In the thread on the newly green New Years Eve countdown ball in another thread SEB member Webs mentioned that all we need to do now is get rid of other old lighting technologies. Apparently he’s not aware that the energy law recently passed by Congress will eventually do just that:
The incandescent light bulb, one of the most venerable inventions of its era but deemed too inefficient for our own, will be phased off the U.S. market beginning in 2012 under the new energy law just approved by Congress. Although this will reduce electricity costs and minimize new bulb purchases in every household in America, you may be feeling in the dark about the loss of your old, relatively reliable source of light. Here’s a primer on the light bulb phase-out and what will mean to you:
Why are they taking my light bulbs away? Moving to more efficient lighting is one of the lowest-cost ways for the nation to reduce electricity use and greenhouse gases. In fact, it actually will save households money because of lower utility bills. Ninety percent of the energy that an incandescent light bulb burns is wasted as heat. And yet, sales of the most common high-efficiency bulb available—the compact fluorescent (CFL)—amount to only 5 percent of the light bulb market. Earlier this year, Australia became the first country to announce an outright ban by 2010 on incandescent bulbs. The changeover in the United States will be more gradual, not mandated to begin until 2012 and phased out through 2014. However, don’t be surprised if some manufacturers phase out earlier.
How do I save money, when a CFL costs six times as much as an old-fashioned bulb? Each cone-shaped spiral CFL costs about $3, compared with 50 cents for a standard bulb. But a CFL uses about 75 percent less energy and lasts five years instead of a few months. A household that invested $90 in changing 30 fixtures to CFLs would save $440 to $1,500 over the five-year life of the bulbs, depending on your cost of electricity. Look at your utility bill and imagine a 12 percent discount to estimate the savings.
The rest of the FAQ lists off some information that even I wasn’t aware of—and I’ve already converted most of the lights here at my in-law’s house to CFLs—such as the fact that any CFL with the Energy Star symbol is required to have a two-year limited warranty so if they burn out prematurely you can get them replaced. So while it’ll be a few years yet the end of the incandescent bulb is on the horizon and may even arrive early if enough folks jump on the bandwagon.
Zilch – exactly: it’s the quantity of methane produced by one burrito. We’re talkin’ energy independence here, every little bit helps.
LH: the heat from a table lamp is perceptible to the person sitting at the table, and the yellow light subjectively raises the sensation of warmth for many people. This can affect the thermostat setting chosen by the person, which is one of the inputs of the large leaky calorimeter. It isn’t a huge effect and PC is correct that it makes a bigger difference if 1) you heat with gas, and even bigger than that 2) during the air-conditioning season.
You start getting into really big numbers with a room like our computer lab. The switch from CRT’s to LCD’s saved far more energy in cooling than it did in the devices themselves. (We have to air-condition year-round)
I emailed our council about this. We have seperate boxes for bottles, paper and plastics/cans. I received this reply less than 48 hours after.
So over 3 years. However I don’t think it’s widely known. I have emailed back and suggested public education, plus placing recycling drops in more convenient places- some super markets already have glass/paper etc drop points.
Our city is in the same situation with electronic recycle. It’s been around for awhile but no one knows about it. Definitely needs more press.
Incidentally, someone earlier in the thread asked about “full spectrum” CFLs. I just happened to stumble across this today:
5500K Color corrected Day Light Fluorescent Lamp Photo Bulb
They sell for $6.99. They were on sale a couple of days ago for $4.00, but I didn’t see the ad until after the sale ended.
The ones I bought at Ikea are clear all the way back. Where as a trad bulb is basically a tungsten wire in an inert gas container, these have a PCB, with what appear to be capacitors etc.
I think this new law is infuriating. How can our government do this? Have any one of you every tried to fire up one of these bulbs when it’s -40* F? It just doesn’t work. We tried this bulbs in our house, and haven’t been impressed. They don’t last very well in all reality. All these new regulations from hell-bent liberals are slowly destroying our right to be free. Global warming is a damn myth people, why don’t you guys understand this? Wake up from your trance so we can fight back, and keep our rights.
I woke up and realized that I’d rather have lower energy consumption to pay for idiots like you to be able to live in some godforsaken place where it gets to be -40F without having to fund more power plants using tax money. Maybe after you’ve switched to CFLs you’ll have enough money saved up from the energy savings to move further south so I’m not funding the idiocy of where you’re living in my gasoline prices.
Relax, PJ. It won’t be getting down to -40 there much longer.
Besides, for your super-cold applications, LED bulbs may be much better. They work fine in the cold.
As for global warming being a “myth”, well, you’re simply mistaken about that. It has nothing to do with liberal vs. conservative, it’s more like science vs. wishful thinking.
That is true if the house is being heated with electric resistance heat. Around here, most people with electric heat use heat pumps, which can be more efficient than electric resistance heat. Heat pumps start becoming less efficient below around −5°C (23°F).
Does Australia get that cold? By the time the law takes effect in the US or Canada (if it does), I suspect that low temperature performance will not be a concern.
As was mentioned, LEDs don’t have a problem with low temperatures, and low temperature fluorescents are likely to be improved by that time. There are already CFLs that will start at -22°F
Too bad it’s illegal to beat ass these days, because you’d all receive one for being foolish.
Global warming isn’t due to mankind’s influence on the earth, but rather the normal weather pattern. The climate will change constantly on our planet for years to come as is has been doing this for billions of years. By taking away some of our liberties and forcing things upon us (such as Diesel Particulate Filters on all diesel powered vehicles, EGR valves and such) you people are just creating more distaste from other human beings. There are several facts in life: you must use energy to create it (automobiles, steel mills, electricity), you much harvest crops grown from the earth as well as kill other animals for food, you must take precious minerals from the earth to make goods needed for 99% of all modern functions in life, and you must harvest trees for lumber for housing. Unfortunately, lot’s of our lumber is wasted on housing the people like most of you who are strictly against the logging industry. I brave the extreme cold and heat every day of my life because I was placed in this spot. In order to live in my area you must have the tools that work with you which help you survive. Low sulfur diesel fuel (which doesn’t heat as quickly as normal fuel) is one of the recent changes that have hurt the lifestyle. Hey genius, you know what I hate paying taxes for? Welfare, funding to government extensions such as the Environmental Protection Agency, and paying government employees and elected officials who fight against the industry in which I work. Does that make sense? They get their share of wages from the mining industry in which they fight against. I like nature, and I enjoy being able to race my cars as well as drive my trucks on this earth. But eventually that RIGHT will be taken away from me due to stupid laws created to ‘help’ our planet. I believe the only laws and programs we need are ones that exterminate human beings trying to destroy our dreams. Those are the same people who are trying to take away our individualities. One of these days when there is a majority of you ‘do-gooders’, you’ll all get together and exterminate the others. Just like Hitler. I’m not a college educated man, but a young kid who is trying to fight the crimes against our free will. You do your thing, and I shall do mine.
Sorry Paul, but I’ve read the studies and I’m convinced there’s more at work here than normal weather patterns. Until you can cough up something to back up your claims, well, I’ll just write you off as another denialist.
Addendum: And you should really take a moment to know people before you start telling them what kind of people they are. I’m not against the logging industry so long as they do it in a responsible fashion.
Attn: Paul Jord
You are indeed correct that it’s too bad it’s illegal to beat ass. Beat your ass because you can’t seem to use the goddamn Enter key! How do you expect anyone to parse through your crap if you can’t separate your ideas into cohesive groups that the rest of the frickin’ world calls paragraphs?
Of course, you do not appear to be able to actually utter a coherent sentence, and what you do write is full of hyperbole and logical fallacies, so nobody should realistically be surprised. The generally accepted means of supporting an argument is to present facts, not opinions to back up a claim. Please note, an opinion shared by multiple people is NOT a fact, no matter how many believe it. Though you do present at least one fact about sulfur free diesel (which has not at this time been verified by our independent researchers), you muddle this fact with personal accounts and hearsay, thus negating the usefulness of your “fact” in support of your argument. The argument which we would like to further point out, does not at all seem clear and present, though it is apparently a danger to anyone reading your “paragraph”.
You appear to have possibly cut and paste your “paragraph” from someone else, so it probably doesn’t display your actual ability to use the keyboard to produce separate multiple ideas into normally acceptable bites. However, despite having said that, We in no way absolve you from the responsibility of learning to use the language of your assumed nation of origin correctly.
So, for your crimes against the English language, you are hereby sentenced to take a freshmen English class at your local community college, and We also recommend you take a keyboarding or intro to typing class for good measure.
Sincerely,
Sgt. Bog Brother, Grammar Police
I haven’t seen any discussion regarding the environmental debacle which will be created from the mercury in all CFLs. Anybody ask the EPA how to handle a broken CFL? Their answer is: “Leave the room immediately after opening all windows. Use rubber gloves to pick up the pieces, along with the underlying carpet. Double bag and contact the appropriate HAZARDOUS WASTE collection center”. NO THANKS!! I’ll keep stockpiling my incandescents…and make more money to pay the electric bill!!
You might have tried reading the previous comments in this thread, for starters…
Sooo…not sure how relevant or useful this is, but I took a look at the EPA site, and they list an assload of household products that contain mercury and are a serious risk to health, AND some even require contacting Hazardous Waste Collection like our CFL bulbs.
I think a lot of folks are ignorant at just how much mercury is in the average home already. If handled properly cleaning up after a broken CFL bulb shouldn’t be too big of a deal.
Though I’ll admit that I’m looking forward to the prices on LED bulbs coming down soon so I can use those instead. They’re brighter, use even less energy than a CFL bulb, last even longer, and are very had to break.
In our place, CFLs last about the same amount of time as incandescents. I doubt we break even on the suckers.
I’ve broken a few, but at the time I didn’t know how dangerous they are supposed to be. I’ve also broken mercury thermometers and accidentally come into contact with the mercury, so I’ve probably suffered at least a little brain damage in my time (or maybe it was all those lead paint chips I ate as a child). In any event, I’d already be replacing all my bulbs with the LED bulbs if they weren’t still around $12+ each.
CFL’s cause migraines for some people. For others, they do not. If you never get migraines, you might be unaware of how easily they are triggered or how debilitating they can be. The small percentage of Americans who suffer from migraines that are triggered by CFL’s are going to be out of luck if they have no other options. Just because this affects a small percentage of people does not make it less of a problem for the sufferers. Would you support the government mandating a vaccine that would make some people chronically ill just because it would supposedly save money in the long run? There is one building on campus where I attend college that has this lighting, and if i am in the building for 15 minutes i have a headache that lasts three days, accompanied by vomiting. Sorry to be graphic, but this is a real problem that should not be overlooked because it does not affect everyone the same way. I have gotten my doctor on board with disability services on campus, but my professors (some of them) still look at me like i am crazy when i have to explain that light can cause chronic headaches. Laws mandating CFL’s will condemn me to live in the dark and avoid public places, barring me from a useful career or decent quality of life. the worst part is, I can’t tell what kind of lighting it is until I start feeling the onset of a headache! Anyone have a good source for black market light bulbs?
Elwed- what the hell you doing to burn out so many CFLs? We have a number of Spotlights in our house- groups of 3 or 4- and the regular bulbs used to pop with depressing regularity. Of course these bulbs were the most expensive ones! So spending a little more at Ikea (the only place that does energy saving spots) was worth it.
Rebecca, if the migraines are being triggered by CFLs then I agree that something should be done to help those folks, but I’m not convinced that the cause and effect has been established yet.
I suffer from the occasional migraine myself and I’m well aware of how debilitating they can be. That said nearly all the lights in my home, with the exception of two floor stand lights, are CFL at this point in time. The bulb hanging over my head as I type this is a CFL and I’m exposed to it constantly. Is it possible that migraines are triggered by CFLs? It could be, but I don’t think it’s been firmly established as of yet.
That said there are alternatives available and more on the way. LED lighting is starting to get a foothold and will hopefully replace CFLs before too long. They have a longer life and no mercury which makes them a much better option, but are still on the expensive side at the moment.
Hey Les-
Let me ask you something- ever have a migraine headache triggered by Premenstrual Syndrome? What about a pregnancy migraine? Just because it does not happen to you does not mean it does not happen!
I don’t I care what scientists say about it—I am personally conducting my own one-person clinical trial to prove that CFL’s can cause migraines. They can. You could come to my campus, and we could go in the new building where they are using CFL’s. After about 15 minutes you can watch me vomiting in the lobby, and you will have your proof.
Migraines are incredibly complicated, and I will not live to see science prove that every possible trigger is really a migraine-inducing trigger for someone.
I am glad they are not a trigger for you. That’s good news. Maybe you are also lucky enough to be able to drink a glass of Merlot or eat a pickle without suffering a migraine.
The point is that removing the option to buy non-CFL lighting will cause unnecessary suffering, while the answer to our energy crisis is right under our butts!
Burning methane released by decomposition of organic matter could provide us with the electricity we need to power our homes and businesses. It would reduce the amount of methane being released into the air by converting methane into carbon dioxide and oxygen. It would eliminate the need for lagoons of manure on farms and sewage treatment plants.
Methane digestion would also greatly decrease our dependence on foreign oil. Now, if someone would just come up with a way for the government to make a bundle off of it, maybe the use of methane would be a reality!
http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/energyefficiency/lighting/publications/fs4.html
http://www.edf.org/article.cfm?contentID=7599
What I find interesting is the argument over whether light “flickers,” and if so, how much. Most fluorescent light does not appear to flicker to most people, but it can still cause headaches. Therefore, stating that CFL’s do not appear to flicker, and actually flicker much less detectably, does not mean that CFL’s definitively don’t cause headaches. I know they do.
So I am sitting here, looking out the window at my garden and my compost box, and thinking about how I had a landfill-free childhood… every newspaper, bottle, can and food scrap in this household has been recycled through my entire life. Maybe this could buy me a little guilt-free lightbulb use?
I refuse to believe that I need a scientist with a PhD. to tell me what I know to be true about my own body. I also refuse to believe that my use of incandescent bulbs can’t be offset by the fact that at least 75% of the food I consume has no carbon footprint and nothing recyclable in my house has been put into a landfill for the past 35 years.
It is not about wanting to do bad things for the environment and waste energy all willy-nilly so I don’t have to buy new light bulbs. I am envisioning a future where every store, library, and church has CFL lighting.
Since scientists have no financial stake in proving that CFL’s cause migraines, since so few people suffer CFL induced migraines, and since I am apparently not qualified to know what is going on in my own body, I will have no choice about even leaving my house without risking a three-day headache.
You do go to doctors to tell you what’s wrong with you, don’t you? Or don’t you believe that their expert opinion makes them more qualified to determine if you’ve got something like cancer or an ulcerated pancreas than your own “I know this has to do with my light bulbs!”
Before he spent a week in the hospital with a ruptured appendix my father spent three ill weeks deciding he was eating poorly. A childhood friend of mine thought he’d been masturbating too much before he went to the doctor and discovered he had inoperable, fatal cancer.
Perhaps it’s leaving the house that causes migraines, or coming into contact with people, or th smell of grass, or anything other than the thing you’ve decided is a cause but has been found medically and scientifically unlikely by people who, by your own admission, have nothing invested in anything other than coming up with an answer rather than proving an answer that they feel is correct but that they have no expert knowledge about to bring proper debate or framework to.
Correlation does not equal causation. Perhaps the Flying Spaghetti Monster wants you to stay at home cooking him dinner?
I’m sorry, Les, I was not aware that light bulbs could cause cancer or an ulcerated pancreas. Duly noted.
My research has indicated to me (confirmed by my doctor) that the tests to conclude a migraine diagnosis merely rule out other headache causes.
I am sorry your dad did not recognize that the pain of a ruptured appendix was not caused by poor eating habits, although I don’t know how one could mistake appendicitis for indigestion. I also don’t know how cancer could be confused with some side effect of excess masturbation, but I really don’t want to know more about the masturbatory habits of your childhood friend.
As for this statement, I am confused: “Perhaps it’s leaving the house that causes migraines… or anything other than the thing you’ve decided is a cause but has been found medically and scientifically unlikely by people who, by your own admission, have nothing invested in anything other than coming up with an answer rather than proving an answer that they feel is correct but that they have no expert knowledge about to bring proper debate or framework to.”
Are you saying doctors have no expert knowledge? Or are you saying I do not? I have made an effort over the last 16 years to educate myself about migraines, and I am doubting that you actually suffer from them yourself, as you claim.
I totally appreciate your cynicism, but when it comes to migraine triggers, based on the individual, a trigger could be as simple as a smell, a certain wavelength of light, or a chemical found in foods that does not affect the majority of the population.
Take phenylketonuria, for example- for most people, artificial sweeteners are harmless, and for diabetics they may be greatly appreciated. For people with phenylketonuria, they are toxic.
Scents, such as plants, or foods, or perfumes in the workplace, can trigger migraine headaches for some people. For others, lighting can cause a migraine. And though a correlation does not prove causation, it does not negate one either!
If you turn from reading what published scientific research has to say and pay attention to what people with migraines (other than myself) are saying, you could see anecdotal evidence that lighting can trigger migraines. Unfortunately, this is a small minority of the population, and not likely to effect any change in legislation or the point of view of cynics such as yourself.
Oh, I don’t know about this spaghetti monster you mentioned, or why he is flying, but if your meals are talking to you, you have bigger problems than debating headaches with me!
Rebecca, please note that not everyone who responds to you here is named “Les”.
If it’s a specific wavelength of light, a pair of correctly colored prescription glasses should protect you. Flicker is a much bigger problem.
There are many different types of florescent lamps, with different ballasts (the transformer that steps up voltage to ionize mercury inside the tube), different form factors and different mounts, and different phosphor mixes. If you read upstream in this thread, there is some discussion of that.
If the CFL bulbs in that one building are causing you migraines, that’s a very interesting result. It would be worth taking it up with the university office of disability concerns to see exactly what type of CFL is in use there. If all CFL’s everywhere are causing you migraines, that’s a different scale of problem.
Long-term, a number of new lighting technologies are on the way including LED. Maybe they won’t cause you to have migraines, but will be a living hell for someone else.
Kudos for your low carbon footprint. Unfortunately the MSM has managed to confuse the issue but while we quibble over stimulus packages and gay marriage, greenhouse gases are reaching the scale of planetary emergency. Once we reach the average temperature where methane clathrates in permafrost zones begin to outgas, a positive-feedback effect (which is not as nice as it sounds) takes over and we’re screwed. We don’t know exactly where that point is but it’s an irreversible tipping point so it would be best not to find out.
Methane generation won’t scale up large enough to provide all the energy we need, unfortunately but you’re right; sewage should be used for energy generation. The treatment plant here in our community generates its own electricity that way.
Rebecca writes…
Never said it didn’t happen, I said I remain unconvinced of the correlation based on the available data. Anecdotes are not scientific evidence.
And while I may never have had a migraine triggered directly by Premenstrual Syndrome that doesn’t mean I haven’t had one triggered by it indirectly. Though, again, the correlation on that is somewhat iffy.
That’s not proof. That’s you making a guess based on personal experiences. There could be any number of factors contributing to your symptoms. It’s entirely possibly you’re correct that it’s the CFLs, but it’s also entirely possible you’re way off the mark. Considering the widespread use of florescent lighting throughout most commercial and educational buildings presumably you must be having a really rough time if that is indeed the cause.
Migraines are indeed complicated things so it’s rather amusing that you’re going with a simplistic knee-jerk explanation for yours.
Yes, I am able to enjoy wine and pickles without issue. If you’re getting migraines from those as well then I’m even less inclined to think it’s the CFLs that are the cause, but perhaps some chemical agent in the environment.
As I’ve already pointed out there are alternative lighting solutions to CFL and incandescent. One person possibly having a reaction to CFLs is not justification for suggesting that their use will result in widespread suffering as you are doing here. You’re taking a personal symptom, making a wild guess as to the cause, and then assuming that there must be millions of others with the same issue.
Methane is already used for electricity production in a number of places and it’s not a bad idea, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t move on from incandescent lamps to more energy efficient lighting.
You assume they do. You’ve provided nothing in the way of support for that assumption other than your belief that it is true and a personal anecdote that could have any number of causes.
There’s no argument over whether or not CFL’s flicker, they indeed do at very high frequencies.
No one has suggested you should feel guilty. Though on has to wonder why, given your apparent lifetime of green-living, you’re so reluctant to move onto better forms of lighting that would go a long way to conserving energy? Again there’s nothing that says it has to be CFL as there are many options in LED lighting with more on the way.
Right, because gut instincts are better than years of medical training in every situation. I assume then that you never visit a doctor when you get ill? What would be the point? You clearly already know the cause and how to fix it instinctively.
Most of those already use florescent lighting of some sort that flickers at much lower rate than CFLs. You should be on the floor in convulsions at many of those places if what you claim is true.
Ah the old scientists-don’t-have-a-financial-incentive-prove-I’m-right canard. That’s why they put out studies saying there’s no apparent link between migraines and CFls. Not because there isn’t, but because they’re not getting paid to say that there is! Yes, that’s a favorite for folks who don’t have anything compelling to offer in the way of an argument.
The above proves what an idiot you are. The comment you were replying to was not written by me, but by MisterMook. You’re so busy being righteously indignant that you’re not even bothering to pay attention to whom you’re replying to. If you’ve devoted the same attention to detail to the causes of your migraines then there’s no question you’re completely clueless.
On top of that you opted to distort MM’s comment in a ridiculous way to avoid his point. That’s just plain dishonest.
And, yes, some light bulbs can cause cancer if you’re exposed for them for too long. The ones used in tanning beds are a good example.
So you do go to doctors then? May I ask why you trust the word of this doctor over the word of any other person with a PhD?
Considering you’re replying to MM and assuming you’re replying to me, well, that doesn’t say much about your intelligence level.
I do not disagree with that statement at all, but the fact that your migraines might be triggered by CFLs in no way means they shouldn’t be used. Sucks to be you if that’s true, but we’ve all got our crosses to bear.
Quite true, but without evidence to support a proposition there’s no good reason to assume it’s true. If you can provide evidence to support your assertion other than “I vomit when I think I’m around CFLs” then we may have something to discuss.
You’ve already been provided with two sources that claim such a correlation is unlikely at best and you’ve dismissed them out of hand without providing anything beyond your own personal anecdotes as a rebuttal. Why should we take your word for it? We don’t know who you are or how qualified you are to make such determinations. You’ve clearly demonstrated a lack of ability to determine whom you’re replying to and that doesn’t inspire one with confidence that you know anything about what you’re talking about.
In other words what you’re saying is: “If you’d stop listening to the people who probably know what they’re talking about and just listen to random strangers who have plucked a reason out of their asses you’d have all the proof you need!”
Anecdotal evidence is not the same as scientific evidence. It is not cynical to discount the former in preference for the latter.
She has obviously not been touched by his noodly appendage.
I don’t think it is fair to assume that I have never discussed my migraines with a doctor. I have seen a number of doctors over the past two decade for treatment, and we are narrowing down what my triggers are. They include CFL’s. I have worked with disability services on my campus, and through their office have learned that I am not the only student with this problem!
I know when I am having a migraine, and when there is something more serious going on, because I take care of myself and I am careful to note potential triggers. This helps narrow down what could be triggering a headache. trial and error is not the best way to figure out what triggers a headache, but it proves useful for me. And this method is far from the “wild guess” as it has been described here.
As I said previously it is entirely possible that CFLs could be a trigger of migraines, but based on the studies I’ve seen I remain unconvinced even with your anecdotal evidence.
You still haven’t answered why we should accept your word over the word of the PhDs that have studied the issue. You were, after all, the one who started in with disparaging scientists for having no financial incentive for establishing CFLs as a migraine trigger.
You appear to have a lot of faith in the scientific community and their research. Good luck with that.
I certainly trust them more than some random yahoo on the Internet. It has little to do with faith and more to do with results.
Seeing as you’re unable or unwilling to back up your claims I’ll write you off as another kook and leave it at that.
yup, you random yahoos on the internet, feel free to believe whatever you want!
Are you taking your toys and going home now, Rebecca? Perhaps you’ll be taking your vomiting to see a faith healer, or maybe a Native American shaman soon?I hear that a lot of the other people who don’t think the scientific community have a lot of credibility like to self-flagellate? Perhaps you’re not suffering enough for a jeebus to come into your life and protect you from those nasty CFLs?
HEY! Maybe you could buy one of those Teslar watches or bracelets! Then you could come in and join those people in their self-righteous anecdotal whining in those threads over here if you get it into your thin skull that they’ve worked?
To be fair, I’ve known a number of people affected by the flickering of fluorescent tubes, though not to the extent Rebecca describes.
The worst for me is big-box stores with old-fashioned 60-hz ballasts. They get out of phase with each other and have unpleasant heterodyne effects, which (since my last head injury) make me dizzy. I get in, find whatever I came there for, and get out. Most tubes and all CFL’s made today have high-frequency ballasts that exceed your eye’s flicker-fusion rate by a factor of 500 or so.
Years ago I was injured working in a furniture factory, due to a 60-hz fluorescent-strobe effect that made a cutting-head appear to be standing still when it was, in fact, still moving. I had never internalized the rule to first touch the cutting head with a push stick, but I sure as hell did after that. (They were able to stitch my hand back together quite well.)
Rebecca, if you’re still around – some incandescents may be able to meet the efficiency standards yet. Fine with me, if they can pull it off. But we can’t go on wasting energy.
That article you linked to provides a strong argument for government setting energy efficiency standards:
It seems they just needed a little motivation to get their shit together. Works for me.
Oh, and Rebecca, I’ll also point out that you’ve got science to thank for saving the incandescent bulb. Perhaps you’ll go a little easier on those PhDs now.
As usual the Green Movement is forcing a new technology on the people, and funding it with horribly high-priced products to be purchased by those who can least afford them. To get equal brightness, much less the proper spectrum of light we humans evolved to need, we must buy LED bulbs or better, $20-$30 and up PER BULB. I’ll simply hoard incandescents until techology catches up. They will last my lifetime. You young folks (and wretched old hippies) can support the CFL ripoff, and stick a windmill in your back yard.
Clearly “Electric Larry” doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about. The Green Movement isn’t forcing anything on anyone. Contrary to what so many idiots seem to think, the incandescent bulb is not being banned. You’ll still be able to buy them if you wish, they just have to meet new energy efficiency standards. For fuck’s sake, there’s already a selection of such light bulbs on the market so you don’t have to buy the scary CFLs if you don’t want to.
As for the “horribly high-priced” LEDs, those will last you a good 20 years and will cut back your electricity usage for lighting by 85%. Yes, they currently have a big upfront cost, but they pay for themselves in savings and not needing to be replaced within the first five years. And as they become more common they’ll also come down in price. But hey, don’t let reality get in the way of you wasting money with outdated technology because you’re too lazy to actually read up on the topic.