Incandescent stupidity: Washington outlaws 100-watt lightbulbs
You know the energy bill that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law today? Tucked into the legislation is a provision that mandates the phase-out of the 125-year-old incandescent bulb in the next four to 12 years in favor of a new generation of trendy, supposedly energy-efficient Gorebulbs.
First, Australia. Then the EU. And now us. Well-intended bulb-pushers said they weren’t supporting mandates. Just “voluntary adoption” of lighting alternatives. But the road to eco-meddling is always paved with “voluntary” intentions–along with threats to your children that if you don’t volunteer to buy environmentally correct lights, Santa and his reindeer will DIE DIE DIE!
The Business and Media Institute blasts the bulb ban and notes some of the drawbacks of CFLs:
The light bulb provision phases out traditional bulbs by gradually increasing efficiency requirements through 2020.
Conveniently for manufacturers like Philips, which has been pushing for legislation that would phase out incandescent bulbs (and level the playing field among competitors while giving Philips the public relations credit), the compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) already meet the 2020 requirement. Proponents of government intervention into the light bulb market argue the change will save consumers money – Davidson reported it will save $40 billion in energy and other costs in the next 22 years. But while Davidson mentioned one drawback of CFLs – that their “yellowish tints” are annoying to some eyes – he failed to mention the major flaw of the new technology: mercury. Mercury, a toxic metal famously found in thermometers, helps create the increased efficiency of a CFL bulb. If the bulb breaks, the small amount of mercury can contaminate the area.
The Financial Post reported in April that a broken CFL bulb cost a Maine woman more than $2,000 to clean when the state Department of Environmental Protection referred her to a cleanup company. At $5 in energy savings per bulb per month (as Davidson reported), one broken bulb could eat up 33 years’ worth of savings! The federal EPA doesn’t recommend professional cleanup for a broken bulb. It recommends you open a window, leave the room for 15 minutes, then put on some rubber gloves, scoop up the broken bits and seal them in a plastic bag, then put that bag in another plastic bag before throwing it out. Then wash your hands. But don’t worry, Tree Hugger – which calls itself the “leading media outlet dedicated to driving sustainability mainstream” – says the bulbs aren’t dangerous despite those recommended measures.
Even if the bulb doesn’t break, CFL users are supposed to dispose of used bulbs through state-run household hazardous waste programs, which aren’t nearly as simple or convenient as tossing a burnt bulb in the trash. Some states, like Maine, tell residents to hold hazardous materials in their homes until designated collection days. Many others, like Virginia, require participants to take the bulbs to waste disposal sites for special processing.
These feel-good dim bulbs give you crappy lighting, don’t live up to their longevity promises, and are a pain in the neck to dispose of–but they sure make enviro-nitwits and Big Greenie water-carriers feel good about themselves.
What happened to keeping government out of our bedroom? And our bathroom? And our utility closets?
The Gore-ing of America continues…
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Strata-Sphere » Blog Archive » The Federal Light Bulb Police Squad Has Been Established
- Plumb Bob Blog » Were We Asleep?
- How the Mayor Stole Christmas… Updated: Now Washington has OUTLAWED 100-Watt Ligthbulbs!
- Snarky Bastards » Blog Archive » The Government Hates Me
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
- RightWingGeek.com
- Pencil Nub » Wednesday WTFs
- Liberal Hypocrisy » Blog Archive » You just might be a liberal hypocrite
- Treeworn.Com » Incandescent stupidity: Washington outlaws 100-watt lightbulbs
- The Low Wattage Of The Liberal Mindset | Stuck On Stupid
- BizzyBlog » Couldn’t Help But Notice (122007)
- Michelle Malkin » President Bush’s year in review
- The Dan Lee Report » Blog Archive » Incadescent Light Bulb Ban.. Who will be the first to pirate Incadescents for the Black Market? I Vote China!
- The EcoLibertarian
- The Dan Lee Report » Blog Archive » Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007! FOUR HUNDRED!
- Global Warming Today: Those CFL’s Are Great. And Required — Pirate’s Cove
- Pickerhead :: Pickings from the Webvine ::December 23, 2007
- Michelle Malkin » Eco-scrooges can’t give it a rest
- Quiglag.com » RIP incandescent light bulb.
- » Global Warming in 2008: same stuff, different year » Leaning Straight Up » Blog Archive »
- usa today high school football poll
- A discussion most illuminating « HoodaThunk?
- Michelle Malkin » Lights out at MichelleMalkin.com
- Solidarity « nuke gingrich
- Michelle Malkin - Should incandescent light bulbs be banned?
- Michelle Malkin » Bagless in Seattle: Green cultists to tax plastic and paper
- Michelle Malkin » Bagless in Seattle: Green cultists to tax plastic and paper
- Michelle Malkin » Townhall columnist has bright idea about Gorebulbs
- Michelle Malkin » Democrat mayor says healthy food is “the new patriotism”.
- Happy Fourth of July, Citizen. How Would You Like Your Fascism Grilled? | The Sundries Shack
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Enviro-nitwits
protein wisdom
» A Nannystatist Emily Litella moment [Darleen Click]
Ed Driscoll
» The University ArchipelagoNewsBusters.org
» The War on Terror Made Him Do ItEd Driscoll
» First We Take Chicago, Then We Take BerlinNewsBusters.org
» Matthews on Ft. Hood Suspect Warning Signal: 'That's Not a Crime to Call al Qaeda, Is It?'Pundit & Pundette
» Westboro haters have enough to go around for everyoneTigerHawk
» Abortion and health care "reform"Weekly Standard
» The Federal Bureau of Non-Investigation
Ooh! I did forget that part. Thanks!
So I have about 30 or so incandescent bulbs that I bought from one of those telesales organizations that employ blind people (Not getting an exact count right now. My closet will attack me if I try). We have had them since 2002. We replace maybe one a year. So improving the existing tech is not really that far-fetched in my eyes.
Twenty year from now all that neon will be an environmental nightmare!!!
I wonder if the Hollywood libs will be putting flourescent bulbs in the cabins of their private jets?
LOL, might as well just stock up on some candles and live like it’s the dark ages again.
This light bulb crap is a joke.
Teddy Kennedy’s alcohol soaked fat stores could light the eastern seaboard for at least a decade.
From the What are they thinking? files:
Article in Medical News Today.
There are legitimate and safe uses for mercury, though many industries such as mining and paper production are moving away from mercury processes. Still, the silver liquid is found in thermometers, thermostats, fluorescent lamps, barometers and car switches.
If the mining and paper industries are moving away from it, why are lawmakers embracing this potentially toxic metal?
Surely, if millions and millions of people start having to use CFLs, don’t you think at some point this mercury will enter the ground water through improper disposal and contaminate who knows what?
Here are symptoms of mercury poisoning:
The symptoms of mercury poisoning can include:
- impairment of peripheral vision
- disturbances in sensations – that ‘pins and needles’ feeling as well as numbness – usually in the hands feet and sometimes around the mouth
- lack of coordination of movements, such as writing
- impairment of speech, hearing, walking
- muscle weakness
- skin rashes
- mood swing, memory loss, and mental disturbances
Banning Edison bulbs at this stage of the development of CFLs is like banning the horse and buggy when Renault invented the automobile; or like banning train travel after Kitty Hawk…
Idiots all.
I like the new bulbs. Been using them for years and to me the light is just fine, (I actually find them easier on the eyes than the incandescent bulbs), and I’m sure they have more than paid for themselves in energy savings.
I’d use them without being forced.
There is only one explanation.
this is it
In other energy bill news, the new energy bill also authorizes drilling for oil and natural gas in ANWR and the recently discovered huge oil field in the eastern Gulf and fast tracked construction of a new refinery, the first in over 30 years. Oil independence from middle east sources is expected in the next 5-10 years while increased commitment to non-petroleum energy sources hopes to produce viable renewable sources with the next two decades …
No, not really, but wouldn’t it have been better than taking away our freedom to choose light bulbs and not possibly instigating a “mercury crisis”.
To clean the environment we had mandated fuel standards that caused us to get fewer miles to a gallon with detuned cars. Then we had to change the composition of gasoline to fight smog. Result ground water contamination with posionous MTBE. Then there was the warning about eating fish due to mercury. You older persons may have to have old fillings removed because mercury.
Now the a**es want to add more mercury to the environment with new fangled light bulbs.
By chance have you read about the shortage of wheat? What about the exhorbant price of corn? Could those shortages and high prices perhaps be the result of making ethanol for gasoline???
Another thing that really bothers me about this. The enforcement of any law the government passes is at the point of gun. So think about this: the Congress of the United States of America thinks that appropriate use of force against We, the People, is to prevent us from choosing the light bulb we prefer. Out of control doesn’t even begin to cover it. This is the type of loss of freedom liberals should be upset about rather than the FISA court.
The idea that replacing gasoline with ethanol will somehow reduce carbon emissions is not only a complete fallacy, but also demonstrates how little the enviro-nazis and their supporters in congress know or care about science. Anybody that has any training in chemistry should know
1. Ethanol is a hydrocarbon.
2. The product of the combustion of any hydrocarbon is water and carbon dioxide.
3. Combustion of ethanol forms carbon dioxide and water as follows:
C2H5OH + 3 O2 → 2 CO2 + 3 H2O
While using ethanol as a fuel may, at a very high cost, reduce our dependence on foreign oil it cannot reduce carbon emissions as I have heard many claim (including Hillary Clinton.) This startling lack of knowledge on their part is only further evidence that the whole “science” of climate change more akin to a religion.
One trip to the recycling yard uses up all the energy saved …. phtttt
Well at least you will be safe in your flat little car while driving there.
Our politicians suck.
If you’d like some perspective on how much electricity different things use, as well as how to figure out how much something costs to run, I’ve got a page on it here:
Electrical Usage: A Tragedy of Ignorance
Mercury is a much worse environmental toxin than some extra hydrocarbons.
Lets elect a intellegent admin and congress, throw out this entire bill and write a workable bill based on knowledge and thought of application.
One thing most people are not aware of is that for florescent type lights the start up phase takes much more power than keeping it lit.
I have a GE ring light out on my garage that stays on 24/7.
That thing must be reaching a near record for life span since I installed it as a replacement for an incandescent almost 12 years ago and it is still working fine.
In my kitchen the general lighting is 4 fixtures with two circular fluorescents per fixture which are 6inch and 8inch circle lites to mount one inside the other.
My range hood has halogen lamps on a dimmer system.
My bathrooms have general lighting provide by fixtures that have U shaped fluorescents that serve well. Their is a light bar above the sink mirrors with incandescent lights so that my wife can judge better her makeup application for real world conditions.
Each room in the house except the bedrooms has on lamp at the lowest wattage CFL I could find that stay on 24/7 and replaced all those baseboard night lights that were almost worthless.
Don’t forget Canada, which has also mandated the banning of incandescent bulbs by 2012.
Just one more nail in the coffin of what was once a great country.
Where are all the “pro-choice” Democrats now??? How come I don’t get to choose what kind of @#$% light bulb I used? Why the … heck should anyone care what kind of light bulb I prefer? I will put my household’s energy usage against the average of those in Congress any day. Let’s whip out the kilowatt usage and compare numbers. I’ll even do by the square foot since I’m certain every one of them has a house (or houses) larger than mine. When the numbers for Al Gore’s mansion were released last year (the one in TN, I understand he has others), I discovered that his annual electrical usage (in kilowatts) was about 4x ours PER SQUARE FOOT. And that didn’t include his $1,000+/month natural gas bill. (We have electric heat — no gas or oil.)
I have some addtional ideas for to save energy. Let’s cut off the air conditioning in the Capitol/White House/House and Senage office buildings. Hey, they didn’t have a/c for the first 150 years, and yet Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, et al managed. And we might as well cut the a/c in their homes, too. (It’s actually easier to tolerate a hot summer if one is acclimated to the heat.) And then all members of Congress should hang dry 100% of their clothes. No dry cleaning. No electric or gas dryers.
Then come back to me and tell me what kind of light bulbs I may/may not use.
This environmentalist agrees, these bulbs bite!
Brain-dead knee-jerk environmentalism gives the legitimate enlightened (no pin intended) eco-movement a bad name.
I warned of this in several earlier posts. While the Liberals are jumping up and down, screaming at the top of their lungs, polluting the Internet with the message and telling it every chance they get to the media about how the Republicans and Conservatives are Hell bent on taking away American’s rights and to beware of their jack-booted Brown shirts, it is indeed the Liberals and the Democrats who have, for at least the last 35 years, been slowly scraping away at American’s freedoms and rights.
What car to drive, what gas to use, what house to buy, what paper to use, what toilet to use, where to smole, when to smoke, if you can smoke, seat belts, helmets, what foods you can eat, what drinks you can drink, when you can eat and drink, how late you can be out, when you should sleep and when you should wake, if you can snore, how much you should weigh, what you should look like, what you should breathe etc., etc., etc., the list is growing longer by the day…and now, it is light bulbs. WHile I had stated as recently as I believe yesterday that it was in California that they were going to regulate what lightbulb you could use, I was unaware that they were going to start elsewhere first.
Anytime you hear about a new rule or law telling you what you can or cannot do with your body, time or property, you can be damn sure that it was created by a Dem/Liberal. (Or Damn Liberal…your choice)
So I ask you…who is the REAL Naziesque thugs out there stealing your rights and freedoms Liberal rolls? Is it your guys? Or is it Bush and his “cronies” You’re right….IT IS YOU AND YOUR ILK!!!!
nothings beats stereotyping and generalizing, some of the above changes or suggestions would provide a great net benefit to us.
not all environmentalists are liberals.
Since low cost energy is the lifeblood of America, I am sure they voted to allow drilling for oil in ANWR… oh they didn’t, but I am sure they voted to allow offshore drilling for oil… oh they didn’t, but they must have had a lot of legislation promoting nuclear power… oh they didn’t do that either. They must have seen the light on the poor economics of ethanol, since it takes as much energy to produce as it provides… oh they are still subsidizing that. But surely they know that wind energy is not practical on a large scale.. It takes 333 wind turbines with 250 diameter blades to provide as much power as 1 coal plant or one nuclear power generator. … and these wind turbines provide zero power when the wind is less than 8 mph. .. but they are pushing more of that… hopefully in Edward Kennedy’s back yard. Surely they know that CFL’s are hazardous and the life expectancy is over rated, and the light quality is poor… oh.. they don’t care.. they are the government and they are here to help us…. yeah right.
RetFireman, you forgot CA is now considering (studying) regulating caffeine as a dangerous substance — you know, in line with lead, mercury, etc.
Nevermind dozens of studies have already been done, but as usual, CA knows best.
Didn’t you know? People are dying by the thousands by drinking caffeine!
Yeah, give me a break. What next?
No, I didn’t forget. It was covered under the etc. And guess who brought that up for consideration and wants it regulated? Teh Republicans and Conservatives? Ummmmm…..Nooooooooooo……It’s those fighters of freedom and of your rights…the Socialistic Liberals and Democrats. Yup…more ways to chip away and erode away at your rights until they control everything you think, say and do.
As for the comment about “not all environazis are Libs”, um…duh…but the ones making the rules and laws are. Read the post.
Speaking of stereotyping and such…
I just LOVE this response. It usually come out when a statement such as the one I made has been made. the persons that it pertains to has been smiteted and, not being able to properly defend themselves or their actions, and knowing that they aare clearly wrong and they can no way come back with facts to prove that what I have said is false, they make some lame statement about “Wahhhh…you are stereotyping all Liberals and blah blah blah…”
I just love it. But see, the fact still stands, that the Liberals and the Democrats are the ones that are removing all your rights and freedoms from you, and they are doing so using three items. They use Political Correctness, Mulit-Culturalism, and the Environment/Global Warming as the excuses to remove all your freedoms and rights.
Again, when you see or hear about one of your freedoms or rights being removed or challenged, look to see who has started the process. You will find a (D) after his/Her name, guaranteed. Go back and check the laws on the books and see who started them. What you will find are (D)’s after their names.
Yet these same people who have done this to us and continue to do this to this country as well as the rest of the world, have all of this country CONVINCED that it is the “EVIL CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS” who are Hell bent on burning the Constitution and throwing away and trashing people’s rights and freedoms. This just goes to show you that people are Lemmings and are easily swayed by smooth talking pot smokers.
how likely is it that Fearless Leader will veto this?
Watch an Internet market develop for the 100 watt incandescent bulbs. There will be a way around the ban. There always is. The free market always prevails.
Regarding the supposed longevity of CFLs… I replaced most of the bulbs in my house 4 or 5 months ago. A couple of weeks ago, the first one burned out! I am not encouraged by this.
I truly believe that our congress is full of sociopaths and psychotic visionaries.
Light bulbs?
When they get rid of their jets, SUVs, large luxury cars, school buses, illegal trucks from Mexico, then maybe we’ll think they have a brain.
Land of Oz……..
Well, if we can all focus on switching over completely to LED’s, then we will be the ones who can point at the Greenies and tell them they have to change. I like that idea.
This is as stupid as when the government decreed smaller toilet tanks to save water, which just increased water usage because everyone had to flush twice.
That said, I have started replacing my incandescent bulbs as they burn out with the more expensive efficient twisty fluorescent bulbs. My rationale is sheer laziness: I hate replacing those overhead bulbs in glass globes you have to unscrew while standing on a ladder. I figure if I put bulbs with five year life spans in there, that will reduce my headaches considerably. And it worked. Since I started using those new fluorescent bulbs about nine months ago, I haven’t had to replace any of them.
However, it’s foolish to mandate the elite choice in light bulbs. There are a lot of people who can’t afford a six buck bulb, even if it saves them money in the long term. You have to put food on the table in the short term to reach the long term. For them it’s a choice of eating in the dark or staring at a very well-lit bare dinner plate.
What is this, the Trial Attorney Employment Act? Here’s how this particular shakedown will work:
1. Use “green” mafia to guilt and otherwise coerce companies into manufacturing mercury-laden “Glass Sprials of Death” (GSD).
2. When people don’t voluntarily buy the bulbs, get idiots in Congress to pass a law mandating the use of GSDs without liability protection for the manufacturer.
3. Wait a few years…
4. When babies are born underdeveloped and deformed, and as more people develop toxic encepholopathy from high levels of exposure to mercury, sue the pants off of the manufacturer.
Man, if it worked for lawn darts, they’ll try it with anything – just watch.
I’m totally against this…in fact this is the stuff that leads to revolutionary wars.
However, to say these bulbs aren’t as good is total BS. I switched to them throughout the house, and not because I give a lick about stopping global environment. I’d use them if they cost more over their life. But the fact is the lighting is awesome, they last forever (as in I just replaced one in my sons room after two years), and they don’t get near as hot. I first tried one because the regular bulb was making my son’s metal lamp shade scalding hot. I tried one of these new bulbs and the metal shade didn’t get hot at all, plus the lighting in the room improved. Bonus that they last forever.
So let’s fight this on the grounds of government intrusion but not on the false facts that these bulbs are inferior.
Oooooh, that is good news. I have no attachment to traditional incandescent bulbs except I want to feel like the area I am in is lit. The CFLs are good for areas that you don’t mind having subdued lighting but there are times that I want real lighting such as when reading or working on a project that requires good eyesight.
I live in Virginia and didnt know about this.
I hate to be the party pooper but there is a lot of technical information thrown around here that can be a bit lacking in detail and misleading.
This factoid has always bothered me. The same argument was used back in the 70’s when the “turn off the juice when not in use” stickers were placed on every public light switch in the country. Back then the claim was that a bulb uses so much power when turned on that it didn’t really matter if you turned it off, or in other words that the majority of power use in a bulb occurs when you turn it on. Now I see that argument has again been ressurected for CF bulbs.
While it is true that there is generally a power surge when a bulb is turned on it is only for a very short period of time. What your electric meter reads is kilowatt-hours (or power multiplied by time), not peak kilowatts. The intial power surge required for a bulb to turn on might be ten times more than what it uses after it stabilizes but it’s happening over a very small time period – a fraction of a second for an incandescent bulb! Even if it’s drawing more power for a whole second at MOST it’s equivalent to what the bulb uses during normal operation for 10 seconds.
So if you want to save money (with any bulb) turn it of when not in use. A 100W incandescent bulb costs about 1 cent per hour to operate including the turn-on power spike (assuming 10 cents/kW-hour utility rate). A 25W flourescent bulb with the same light output only costs 0.25 cents per hour to operate.
My big beef with this phase-out is that incandescent bulbs are the best choice for rarely used light fixtures. Like that one in the corner of the basement or the closet that you rarely use or use for short periods. Another problem is that a flourescent bulb has a shorter life time when turned off soon after it’s turned on (which of course also happens to incandescent bulbs). So let’s assume you have a flourescent closet bulb you turn on for 1 minute every day (hey, I’m a guy). If the nominal bulb lifetime is 10000 hours it would ideally take about 1640 years for the thing to burn out. It’s also doubtful that the electronic circuits (i.e. the electronic ballast) in a CF bulb will be functional after only 100 years. In this case a CF bulb will never be cost effective to the original owner. An incandescent bulb might be rated for 200 hours. We can calculate an incandescent bulb would ideally last 32 years with the same use pattern.
I know what you’re wondering, “Hey DelosWorld, why don’t you use an LED bulb?” Eventually that might be acceptable but right now a 25 cent incandescent bulb is a lot cheaper than an equivalent LED bulb that costs $30. Full disclosure: I did buy a $30 dollar LED bulb for close reading illumination. It works great for that application but I’d like to point out that the government didn’t force me to buy it. I figure a purchase of about 100 incandescent bulbs stored in the basement should keep my closets illuminated for at least a Millennium!
I guess I should start my own techno-calculation blog. This stuff is probably much too dry for most visitors here! Sorry!
Ironic that a light bulb is the symbol of a good idea. Seems fitting that the socialists in DC want to tell us what kind of ideas to have. No more bright ideas that get hot. Instead it will be mercury poisoned ideas that stay cold and require less energy.
I’ll admit I use these stupid bulbs for outdoor lighting applications against my better judgement. Using them outdoors means I don’t have to cope with the horrid yellow light and frankly they’re much too hard on my 52 year-old eyes, especially for reading purposes. Guess I’ll have to spend my idle time watching TV and can’t wait for government-run programming to hit the U.S. just like our Canadian neighbors. I yearn for the Global Warming Network….in High Def of course.
So why can’t we just line everyone’s house with neon anyway? Itt’s cheaper to run and let’s face it…it’s way cooler.
Stupidity has always been the longsuit of the Dims, and enablement has always been the longsuit of hte GOP.
This is insane.
Then Harry Reid says it is “an appropriate use of government power”??????????
EXCUSE ME???
No, an appropriate use of government power is to impeach politicians who overstep and abuse the legitimate authority of their offices.
The kind and amount of energy that we use and they type of ordinary products we use has never been a legitimate power of government, as long as the customers don’t have a serious problem with it, and have the money to buy it.
These incandescents are hardly as dangerous as Liberals, terrorists, illegal aliens, coyotes, gangs, the NEA, rapist/murdering pornographers, etc – and the government doesn’t seem to think it is an appropriate use of power to limit or stop any of THEM!
They will force on us a much more expensive, and energy-draining light bulb for our homes, but they won’t protect our borders, or our children!
Appropriate???
Well, I knew of a college professor who got an ordinary-sized incandescent stuck where the sun don’t shine at a party he was throwing for the sutdents, one time, and had to go to the ER to have it extracted – maybe the Liberals think this new twirly thing will be easier to work with. One of the lab techs told us about it.
Hey, Delos World – did you know? the wear and tear on a flourescent is in the turning it on and off – once on, the energy use and the wear and tear on the bulb and lighting fixture is nominal and almost literally non-existant – so use in a closet, pantry, or anywhere else its use is normally only momentary, is a tremendous waste of efficiency – and will burn the bulb up much faster than normal room-lighting apps.
So, like all Liberal “bright ideas” (yeah, so funny the light bulb is the symbol of bright ideas), this LAW is an exceptionally ignorant joke.
But all envirowhackos are Socialists – that would be bo th nazis and communists.
The farmers and ranchers practice a studied, scientific methodology of caring for the land and all that appertains to it, the animals and plants – and it was always called conservation. It meant they had an experienctially proven methodology of making thigs better and healthier, and more productive.
Environmentalists just study what will give a dictatorial powermongering micromanagerial bunch of lard-fannied bureaucrats excruciatingly delirious.
If that plan makes things worse for the peasants, and the environment, that is a tremendous bonus to them.
Like this CO2 nonsense they are squawking about these days – everyone outside the city limits of your Liberal compounds knows that if you want healthy food crops and forests, and other oxygen-generating life-forces to thrive, you best leave the CO2 alone.
Not the Liberals! oh, no! Wonder how many forest fires they DELIBERATELY SET, aside from those they “accidently CAUSE”, just trying to sop up the CO2 sponges, so they can have a cause for panicking.
I thought I said that. Any bulb will generally have a reduced life time when switched on and off a lot. On the other hand if you properly design the electronic ballast for a CF bulb you could force the start-up to limit currents and not be so bad for the bulb. But that would require additional cost in the electronics and you’re not going to find such complex circuitry in the cheap CF bulbs made in China. Still a CF bulb is a waste for rarely used light fixtures.
It’s official. This is the congress of the yellow dimbulbs.
We have 4 years to inform them that they need to reverse course on this: an entire country illuminated every evening by mercury-filled poisons is a long-term health disaster waiting to happen for parents and children alike.
One can only wonder what other surprises were sneaked into that gigantic bill by at the last minute by unconscionable Democrats and signed into law by Goofus Walker Bush, POTUS-at-large.