What do you think about the ban on light bulbs

[bicker]

Note that municipal water pressure generally has no impact on the efficacy of a toilet flush. The water that is used to effect the flush is generally stored in the tank before the flush, and only that water, and the pressure that it can create, though the design and condition of the toilet itself, is used to clear the bowl.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I'm a long time CFL user that thinks the law is stupid.

There is nothing inherently wrong or harmful about incandescent light bulbs. The problem is that they use more electricity and the production of electricity has negative externalities (bad side effects not paid for by the consumer of the electricity) such as adding CO2 to the atmosphere (burning of fossil fuels), adding mercury and sulfur to the atmosphere (burning coal), creation of radioactive waste (nuclear), changing ecosystems (hydro), enriching troublesome nations (foreign oil), and other bad things.

Given that, it seems like requiring people to use lightbulbs that consume less energy is a good thing. The problem with these centrally planned notions of how people should live their lives is contrary to what scientists (in this case economists) tell us is efficient.

First, this type of regulation is very subject to political influence. The solutions central planners choose are often not really in our best interest. They are in the best interest of lobbyists and pressure groups whose interests may not be aligned with the general public.

Second, even if the controls were laid down by benevolent dictators, they wouldn't work very well. The problem is that they don't take into account the variety of wants and desires of people and they don't keep up with changes in those wants and desires.

The ideal solution would be a way in which people that use electricity pay society for the environmental damage that they do in proportion to how much damage they do. With this approach, we wouldn't be singling out incandescent light bulb users. Instead, everyone that uses electricity would be encouraged to conserve to the extent that it makes sense and in the ways that best suit them. Some people would switch to CFLs. Some people would cut back on air conditioning, TV watching, or other electrical uses. Some people would just pay more money to offset the harm that they are doing. The main point is that we wouldn't have to rely on people to promulgate a bunch of invasive rules on what light bulbs we use, how our TVs work, etc. We would all be free to choose how we want to balance conservation against paying extra for the right to pollute.

Sounds like an energy tax in disguise and your tired of paying more taxes, right? Well, it's an energy tax. There is no need to disguise it. However, rather than use it to raise taxes, we could offset the new energy taxes by lowering existing taxes like the payroll tax. Adding a tax to discourage something harmful like mercury emissions and cutting a tax that discourages something good like payroll taxes seems like a good thing to me. Some people have even proposed that we just total up the money raised by a tax on emissions and send it back to people at a flat rate per person. In this way, it's revenue neutral to the government and its citizens but it still apportions costs to people generating negative externalities. All we need to do is decide what the appropriate cost of those externalities is and how to collect the tax. To me, that seems a lot less intrusive and a lot more efficient than having a group of legislatures and lobbyist try to micromanage our energy usage.

I'm an environmentalist. I'd love for everybody to become more environmentally conscious. On the other hand, I'm not fond of being told what I can do and how I can do it. Rather than have some lobbyists and bureaucrats dictate what I can and cannot do, I'd rather have them just align the costs of energy use with the harm caused in its production and let me decide how to live.

I worry about the world I will leave to my children. I want to give them a healthy environment. I also want to give them freedom and a healthy economy.

 

[Muushka]

I switched to CFL and LED several years ago. I did it to save money. It should be a personal choice, not a mandate.

What will be next? Oh, I know, it is for the good of the country. What ever it is will be good for the country.

 

[CowboyCO]

I hate laws like this because it infringes upon my freedom to choose what I want to use. It follows the reasoning that "if the citizens don't want to do what's "right", we'll make them do it by outlawing it.

I have to admit, though - I LIKE COAL. It is plentiful, cheap and it is HERE. The state of Wyoming has enough coal to provide all the energy needed to run this country for the next 100 years. You can make gasoline from coal. You can put scrubbers on power plants to further reduce emissions.

I support the American Coal industry. Even Solar and wind power isn't "clean energy" Solar panel manufacturing produces toxic silicon tetrachloride. Experts estimate that just California's commercial solar panel industry will create 1.5 BILLION lbs of panel waste. Wind turbines create more CO2 in the manufacturing than they save in their use.

It's all touchy-feely goody-goody clean energy. Nothing is clean. So go with what's cheap and domestic - COAL.

 

[bicker]

The point of the regulation is that it wastes less energy, so the limited amount of coal, for example, that we have left, will last longer.

 

[golfgal]

I have this problem here at the lake since my Dson-in-law installed my new toilet last year.. I have a gravity-fed well - without a lot of pressure - and the new toilet definitely takes at least "two flushes"..

That can be problematic here because on occasion, my well has gone dry in the past..

One of these low-water-use toilets in my DD's house often requires two flushes as well.. Their water is supplied by the town - and has terrific pressure..

This may or may not help your situation but we have the low flush toilets and the previous owner rigged up plastic milk jugs in the tank so it only uses a small amount of water to flush but it increases the water pressure tremendously. Basically the milk jug goes around the flapper so the water that gets flushed is what is in the milk jug. I don't know how it works, only that it does and we never have to double flush.

 

[Muushka]

I hate laws like this because it infringes upon my freedom to choose what I want to use. It follows the reasoning that "if the citizens don't want to do what's "right", we'll make them do it by outlawing it.

I have to admit, though - I LIKE COAL. It is plentiful, cheap and it is HERE. The state of Wyoming has enough coal to provide all the energy needed to run this country for the next 100 years. You can make gasoline from coal. You can put scrubbers on power plants to further reduce emissions.

I support the American Coal industry. Even Solar and wind power isn't "clean energy" Solar panel manufacturing produces toxic silicon tetrachloride. Experts estimate that just California's commercial solar panel industry will create 1.5 BILLION lbs of panel waste. Wind turbines create more CO2 in the manufacturing than they save in their use.

It's all touchy-feely goody-goody clean energy. Nothing is clean. So go with what's cheap and domestic - COAL.

I like your style CowboyCO .

 

[Evi]

I'm a heavy electronics user and very conscious of our carbon footprint. switching to cfls and now we've switched a few to leds even our Christmas lights to me was a no brainier. I know many people feel the light is different but I think it depends on the quality of the bulbs you buy as well as there are things you can do to soften up the light. Like painting the inside of a lampshade pale pink, changing wall color etc. Though some people see this as an inconvenience I think we all need to remember that if we want to continue to live this lifestyle were we have lights on all the time and we want to continue to use all this energy we have to see how to conserve it. I think people can buy regular bulbs and stock pile them but honestly your not doing yourself a favor. I'd encourage you at looking at alternative lighting from a fresh standpoint and an open mind. I know I let in alot more sunlight in the day time and love all the solar lighting we have outside the house. Its guilt free lighting.

Like personally I use rechargeable batteries I like not having to run to the store for batteries and knowing that when they no longer charge I can recycle them. Find convenience in the things you find inconvenient and you'll learn to love them.

 

[mr.alec]

I think the ban is 110% useless and meaningless.
Just big brother trying to run my life.
I actually DID buy the new kind just to give it a go.
Now i went back to the old kind and leave a light on just to burn some energy!

 

[bicker]

I hope you were kidding, about everything you said, but especially about that last part. However, that attitude that you were hopefully mocking is the kind of attitude is especially troubling, placing one's own personal preference so high that they have it trump actual, serious societal issues. Not implying that you would take this perspective, but it is just like saying that you're only going to hire white folks because you think EO laws are "110% useless and meaningless" and "Just big brother trying to run my life". And in the end, equally as objectionable.

Despite the penchant so many people have to insisting on living their lives in total isolation from how their choices impact others, the reality is that we do live in community with each other, and the only reasonable perspectives are those that factor that in, and integrate into one's own actions a respect for the collective decisions of society. It is indefensible to treat one's personal preferences as if they were pillars of religious belief or otherwise some type of moral imperative that trumps the law.

 

[mr.alec]

I hope you were kidding, about everything you said, but especially about that last part. However, that attitude that you were hopefully mocking is the kind of attitude is especially troubling, placing one's own personal preference so high that they have it trump actual, serious societal issues. Not implying that you would take this perspective, but it is just like saying that you're only going to hire white folks because you think EO laws are "110% useless and meaningless" and "Just big brother trying to run my life". And in the end, equally as objectionable.

Despite the penchant so many people have to insisting on living their lives in total isolation from how their choices impact others, the reality is that we do live in community with each other, and the only reasonable perspectives are those that factor that in, and integrate into one's own actions a respect for the collective decisions of society. It is indefensible to treat one's personal preferences as if they were pillars of religious belief or otherwise some type of moral imperative that trumps the law.

No, i was 110% serious. This whole "green movement"
is nothing more than a back door to attack capitalism.
So, i am going to get my son from preschool in our minivan that only gets 22 mpg in the city at best and i WILL be setting the A/C on about 69 and leaving a few lights on.
You can bet on that. We have earned that right as Americans to live our lives how we want. And, i will.

 

[bicker]

No, i was 110% serious. This whole "green movement" is nothing more than a back door to attack capitalism.

You're relatively new to posting here, so ask around: I'm Joe Capitalist here on the Community Board. What you're advocating isn't capitalism, but rather anarchy, i.e., doing whatever you want.

Beyond that, the "green movement" may be one of the very few things that fosters capitalism in this country for the foreseeable future.

We have earned that right as Americans to live our lives how we want. And, i will.

Most people haven't done anything to "earn" any of the rights they actually have, much less the made-up "rights" that you're claiming. The reality is that, by choosing to live in this country, you are voluntarily agreeing to abide by its laws, and if those laws say no more standard sized incandescent bulbs then you have no right to standard sized incandescent bulbs.

 

[FireDancer]

I use CFLs because I like the full spectrum lighting not because of my carbon footprint. When they burn out, they go right on into the garbage can with the rest of the trash. The only thing I really care about when it comes to energy consumption is the cost. I don't drive a car that gets 30mpg because I care at all about my carbon footprint, I just don't want to pay for the gas it takes to only get 15mpg.

Personally, if someone wants to turn their heat on in summer with the windows open and every light on I could not care less as long as they were willing to pay the bill for their consumption. I will not tell anyone else how to live their life or that they should be more "green". I really don't care one iota about the entire green movement because most of the good things involved in the movement have been politicized at this point anyway.

 

[Muushka]

I find that Hollywood movie stars in their 20,000+ square foot mansions and transporting themselves in their own private jets at the same time driving in public in a Prius, a bit disingenuous. And I will not even attempt to use a certain past vice president's lavish lifestyle while telling everyone that we must go green...or else! Oh, and my personal favorite, that huge "carbon footprint" (whatever that is or supposed to be) that was left for the energy summit where our beloved politicians flew to Europe to attend. Yeah. Love it.

I choose to use CFL light bulbs in my house and LED on my tree. I conserve water as much as I can, even saving the water that is waiting to turn hot and putting it in the washing machine. We both drive small, economical cars, installed programmable thermostat, paid the extra $$ to get the energy savings for a more efficient heating/AC, put a sort of whole house fan in (second floor very powerful fan that sucks the hot air out of the house) to conserve in the summer and a very efficient gas insert in my fireplace for winter savings, turn lights off in rooms that are not being used. You get the point. I do all of this to save MY MONEY. Certainly not to please 'the green movement'.

But I refuse to tell anyone else to do what I do. How people choose to live is not my business. Which is why it irritates me so much when public figures, who do not conserve, tell us that we have to. I do it to save money. My choice.

Beyond that, the "green movement" may be one of the very few things that fosters capitalism in this country for the foreseeable future.

Please tell me you are not referring to cap and trade.

 

[FireDancer]

I find that Hollywood movie stars in their 20,000+ square foot mansions and transporting themselves in their own private jets at the same time driving in public in a Prius, a bit disingenuous. And I will not even attempt to use a certain past vice president's lavish lifestyle while telling everyone that we must go green...or else! Oh, and my personal favorite, that huge "carbon footprint" (whatever that is or supposed to be) that was left for the energy summit where our beloved politicians flew to Europe to attend. Yeah. Love it.

I choose to use CFL light bulbs in my house and LED on my tree. I conserve water as much as I can, even saving the water that is waiting to turn hot and putting it in the washing machine. We both drive small, economical cars, installed programmable thermostat, paid the extra $$ to get the energy savings for a more efficient heating/AC, put a sort of whole house fan in (second floor very powerful fan that sucks the hot air out of the house) to conserve in the summer and a very efficient gas insert in my fireplace for winter savings, turn lights off in rooms that are not being used. You get the point. I do all of this to save MY MONEY. Certainly not to please 'the green movement'.

But I refuse to tell anyone else to do what I do. How people choose to live is not my business. Which is why it irritates me so much when public figures, who do not conserve, tell us that we have to. I do it to save money. My choice.

I think it was Richard Jeni who use to have a bit that went something like:

"I love the people who leave their 20,000 sqft mansion's AC on and pool heater going while they jump in their limo which takes them to their private jets which they then fly across the world all alone in to stay in a lavish hotel only to tell me that I waste too much energy and should be ashamed of myself"

 

[mr.alec]

You're relatively new to posting here, so ask around: I'm Joe Capitalist here on the Community Board. What you're advocating isn't capitalism, but rather anarchy, i.e., doing whatever you want.

Beyond that, the "green movement" may be one of the very few things that fosters capitalism in this country for the foreseeable future.

Most people haven't done anything to "earn" any of the rights they actually have, much less the made-up "rights" that you're claiming. The reality is that, by choosing to live in this country, you are voluntarily agreeing to abide by its laws, and if those laws say no more standard sized incandescent bulbs then you have no right to standard sized incandescent bulbs.

oy vey

 

[Toad_Passenger]

Wow, you cant get anymore lib can you?
You make no sense at all....nothing to see here..time to move on.

bicker is the Plato of these boards. Agree with him, or not, but his posts are usually some of the best around. Plenty to see IMO.

And, I have disagreed with him countless times.

 

[Colleen27]

I really don't care one iota about the entire green movement because most of the good things involved in the movement have been politicized at this point anyway.

Why does that matter? Is a good idea really diminished because people argue over it or because groups you disagree with on other matters support it? To me, a good idea is a good idea and it remains a good idea even though I may not like some of the people who espouse it.

 

[FireDancer]

Why does that matter? Is a good idea really diminished because people argue over it or because groups you disagree with on other matters support it? To me, a good idea is a good idea and it remains a good idea even though I may not like some of the people who espouse it.

It matters to me when it becomes a money grab that makes the cost no longer worth the benefit to me. I also don't like choice legislated out. The government shouldn't be using tax to change behavior, not with things like the soda tax and not with energy taxes.

 

[Muushka]

Ah, here is the capitalism that the green movement will bring:


Tony Blair to earn millions as climate change adviser

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Tony Blair is set to earn millions of pounds advising an American businessman on how to make money from tackling climate change.
The former prime minister will be paid at least £700,000 a year to act as a “strategic adviser” to Khosla Ventures, a venture capitalist firm founded by Indian billionaire Vinod Khosla.

The Californian company bankrolls businesses hoping to profit from technology that helps reduce global warming and carbon emissions.

Mr Blair secured the job thanks to his “influence” and high level international contacts, whom he will be expected to lean on to open doors.

He has told friends he needs £5 million a year to fund his lifestyle.

Here is the article http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...to-earn-millions-as-climate-change-adviser.do


Yup, there's that capitalism. I was wrong.