea?

I think if we ignored about 90% of the "do gooders" and "experts," we just might have a better planet on which to live. "Do gooders" and "experts" have caused us far more damage in the name of more causes than they have ever done good - it just takes them, on average, about 20 years to come up with conclusion that "we may have been wrong about ... ."

As to the light bulbs being foisted upon us - I do believe they are dangerous. (I think I have already posted this in another "light bulb" thread) - but when a city government says that the used bulbs cannot be tossed in the dumpsters with our other trash, but we have to deliver the used bulbs to a special location for disposal - I have to believe that there's a problem with those light bulbs. And if they're that dangerous I don't want them in my house. I have to confess that I don't have a good understanding of the "Commerce Clause" - but it appears that particular clause is the "open door" to make us purchase anything the government says we must purchase - whether it's light bulbs or healthcare insurance.

 

[Flopper]

How do people feel about the current repeal of the "light bulb" ban?

I get it. The govt should not tell us what to buy, but at the same time my firm belief is that the roll of govt sometimes is to steer us in the right direction. Anyone care to sound out? Interesting debate: What is clearly a good thing for the planet and all in our benefit versus the roll of govt to legislate what we can and cannot buy (simplistically)...

You are aware that the bulbs we will be forced to buy are anything BUT safe for the environment? And that at present are not made anywhere in the US?

You are not being forced to buy anything. You will be able buy CFLs, LEDs, high efficiency incandescent bulbs, or nothing. The choice will be yours. This is the same fucking argument we heard when congress required the automotive industry to build safer cars, lower pollution emissions and increase gas mileage. Today we drive safer cars and get better gas mileage with less pollution.

In ten years we will have more choices in the type of bulbs, new lamp designs that were never possible with old incandescent bulbs, plus we will be saving billions of kwh of electricity, all with less air pollution.

 

[Oddball]

Right...You can "choose" from the "options" provided to you by your gubmint masters...Like a good little subject.

 

[konradv]

Right...You can "choose" from the "options" provided to you by your gubmint masters...Like a good little subject.

The options are given to us by industry. The ban is on the order of not putting raw swage into streams. Anyone that fought that is the spiritual anscestor of those who can't see the advantage in saving 75% on lighting costs!!!