California may ban conventional lightbulbs by 2012 | Reuters.com
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California lawmaker wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs as part of California’s groundbreaking initiatives to reduce energy use and greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.The “How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act” would ban incandescent lightbulbs by 2012 in favor of energy-saving compact fluorescent lightbulbs.
“Incandescent lightbulbs were first developed almost 125 years ago, and since that time they have undergone no major modifications,” California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine said on Tuesday.
“Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about 5 percent of the energy they receive into light.”
Levine is expected to introduce the legislation this week, his office said.
Statist shitheel Levine is - wait for it - a Democrat.
Surprised?
I changed all my bulbs to cfls some time ago, to save money. Nonetheless….that was my voluntary decision. If this passes, I’ll have to switch back to bootleg incandescents.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
I bought some of those CFL bulbs - two weeks later we had a power surge. Poof - money wasted. Ask yourself if you want to file and catalog hardware store receipts or proofs of purchase. Bottom line - sometimes the incandescents (too lazy to check spelling) are cheaper in the long run.
But I’m sure every DP reader can figure that out themselves.
wch, bet they were not GE.
I have a mixture, I still prefer reading with the 300 watt incandescent, mounted in an antique floor lamp aimed at the ceiling. I like the diffuse lighting it provides oriented this way. I may spring for an LED bulb that will never pay for itself (about $80. for now).
As a Californian, I take exception to that headline. There are no more lunatics here than any other state, proportional to the population. It’s just that here, they get elected to office where they can do real damage. (I’m STILL trying to figure out how Boxer keeps getting elected.)
Bill and Lorenzo, let me put your mind at ease (or not) that not all the lunatics are in California.
From KHOU
Emphasis mine on the R.
Coffee, that’s incredible. As I just said in a different context:
I’m starting to think that my only long-term hope for the Republicans is that they have a post-Watergate-scale debacle in 2008. Even that might not get their attention.
I believe CFL bulbs contain small amounts of mercury.
The CFL bulbs will eventually burn out or in wch case - power surge. Disposal of dead CFL bulbs is a bit problematic. They can’t go into a landfill. One will have to transport them to the local hazardous waste facility.
I saw this on Drudge last night. I’ve been casting about for an opportunity for an initiative statute, and this just might do it. What do you think of this?
1. The people of the State of California shall enjoy the freedom to purchase whatever type of light bulb they please. All laws and regulations to any contrary effect are hereby repealed.
2. The Legislature of the State of California is hereby admonished to stop being silly.
3. The Legislature of the State of California is hereby adjourned, and shall not meet again until its successors shall take up their offices following the next general election.
This is too good to be true. Someone please quick write Assemblyman Levine a letter:
Dear sir:
I applaud your brave and forward-thinking initiative on incandescent light bulbs. May I suggest a further contribution California legislators can make to improve the global environment — one that will also require fortitude and vision?
Ban the consumption of beans.
Beans create methane; methane is a significant contributor to global warming. Californians (and their “undocumented guests”), I believe, lead the nation in the consumption of beans. Eliminating this source of pollution should be an obvious and immediate priority.
I look forward to your response and your support. Beans=Death.
Save the planet!
Yours sincerely,
etc.
I believe CFL bulbs contain small amounts of mercury.
That they do.
Disposal of dead CFL bulbs is a bit problematic. They can’t go into a landfill. One will have to transport them to the local hazardous waste facility.
Well. I’ve seen many a dumpster with a bunch of broken remnants of fluorescent tubes in them….
Never gonna happen. Is Lloyd Levine married? If he is, I betcha he didn’t check with his better half to see what she thought about the idea of having fluorescent lighting everywhere, even in your own home. Women are big on “soft light” you know, because they think it makes them look better.
Another voice of reason from the void.
Gary, they due make soft white CFLs. Also sunlight bulbs which are definitely whiter and brighter than the standard CFL. Matter of fact they now have them for refrigerators and stoves.
I live in a very old house and it’s full of antique fixtures and lamps, and those light bulbs look awful. I don’t mind putting the new light bulbs in fixtures where they don’t show, but to be forced to use them is ridiculous. What’s next a ban against spanking my light bulb?
Exactly, tonia. A matter of taste, not of law.
What California lawmakers never seem to grasp is that their laws don’t apply to the three neighboring states, Mexico or the internet. Californians are free to give the production of their state legislators the same respect and deference we all give to speed limit signs.
We all should know by now that if they really want to do away with incandescent bulbs, just tax the living hell out of them to the point that they become more expensive that CFL bulbs at the time of purchase. This will create additional funding for the state, rather than additional debt caused by enforcing yet another useless ban.