Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Terry Jeffrey :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Light Bulb Liars
by Terry Jeffrey
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


What if in 2025 a husband and wife decide they want to use old-fashioned incandescent bulbs in the sanctuary of their home? Will the light-bulb left defend their right to privacy and freedom of choice?

Don't count on it. Many Americans may not know it yet, but the federal government has already effectively banned the type of light bulb most of us use today.

In 2007, President Bush signed the Energy Independence and Security Act, mandating that household light bulbs use incrementally less electricity starting in 2012 and culminating in 2020, when they must use less than 70 percent of the electricity conventional incandescent bulbs use today.

Compact fluorescent bulbs already meet this standard. The congressional authors of the law understood they were, in essence, phasing out incandescent bulbs.

They did this, they said, to help save the planet from overheating. But the light-bulb left did not weigh -- or care about -- the unintended consequences of their crusade.

One of these consequences is the potential for an environment disaster in your family room.

You see, fluorescent bulbs contain mercury -- a bad, bad pollutant and health hazard that the Environmental Protection Agency has been sounding alarms about for years.

This put the EPA in a tough spot. On the one hand, it needed to applaud the politically correct use of fluorescent bulbs to save the planet. On the other hand, it needed to warn people that if they break a fluorescent bulb in their home it could poison the dog, the kid and the wall-to-wall rug.

So, the EPA published blatantly self-contradictory instructions about what to do if mercury spills at your house.

The first section is titled: "What Never to Do With a Mercury Spill."

It says: "Never use a vacuum cleaner to clean up mercury (but see the 'What to Do if a Fluorescent Light Bulb Breaks' section below for more specific instructions about vacuuming broken fluorescent light bulbs). The vacuum will put mercury into the air and increase exposure."

Now, an obvious question: If you should "never" vacuum mercury because it "will put mercury into the air" and increase the exposure for your pets and preteens, why should you vacuum broken fluorescent light bulbs that contain mercury?

The EPA's answer would be farcical were the government not trying to force people to use fluorescent bulbs.

If you use fluorescent bulbs, says EPA, you will need an evacuation plan in the event of a break. "Have people and pets leave the room, and don't let anyone walk through the breakage area on their way out," says EPA's directive. "Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more. Shut off the central forced-air heating/air conditioning system if you have one."

When you can safely return, says EPA, start throwing away your belongings. "If clothing or bedding materials come in direct contact with broken glass or mercury-containing powder from inside the bulb that may stick to the fabric, the clothing or the bedding should be thrown away," says the directive.

Never clean any washable thing -- no matter how costly or sentimentally valued -- if it has been near a broken fluorescent bulb. "Do not wash such clothing or bedding because mercury fragments in the clothing may contaminate the machine and/or pollute sewage," says the directive.

Imagine: The mercury in these bulbs is so bad it is bad for your sewage.

But what if a fluorescent bulb breaks on the wall-to-wall carpet where your toddler crawls? What then? Suddenly, it is OK to use a vacuum on a mercury spill.

"Carefully pick up glass fragments and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag," says the directive. "Use sticky tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder. If vacuuming is needed after all visible materials are removed, vacuum the area where the bulb was broken. Remove the vacuum bag (or empty and wipe the canister), and put the bag or vacuum debris in a sealed plastic bag."

But don't throw that sealed bag away. It may be too toxic for your garbage can. "Some states do not allow such trash disposal," says EPA's directive. "Instead, they require that broken and unbroken mercury-containing bulbs be taken out to a local recycling center."

Apparently, some light bulbs escaped the standards in the 2007 law. So, last week, President Obama's Energy Department closed the loophole by issuing new efficiency regulations targeted at these bulbs that will take effect in 2012.

In a June 29 speech, Obama described the move as part of an energy efficiency initiative that "will create jobs in the short run and save money and reduce dangerous emissions in the long run."

After reading Obama's speech, I drove over to the local big-box hardware store and studied the products in the light-bulb aisle. The store stocked exactly one brand of compact fluorescent bulb for conventional light fixtures. The 75-watt version cost $3.47 per bulb -- compared to .22 cents for a 75-watt incandescent bulb.

On the back of the fluorescent-bulb package -- just below a warning about the mercury content -- the following words were inscribed: "Made in China."

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor-in-chief of CNSNews

Be the first to read Terence Jeffrey's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
This
just shows liberals don't care about the consequences of their actions. They only care that they are doing something even if it is wrong. And we all know China really cares about the environment. When possible I have stopped purchasing products made in China. The rest of the U.S. should do the same thing when you have a choice.

I put some CFL in my home. They lasted about half as long as a regular incadescent bulb. What a bargain. Pay 17 times for a bulb that last half as long.

What is the interest of the state?
This light bulb tyranny really frosts me. They bedevil us with these little rules and fail to address the big problems like Social Security and Medicare.
More importantly, I am starting to wonder if the state has any real interest in energy. they don't have any energy and they lack expertise too. How about they just leave it alone and let the market work. We don't need their help. Also the rfascist collusion is offensive.
I too bought an expensive bulb that didn't last.

Another waste from DC
Fist, I will purchaseseveral hundred boxes of 40w, 60w and 100w incandesent (sp?) bulbs. Buy one or two boxes every shoppong trip, and I'll have what I need. I do use CFLs in those locations where replacing bulbs is inconvenient.

For those who don't want to use CFLs, there IS an alternative. The LED bulb. You've seen LED lights in new flashlight. One or two leds and be quite bright. Imagine 50 - 60 LEDs on a hemisperical shape. Lots of light everywhere with NO mercury.

Oops! Al Gore and GE won't like THAT one bit.

Made in China

And how do all those light bulbs get over here from China? On great big container ships.

But I guess those environmentally conscious Chinese have invented cargo ships that don't burn any energy or emit any CO2.

Mrs Corndog and I will be stockpiling thousands of incandescent bulbs before the mandatory changeover and selling them on the black market. I imagine our best customers are going to be government officials.

Congress, read the black box warning
Does Congress ever read anything? We know that they haven't read the stimulus bill, the cap and trade bill, nor the budget bill. It's obvious they didn't read anything about the mercury in the new magic light bulbs.

There is also another ignored fact. There are many people who cannot tolerate the light emitted by flourescent (sic?) bulbs. Those with scotopic sensitivity syndrome are severely affected.

Let's start giving our lawmakers tests on the content in bills and their possible outcomes before they are allowed to vote.

You won't find the brightest bulbs in
Congress.

Absolutely...
NOT surprised. I have not made the switch to Fluorescent. I am stockpiling good 'ol GE regulars...I guess the energy Nazis will have to come and get me.

Love Those Mercury Bulbs
The package says that they last a gazillion times longer. It's guaranteed. Being old and stupid, I bought six. Three lasted less than six months. Three are still going strong-- but they're in the garage. As an artist and also as a person suffering from the ever popular Seasonal Affective Disorder, I am very sensitive to the color temperature of light. The color temperature of the CFLs can best described as death warmed over. I moved to Arizona for the heat and the wonderful light. I don't need to put that pasty, miserable light. In my main working and living areas, I installed lighting that shines at around 7000 K, virtually arctic marine. And they're not fluorescent.

As for the dud mercury bulbs, I plan on throwing them at politicians. They should get some use. And it should be vastly entertaining.

What a joke
They mandate these light bulbs with mercury, issue these idiot's delight in warnings. Have they a Spanish version? I am so sure the illegals, even if amnestied will understand this garbage or that they will even obey the
instructions regarding disposal of spent bulbs.
uh huh, yeah right.

We have had mercury in our dental amalgams for years..are we to call Hazmat every time we brush our teeth? They havent' done a thing about this stuff yet go after light bulbs.
The question is which Congressman/woman; lobbyist; and/or business benefits from this scam? GE is one I could name.


About those bulbs...
While the government should not mandate specific light bulbs, some facts are in order. The first is that the amount of mercury in these bulbs is very small. In the home, there is very little danger. The amount of mercury will become more dangerous when these bulbs are thrown away. Landfills will contain large numbers of these.

Secondly, while the mercury bulbs are the popular choice, we've had a cheaper, more environmentally friendly solution for years. You may have seen it if there is a stoplight in your area: the LED. These bulbs use very little electricity and, for large fixtures, are made up of many tiny bulbs. The LED is actually more versatile than the mercury bulb in terms of color choice and variable brightness. Also, because LED fixtures are made of many tiny bulbs, they don't have some of the disturbing qualities of fluorescent light.

Unfortunately, the industry and propaganda is geared toward the mercury bulb and it's almost impossible to find LED lights at a reasonable price (or even find them at all).

Moron Law on display
Just another example of liberal doo goodery that did not recognize the law of unintended consequences.

If CFL's become the product of choice in 2012, where, then, will they go when they burn out????

Thas right liberal fools.........

The land fill....................

Start reading up on mercury leaching into the water supply.........


Liberal fools never learn.......
But I bet it FELT GOOD to pass this legislation.....

Record lows
The 1st number is the record low for June.
2nd number is previous record.
3rd is year of previous record.

HARDY, AR
51.0°F
54.0°F
1920


MURFREESBORO 1 W, AR
52.0°F
56.0°F
2006


GREERS FERRY DAM, AR
52.0°F
52.0°F
1990


HOT SPRINGS MMRL FIELD, AR
55.0°F
57.0°F
1987


NORTH LITTLE ROCK WFO, AR
57.0°F
58.0°F
2000


KEY WEST NAS, FL (KNQX)
73.0°F
73.0°F
1977


JOLIET BRANDON RD DAM, IL
45.0°F
45.0°F
1990


WATERLOO, IL
48.0°F
49.0°F
1990


INDIANAPOLIS SE SIDE, IN
43.0°F
43.0°F
1954


BIENVILLE 3 NE, LA
57.0°F
57.0°F
1987


ROSEPINE RSCH STN, LA
60.0°F
61.0°F
2006


BOYCE 3 WNW, LA
62.0°F
65.0°F
1988


LSU DEAN LEE RSCH STN, LA
63.0°F
64.0°F
2000


MILLINOCKET MUNICIPAL AP, ME
39.0°F
39.0°F
1958


DETROIT WILLOW RUN AP, MI
39.0°F
42.0°F
1999


INTL FALLS WSO AP, MN (KINL)
33.0°F
33.0°F
2000


ROLLING FORK, MS
61.0°F
62.0°F
1992


DEL BONITA, MT
29.0°F
32.0°F
1962


WILLISTON SLOULIN FLD, ND (KISN)
33.0°F
33.0°F
1907


GRAND FORKS INTL AP, ND (KGFK)
34.0°F
34.0°F
1958


DUNN CTR 1E, ND
35.0°F
35.0°F
1943

Wow!! Those light bulbs are working already!



LED LIGHTS ARE NOT A GOOD ALTERNATIVE
I have tried using those led lights and they are pathetic. First of all, they don't provide adequate light; plus they last about 2 weeks. As many posts have already indicated, I too, am stockpiling incandescent bulbs. I will use them as long as I possibly can. Those idiots in Congress need to go home and stay there!

Stock up
Almost every time we go to the store to buy groceries, we also buy a pack or two of incandescent light bulbs of the types and wattage we need in our home. We have a good stock on hand now and in the future, plan to continue this process. We hope to never have to buy one of these terribly foolish CFL bulbs, and since we are in our sixties, we believe we will be successful. We encourage all Americans to stock up.

Waski
LED bulbs are all over the place....trying to gain a foothold in the marketplace.......Right now....

They are too expensive and do not put out the quality of light that the Inc. and CFL's do.
That is being worked on by some of the big guys....GE, Sylvania, etc, etc. The company that comes up with a comparable or better version of an Inc or CFL at a market acceptable price will have a great step on the competition.

Being that I deal with some large hardware distributors, I see LED's all the time. They are not "there" yet. They still need to evolve....and most importantly, price needs to come down to a more acceptable 1st cost level.

IE.
1st cost price of an incadescent bulb is $.50 making it very attractive. Over the course of 10 years, the consumer may buy 2 lightbulbs a year and spend $50 in electricity for that socket. $50+$10 = $60.

1st Cost price of an LED may be $45...and over the course of 10 years, the consumer may only spend $15 in electricity.
$45+$15 = $60.

Same $$ spent over the course of 10 years.......

The consumer, however almost always looks at the first cost price.....in which case....$.50 will win out 95% of the time.

Irrational Arguments
As a conservative, I think the emotional conservative hysteria about mercury in fluorescent lamps make us look as loony as we claim the left to be. The generation of electricity emits uncontrolled mercury into the atmosphere, along with other stuff that is unhealthy to breathe. The use of less than 5 mg of mercury per fluorescent bulb is in a controlled environment. Sure, one may occasionally break. The main caution is that one does not clean it up with a vacuum cleaner, to cause it to become airborne. Again, mercury from the generation of electricity is already airborne. We can recycle mercury based lamps much easier than we can scrub mercury out of the atmosphere. The gold miners of 100 years ago dumped tons of mercury into our lakes and streams, and now there are limits to the number of fish we can safely consume. We are no different in dumping tons of mercury into our atmosphere.

In California it's already illegal
to throw a florescent bulb (broken or whole) into the trash. You must take them to a designated household hazardous waste disposal site. Frankly, this is a big inconvenience -- and I now have a box of 'bad' CFLs collecting and creating a hazard if they should be broken.

Then, there's the myth that over time, they're more cost effective. Typical leftist lie. I've found that the number of CFLs that last anywhere near as long as claimed are pretty rare. Apparently, any fixture with a lot of switching on and off, shortens the life expectancy considerably. Since most lower wattage CFLs take a long time to warm up and reach full brightness, where I might have put a lower wattage bulb (e.g. 7 watts), I've used an 18 to 23 watt bulb instead, so I can get enough light right away to (for example) walk down a flight of stairs to the basement.

Also, I doubt that 70% savings is achievable. I used the opportunity when I changed to CFLs to get larger bulbs (more light) than with incandescents. For example, many lamps have a 60 watt limit (primarily as a heat factor). I can put in a 23 watt CFL and get 100+ watts of light (compared to an incandescent bulb); the CFL outputs less heat, so it's practical in a 60 watt rated fixture or lamp. That's a reduction of only about 40% in electrical use. I suspect that there will be many who do the same.

It's too bad the brain-dead left couldn't wait until the cost of LED lights come down in price. They save up to 95% in power use and don't have any nasty environmental effects (at least, not at the consumer level).

Oh fer corn's sake
My DH used to PLAY with mercury in his chemistry classes. I've never had the pleasure, but understand it to be quite interesting as this blob of liquid metal you can hold in your hand shimmers and shimmies like liquid silver.

Of course we oughtn't be careless about mercury but please-nobody's eating or bathing in the stuff, and nobody would dream of polluting a landfill much less the water table with it. (Note to gf-nearly all the fish we consume is farmed)

But for the EPA to tell me what kind of light bulb I must use, nevermind how to clean up a broken one is just too much!

'Save the planet', yeah, right. Micromanage our lives, is more like it!

gf
I have a better one. The government has no role in telling me what kind of bulb I can use in my home. Even so-called "communist" countries like China don't go that far. Odd, that in some ways China today is more free than the US.

This wasn't about energy or security. First, almost all electric power generated in the US is generated from North American sources--nuclear, coal, natural gas, hydroelectric, and some "green" energy such as geothermal, wind, solar. The effect on green houses gases? Well since global warming is pure BS, we can ignore that.

What it is about is increasing the profits for the bulb makers. It was rent seeking at its worse. A traditional bulb costs $.40=$.50 a piece and a CFB costs $4-$5. You can get traditional bulbs that last for at least a year and I have traditional bulbs that have been in place since I bought the house 5 years ago. I doubt a CFL will last 40 years (the claim is they last 7 to 8 time as long).

So GE, etc get's the government to pass this fascist law making everyone buy $4.00 bulbs which increase their profits and makes them look "green" to the eco-nuts. GE and the other bulb makers supported this bill and Bush the stupid signed it. Large business interests may be greedy and amoral, but they aren't stupid.

I expect some bright people to set up businesses where they smuggle in the now banned bulbs from places like Mexico and then sell them at very high prices to Americans, trapped in this so-called free country. For those that celebrated freedom on 7-4, that is a total joke. The freedom train left the US station long ago.




Pete
"In California it's already illegal
to throw a florescent bulb (broken or whole) into the trash. You must take them to a designated household hazardous waste disposal site."

Yeah. Lots of things are illegal and what people don't know...

In the west, there used to be a saying...SSS--shoot, shovel, shutup on dealing with say an endangered species that came across your land and was likely to cause problems. Black bags cover up a variety of sins including getting rid of "dangerous" materials without the trouble and expense of dealing with EPA HAZMAT landfills.

Alive
"and nobody would dream of polluting a landfill much less the water table with it..."

Who says so...? Government doesn't want me to throw away these toxic bombs into the trash? Don't make me buy them.

gf in CA, you're missing the point....
The point is that there's NO MERCURY AT ALL in incandescent bulbs. Our loony government, in response to anthropomorphically suicidal crackpots with too much time on their hands, is mis-micro-managing things it has no business managing.

And Once Again, the MSM can "follow the money" to the Boy Scout cake walk where Ted Stevens donated $5 and won a bundt; but they can't link mandatory CFLs to the political influence of General Electric. And they wonder why advertising-supported traditional journalism is dying faster than a Chinese CFL factory worker. Pinheads.


If it is Good...
The Republicans will be against it. I remember the last time I broke a light bulb... it was 37 years ago. I think I can live with the risk.

Did you hear...
...about the Chinese CFL factory workers that are getting sick making these things? They're dumping the industrial waste straight into their rivers--which ends up in the ocean and the ooh-so-cosmopolitan sushi consumed by eco-conscious progressive pinheads.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article621 1261.ece

Obviously won't get much on this story from NBC, now, will ya??


Mr. Jeffrey Needs to Spread More Light
Perhaps better instructions are needed concerning measures to take after CFL breakage, but I find it interesting that conservatives never express concern for health, safety, or environmental issues unless that alleged concern can be used, rightly or wrongly, to criticize people who are actually trying to make improvements in those areas of concern.

Left out in Mr. Jeffrey's assessment is the much greater amount of mercury pollution prevented by using CFLs and other energy-efficient technologies to reduce the power generated in coal-fired plants. Also left out is the fact that rapid progress in LED development opens the possibility that in a few years this highly efficient, mercury-free form of lighting will be more widely used than CFLs.

Also interesting is the recent announcement that researchers have found a way to make incandescents--which had supposedly reached the limits of their efficiency---meet the new federal guidelines. Gee, I wonder what spurred that sudden burst of innovation. Could it be the prospect of the dreaded GOVERNMENT REGULATION???

RK
"The point is that there's NO MERCURY AT ALL in incandescent bulbs. Our loony government, in response to anthropomorphically suicidal crackpots with too much time on their hands, is mis-micro-managing things it has no business managing."

But the real point is even if CFBs (or CFLs if you like)had zero mercury or even if incandescent bulbs were filled with mercury, it is not the role of the government to tell you what bulbs you can use. The US slips closer and closer to tyranny each day. Ironic isn't it that China becomes more free each year and the US becomes less free...at some point I suppose the lines will cross.

Hey Robert...
...also in CA(hmm...)?

Do you have kids? Real ones? The kind that throw couch pillows and shoes at each other, and play TP roll football in the living room when you're not looking? Were you ever a child, or did you materialize as a fully grown, perfectly coordinated and accident free eco-warrior?

The excuse for forcing this poison on us is more flimsy than the bulbs. Why are you defending it?

Mr. Jeffrey
I would add, that the CFL is useful in the right situation. The cost savings are not that great for the home. The CFL uses ballast that acts as a start capacitor, and a run capacitor. If you turn them off and on like an incondesent it cost more then the incandescent. It also cuts its life in half. The incandescent is made to turn off and on, and will out last the CFL (in the maint. Trade we call them CFTs), and use less electricity. Business has done cost analyses on this for years. A business turns lights on for a minimum of 8 hours per day. In the home this is not true. As for the mercury issue, wait till the people have to pay $2.00 plus to dispose of the CFL, they will throw them in dumpsters, and ditches as they do their bigger brothers now. Now tell me how that will put less mercury in the environment?
Kirk

johninoregon
Who cares about the mercury content...that is really not the point. How meany bulbs really break and plenty of mercury in things people have, bet there is more exposure from fish we eat.

The point is that the government has no right to basically tell us what bulbs we can use in our own homes.

"Could it be the prospect of the dreaded GOVERNMENT REGULATION???"

Yes, that is it exactly. So Diu Nie Lo Mo on the US government. Basically, f them.

"...is the much greater amount of mercury pollution prevented by using CFLs and other energy-efficient technologies to reduce the power generated in coal-fired plants."

Don't care, burn all the coal you want as far as I am concerned.

"... Also left out is the fact that rapid progress in LED development opens the possibility that in a few years this highly efficient, mercury-free form of lighting will be more widely used than CFLs."

Don't care. I do care that people are forced to use bulbs they may not want to use.



Another left coaster?
Johninoregon also chimes in to defend this completely irrational response to an invented problem. What's in the water out west?

There's no rational reason for the government to be involved in light bulbs. None. The clause in that energy bill requiring these bulbs was a blatant giveaway to 'evil multinational' campaign donors, eg: GE!!

And John? We wouldn't have to burn so much coal if 'progressive' lefties would let us build nuclear power plants that produce no waste at all--LIKE FRANCE DOES.


Akaqi
You are right on. The gov. has no right to tell us what we can, and can not use. As Lawrence v Texas said "what is done in the privice of the home is not the Gov. business". Now I guss they have reverced themselves again.
Kirk

Thanks Kirk
Keep pounding them over the head with facts, maybe something will get through the Humbolt County haze!!

RK
You are welcome. Also I liked the post about nuke energy.
Kirk

I'll say it again
I didn't introduce the mercury argument. The argument that government has no right to tell us what kind of bulbs we can use is a completely different issue than crying about mercury in CFLs. The point I tried to make earlier is that the mercury argument is ignorant. Using CFLs does not increase mercury polution.

metallic mercury . . .
IS NOT POISONOUS. The toxicity of mercury arises in COMPOUNDS OF MERCURY (not the metal) that are used in industrial processes and escape through careless handling into the food change.
Metallic mercury only becomes toxic when heated to over 600 degrees F. The lies that the epa perpetuates about metallic mercury only works to the benefit of the "toxic disposal industry".
If you want verification of this ASK YOUR DENTIST. They handle metallic mercury all the time.

that's
food chain. my bad.

gf
"Using CFLs does not increase mercury polution."

They no doubt increase it some--bulbs are thrown away in landfills, crushed and they seep into the water table (most people aren't going to go through the trouble of getting rid of them in an EPA HAZMAT landfill, most will be like me and put them in a bag and throw them in the trash)and then there are the bulbs that break, are dropped, etc.

SO there will be some increase but the amount is probably so low not to be of any great concern--you'll get more from eating fish. I agree the mercury issue is a canard, the real issue is the freedom to pick what bulbs you want to use for your own house.




Does anyone remember lead paint?
As a chemical engineer, I can only shake my head. Mercury is bad stuff. Whereas PCB's have never been proven harmful, we are being set up for the most costly remediation in the history of man.

Clarification
It has cost us billions to clean up lead paint (which indeed is bad) and billions to clean up PCB's.

ANOTHER CZAR ?
The Light Bulb Czar.

He can send his Bulbers to every house to check on your bulbs.

CFL vs inc
Cost analyses of compact flourescent (cfl) bulbs in residential applications purportedly show savings of $70/ year when an incandescent (inc) bulb is replaced with a cfl. More than offsetting the higher cost of cfl's. This is misleading in several regards.

First, bulbs placed in areas that are used infrequently (closets, storage areas) will have miniscule savings, and will probably not recoup the cost of the cfl.

Second, the life of cfl's is not honestly stated. I purchased a number of cfl's for my home, expecting 5000 hour bulb life. Wrong. When most of the bulbs I purchased lasted on the order of 1000 hours, I became suspicious. Upon investigation I learned that the published life expectancy was based on the cfl being "on" constantly. Apparently, as a previous post stated, on/off cycles reduce the life expectancy of cfl's. Very misleading.

Third, inc's give off about 85% of their energy consumption as heat. This is bad in Southern climes that annually have higher air conditioning requirements than heating requirements. However, in northern climes, that have much higher heating requirements, the heat given off by inc's reduces heating requirements. That 85% of energy given off as heat by inc's is not "wasted" because it offsets (1/1) the amount of heat required from your heating system.

So, claims made of the benefits of cfl's are to be taken with skepticism.

Light Bulbs
Has this happened to anyone else? I had a terrible fall, at least partially due to the cfl's. They do not produce such a clean, clear light as do inc's. This may be more apparent in older people who do not have the same clear vision as younger people. I could not clearly define the outline of furniture in a poorly lit room and took a headlong dive onto the floor. Yes, my electric bill has gone down some since I started using cfl's in spots where I need lighting for the most hours, but several other factors have contributed to negative factors as a result of their use.

Bulbs
I broke a 4 foot florescent in the basement a few years ago.
Swept it up and threw it in the trash. I'm still here.

Just freaking hilarious!
And they wonder WHY we call them the "loony left"!

i

Reality
Want less mercury? Want less CO2? Want to conserve? I know this is asking too much from Beck followers, but reality has a Liberal bias.

For most posters and Mr Jeffrey, please read this and stop pretending that science can't answer the simple falsehoods presented here:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/home_journal_news/421 7864.html

"In the May 2007 issue of Popular Mechanics, we tested seven popular compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) and found that the light quality in all of them topped that emitted by traditional incandescent bulbs."

"How much mercury is contained in a CFL?
Each bulb contains an average of 5 milligrams of mercury, “which is just enough to cover a ballpoint pen tip,” says Leslie, associate director of the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer. “Though it’s nothing to laugh at, unless you wipe up mercury [without gloves] and then lick your hand, you’re probably going to be okay.”"

"Over the 7500-hour average range of one CFL, then, a plant will emit 13.16 mg of mercury to sustain a 75-watt incandescent bulb but only 3.51 mg of mercury to sustain a 20-watt CFL (the lightning equivalent of a 75-watt traditional bulb). Even if the mercury contained in a CFL was directly released into the atmosphere, an incandescent would still contribute 4.65 more milligrams of mercury into the environment over its lifetime."

CFL
If we all switch to CFL your electric bill will go up because we will need to build more power plants! This will happen because CFL's draw power for only a very short period of time instead through out the AC waveform. The peak current is higher for the CFL's! Since a generator is limited by peak current the power grid will need more generators/power plants. We get to pay for them. This happens even though the saleable power went down.

This is a little bit complex, too much so for congresscrooks.

Being an engineer I even took data which supports this case. Yes its common knowledge in the engineering world but I had to repeat it.

Majority
I don't care about the mercury in cfl's. However, I am concerned about the mis-information with regards to the life expectancy of cfl's, the TOTAL energy usage, and an intrusive gov't that dictates what light bulbs we are to use.

My own experience is that cfl's don't last nearly as long as rated. Total energy use is not reduced as claimed (in my geographical area where heating is 4x cooling). Most importantly, if cfl's are so good compared to inc's, then people would voluntarily use them. Just the fact that gov't has to force people to use them indicates they're not as good as inc's.

A safer cost effectve Alternative to CFL
I agree with everyones comments, thats why we have modernized the incandescent bulb. We created a new version that uses only 18W for 60W of light output. It meets the govmnts new limits and lets people enjoy the same light quality they have always had WITHOUT MERCURY!

Check it our http://www.synlighting.com
Dont let common sense lose the day!
Clay
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.