Australia to ban incandescent bulbs

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Imp
Seriously, do you trust market forces and capitalism to actually work properly in a timely manner?

seems like wally world is making a big push of these things. aus is taking 3 years to do this. wally world might be faster at it. other retailers will follow suit if wally world is successful.

Not only that but Wal-Mart will drive the prices down because of increased supply (they'll be demanding it) and increased competition.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: Gillbot
I've switched all of mine except the few that are on dimmers and photoeyes, etc.

I'm waiting for my incandescent bulbs to burn out, and then I'll start replacing them as well.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: mrjminer

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: mrjminer

Originally posted by: Citrix

sure thats easy. coal is burned to make eletricty, now if you have 5 million 100w incandecent bulbs buring that is a lot of coal just to power lights. now if the light bulbs are replaced that use less wattage for example the 23w CLF that is equal to a 100w bulb that gives off the same amount of light that is a lot of power conversation. replace the 5 million lights with CFL's and thats and a whole lot less coal being burned and whole less C02 being pumped into the world just to power lights.

So tell me, did you thorw a fit when the government banned freon and made all of use another product that is a whole lot less damaging to the environment and did the same thing?

Then your argument would be that we need to switch from using coal to produce electricity to get to the root of the problem. Try again.

you try again, that wasnt my arguement at all.

Doesn't matter what you think your argument is, you've identified the real problem as being fossil fuels. As I said, try again and, perhaps, you can come up with something that shows an actual problem directly related to the use of incandescent bulbs. Indeed, they use more energy, but the problem is not the amount of energy they use, the problem is the production of energy itself.

Try again.

Seat belts and cars. You're a country thinking about mandating the installation and use of seat belts in all cars, but this will cost considerable money as well as incite a continued uprising from the people who feel government should not have the power to dictate "how they drive their car."

Bad drivers and out-of-your-control events cause accidents. That is the root of the problem. That is the "real problem." But all too often the root problem is too big. Thus we create solutions to lessen their impact. It is very hard to eliminate the root problem of car accidents, so we install seat belts and mandate their use to lessen the problems that will arise from accidents.

My point is that just because there is a root problem, there is absolutely nothing wrong with finding smaller solutions to small parts of the root problem. Sure, it may only be a marginal improvement, but it's worthwhile if the marginal improvements outweigh the costs, and in the case of fluorescents, I believe this is the case. If benefits outweigh the costs, DO IT.

a good photographer, with the mind of a sharp economist. this is the most sensible comment in the thread, I think

:beer:

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Specop 007
What a craptastic idea. Where do knuckleheads come up with these ideas?

I truly hate, I mean HATE politicians.

The U.S. should ban them just to piss Spec off :laugh:

I think spec was pissed off the day he/she was born. It won't take much...

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Aharami
IMO, me not being able to buy incandescent bulbs doesnt really bother me...especially since market will eventually swing towards that anyways. Federal officials keeping people in jail w/o any proof or access to a lawyer or due process bothers me. FBI not requiring a search warrant to search thru my house or not being obligated to inform me of said search bothers me

The more leftists like you support nanny state laws, the government will become more authoritarian. And you'll support it, no doubt.

Isn't it the truth though - those shouting liberal or conservative all-throughout are those who just really don't have an argument. It's like those who disagree but can't think of anything with substance just love shouting Liberal! Conservative! Look at me!

It doesn't even make sense either. I'm conservative, I vote republican. But I would support the government forcing a switch to energy efficient lightbulbs.

But wait a minute, does that make sense? Of course it does. Because lightbulbs are not political! D'oh, how could so many have gotten it so wrong?

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: funboy42
I bought into these back when I lived in my trailer and I was trying to get my bills down and they are a bunch of garbage IMO. Most died out WELL before their time and I had one in the living room catch on fire and almost burned my house down. Had I not been home when it shorted out to cut the power off to the outlet Im sure my home would of went up and then my home smelled of burning electricals for months after that.

Did not save me any money on my bills, cost me 4x as much as a regular bulb, my home almost burned down (shorted out in the bulb unit itself, it melted, and charred itself into the outlet), and half quit working within a years time and was hardly used at all. WTF did I save?

I bet the power in your trailer was bad. Probably overvolting them.

exactly. Not surprised considering that a lightbulb likely doesn't have very stringent voltage requirements. I've replaced the flood lights in my room with CFL flood lights, when you first turn them on yeah they've got to warm up but once they're on, you wouldn't have guessed that they were CFL unless I told you.

Just like flood lights, even got the yellow tinge of a typical incandescent light. The thing I love the most about these lights is that I've had them for many months like 9 and out of the three I installed, only one has 'died' and I say 'died' because florescent lights die much different from regular light bulbs.

See the one that 'died' simply cuts out every few hours of the day and comes back on at random intervals and stays on at random intervals so I haven't bothered to replace it quite yet, I probably will when it stays off for the majority of the time.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Specop 007
What a craptastic idea. Where do knuckleheads come up with these ideas?

I truly hate, I mean HATE politicians.

why do you think its a craptastic idea?

Your kidding right?

You mean, you dont see something even a little bit wrong with the government forcing you to use a certain LIGHT BULB? I mean passing a law that makes it ILLEGAL to use a certain LIGHT BULB.

Your ok with that?!

yea. i should be able to run leaded gasoline as well as a car without a catalytic converter. screw the environment, i want to be able to live the way I want. the world revolves around ME. ME ME ME ME ME.
oh but CFL bulbs will save me money in the long run...so the govt is really trying to help me?! no wai!

no but seriously, i agree with Queasy that marketplace will eventually switch over to CFL bulbs, but that will be slow. In this case, i see nothing wrong with govt trying to expedite the process a bit

Haha, I always love how liberals reach for kneejerk reactions.

So please, put up some facts. Show me that incan's pollute as much as leaded gasoline cars. In fact, why dont you show me how much a regular incan does pollute. I bet taking you car around the block once pollutes more then if you ran every light in your house for a month.

But lets not let facts and reason get in the way of a good emotional kneejerk law!

i guess global warming doenst mean anything to you.

Tell me with a straight face my light bulb selection is contributing to global warming.

Please. Try it.

power consumption=pollution, often with coal fired plants or otherwise.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: OrangeJellyDisk

Originally posted by: Specop 007
Its sad to see so many people support the government nanny state mindset.

Maybe the .gov should also tell you when you can use those lights. You know, a national "bedtime" for everyone.

You're totally the reason the rest of the world hates Americans. Never willing to even consider such a small non life modifying change purely because its not part of your own personal agenda.

They are only talking about light bulbs its hardly a huge deal and the fact is regardless of what you selfish moronic comments have been, it will reduce greenhouse by a small amount of the next 10yrs. All and any move that helps reduce the greenhouse build up is a good one especially something so simple as using a diff lightbulb...

:roll: yes, this thread clearly shows that all Americans are against this law. Idiot non-Americans (sarcasm, in case your detector is broken)

you from New Zealand?

 

[Journer]

i still use incandescent bulbs b/c they are .99 /4 pack...with all the electrical problems around here there is now way in hell i am spending 5 bucks on a light bulb that will be shorted out in 4 months

however, if i ever rent/buy a place that isnt so ******...i would get florescent

 

[BillyBatson]

i still prefer regular bulbs as long as they are bright. you can't even use a dimmer switch with the flourescent bulbs

 

[So]

All the hate for incandescents...but they provide very effective resistive heaters in the winter.

 

[dug777]

The comments about harsh light are obviously coming from people who haven't used a new 'warm yellow' tone one.

I switched recently (i do work for the Office of Energy after all ), and i've nothing but praises to sing, they are much brighter than the 100w incandescents they replaced for an impressive fraction of the power usage

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Minerva
Oh and BTW by the time they finalize a ban on inacan's LED's will take over. They are working on a 500 lumen/watt die now. The best bulbs are LPS and they are 200 lumen/watt when NEW and are puke yellow.

as i understand it they have some serious heat issues to sort out, and even then, they'll be pretty pricey?

again, the arguments that the light from CFLs is too white and harsh are clearly coming from people who haven't tried the new warmer tones.

 

[jpeyton]

Greetings retards.

CFLs come in different color temperatures, including ones that match the yellow tone of standard incandescent light bulbs.

They use a lot less energy.

I hope they adopt this in the states.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Greetings retards.

CFLs come in different color temperatures, including ones that match the yellow tone of standard incandescent light bulbs.

They use a lot less energy.

I hope they adopt this in the states.

I don't. Forcing things on people FTL.

Besides, we're moving towards them naturally, without making silly regulations.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Greetings retards.

CFLs come in different color temperatures, including ones that match the yellow tone of standard incandescent light bulbs.

They use a lot less energy.

I hope they adopt this in the states.

I don't. Forcing things on people FTL.

Besides, we're moving towards them naturally, without making silly regulations.

We have an election very shortly, and guess what's the headlining agenda?

It's not going to hurt anyone, it will actually save people money, it will save a not insignificant amount of power, and they're not actually going to take your incandescents away, just ban their sale iirc, and then only ones with an energy saving equivalent, so as far as things being forced upon you i think it's pretty innocuous

 

[So]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Greetings retards.

CFLs come in different color temperatures, including ones that match the yellow tone of standard incandescent light bulbs.

They use a lot less energy.

I hope they adopt this in the states.

I don't. Forcing things on people FTL.

Besides, we're moving towards them naturally, without making silly regulations.

We have an election very shortly, and guess what's the headlining agenda?

It's not going to hurt anyone, it will actually save people money, it will save a not insignificant amount of power, and they're not actually going to take your incandescents away, just ban their sale iirc, and then only ones with an energy saving equivalent, so as far as things being forced upon you i think it's pretty innocuous

Oh, I agree in practice, it's more or less innocuous. I just don't like unnecessary government rules.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Greetings retards.

CFLs come in different color temperatures, including ones that match the yellow tone of standard incandescent light bulbs.

They use a lot less energy.

I hope they adopt this in the states.

I don't. Forcing things on people FTL.

Besides, we're moving towards them naturally, without making silly regulations.

We have an election very shortly, and guess what's the headlining agenda?

It's not going to hurt anyone, it will actually save people money, it will save a not insignificant amount of power, and they're not actually going to take your incandescents away, just ban their sale iirc, and then only ones with an energy saving equivalent, so as far as things being forced upon you i think it's pretty innocuous

Oh, I agree in practice, it's more or less innocuous. I just don't like unnecessary government rules.

FTW

 

[Skotty]

For the record, I frequently side with liberal causes, but I do not agree with banning incandescent light bulbs. There is still concern for their price and quality of light. I agree with others that have said doing a ban would be excessive government nannying (much like the seat belt law, even though I always wear my seat belt). As long as they are banning energy wasting light bulbs, maybe they will ban large monitors and high end graphics cards too. Surely you don't need a 24 inch monitor with 100FPS at 2500x1600 resolution? I would be okay with a tax incandescents, however.

A lot of people suggest energy efficiency as a means for combating global warming and/or excessive power plant emissions. However, I think this should only be viewed as a short term solution. The real solution is to continue (and increase) funding for research and moving to cleaner means of producing electricity (fission, fusion, renewables where economical). There is plenty of power available in the universe and we should not simply accept that we should all live with less of it. We just need to harness it in a cleaner manner. Greater efficiency is always good, but not when it comes at the price of reduced quality or choice.

I'm surprised to hear people saying that their same watt CFLs are brighter than incandescent. I've found the opposite to be true. I've been installing 100W-equivalent CFLs because I think they offer about the same light as the 60W incandescent bulbs I replace. I'd be interested in more discussion on this matter. Perhaps there are different kinds of CFLs or non-incandescents?

Also, I'd be curious to know if there is really much energy savings in the winter months. Incandescents lose a lot of their energy through heat, but heat is a welcomed addition to the home when it's freezing outside. Of course, in summer, the opposite is true.

 

[MrPickins]

My question is, what happens to all the mercury in the CFL's as people dispose of the improperly?

Instead of making nanny laws, governments should be building more nuclear reactors (preferably pebble-bed).

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: So
All the hate for incandescents...but they provide very effective resistive heaters in the winter.

iirc, resistive electric heat is about the most inefficient heating system you can devise. even if it's 100% at your house (which it's not) it's limited by the power plant and transmission wire loss. so, like 33%.


i'm thinking ground-source heat pump ftw.

Originally posted by: Skotty

I'm surprised to hear people saying that their same watt CFLs are brighter than incandescent. I've found the opposite to be true. I've been installing 100W-equivalent CFLs because I think they offer about the same light as the 60W incandescent bulbs I replace. I'd be interested in more discussion on this matter. Perhaps there are different kinds of CFLs or non-incandescents?

Also, I'd be curious to know if there is really much energy savings in the winter months. Incandescents lose a lot of their energy through heat, but heat is a welcomed addition to the home when it's freezing outside. Of course, in summer, the opposite is true.

are you buying crappy CFLs? the ones i've been installing have been great. yes, they are dimmer to start, but about 30 seconds later they're at least as bright as the incandescents i replaced. the color and quality of the light is the same as incandescents. i'll bet that if you walked into the room after the warm up period you wouldn't know the difference. i use GE soft white, which gives the same light as GE soft white incandescents.

 

[imported_Imp]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Imp
Seriously, do you trust market forces and capitalism to actually work properly in a timely manner?

seems like wally world is making a big push of these things. aus is taking 3 years to do this. wally world might be faster at it. other retailers will follow suit if wally world is successful.

Not only that but Wal-Mart will drive the prices down because of increased supply (they'll be demanding it) and increased competition.

Yes, they're driving down prices. Lower price equals higher demand meaning more adopters, but how long until you get the same effect of a total ban? There will be a LOT of people like those in this thread who just won't put their incandescents away no matter the price. And honestly, I don't see how it's so hard to pay a buck or two (probably less) for a bulb that saves energy and lasts longer. Some people are shelling out $600 every few months for a new 8800 or 24" LCD, but you won't pay for a light bulb. Skip that one case of bear (edit: ya, that's right, minature furry bears, 24 a case...beer) and you can redo your house. For the many regular Joes, as long as there's incand. $0.01 cheaper, they'll buy them.

Also, an interesting fact from the paper this morning talking about this ban. About 20% of the world's energy is used for lighting.

 

[Number1]

Ontario is also looking into this. Check this Globe & Mail article

Quote: "By Premier Dalton McGuinty's estimate, replacing every old-fashioned bulb with an energy-efficient one would allow the province to shut down one coal-fired power plant."

"California, which is widely considered to be on the leading edge of energy policy in North America, is debating a similar ban."

This idea is gaining momentum. I hope they implement it.

 

[Raiden256]

That's a lot of mercury. Do they have a plan for recycling the bulbs?

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: mrjminer
Whoever supports banning lightbulbs, how about responding to this one (from the article):

the vast bulk of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions come from industry, such as coal-fired power stations.

So, presuming that this same principal is applicable to every location where there would be 'industry,' rather, as implied by the article, factories running off fossil fuels--further, anything that runs off fossil fuels--how is banning light bulbs more logical or worthy of time than banning, for example, gasoline and converting to electric cars?

I'd say I'm moderately liberal, but some people just like to ignore logic, which, sadly, is a trait of a majority of the populace.

Allow me to explain the logic. First - coal powered power stations...create electricity...for...light bulbs? Less power draw = less power needed = less coal burned = less pollution.

Secondly - your analogy is terrible. Electric cars are not the equivalent of gasoline cars at this point. They're horribly more expensive, and have dozens of drawbacks. They can't be refilled easily, and the infrastructure to support them does not exist. They don't come close to paying for their extra cost as well.

But a CFL lightbulb is nearly exactly the same as a incandescent aside from a short warmup time. People lose nearly nothing by switching to them.

That being said, it's going a bit too far to ban them. As has been mentioned, they should be taxed. And put that tax towards cleaning up for the environment. If you want to be selfish, then you'll have to pay for the priviledge.