Tuesday, September 21, 2010

A ray of hope for incandescents

A few brave congress persons have introduced a bill to repeal the incandescent light bulb ban. Powerline:

Representatives Joe Barton, Michael Burgess, and Marsha Blackburn have just introduced the Better Use of Light Bulbs Act (or BULB). The legislation would repeal the de facto ban on the incandescent light bulb contained in Subtitle B of Title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
It's H.R. 6144, for those who care about that sort of thing.

There is some vaguely scientific sounding noise being made in certain quarters about health hazards of compact fluorescent bulbs. For some reason that I don't understand, most of it seems to be in the form of videos rather than articles. A number of these are assembled for your viewing pleasure at CFL Impact.

I find it offensive that the ban has no justification other than that incandescents are inefficient. That's a matter of one's perspective. A CFL is terribly inefficient, in fact downright ineffective, in an Easy-Bake oven. And since when has mere inefficiency been a reason for legislation to outlaw anything? If something is inefficient enough, people will stop buying it. Non-radial tires have just about disappeared, without ever being banned. For instance. Even though radials are more expensive. The better product naturally supplants the worse. Yet bias-ply tires are still available, if you want them.

Now that there have been two failed attempts to repeal the 1099 madness in the health care bill, I do not have much hope for this first attempt to repeal another piece of lunacy. But hope springs eternal, I suppose. Hope for a change in direction. Yes, I'll have a cup of tea, thanks.

Added: Peg at "what if?" appreciates her incandescents.


MickeyWhite said...

Marsha Blackburn Voted FOR:
Omnibus Appropriations, Special Education, Global AIDS Initiative, Job Training, Unemployment Benefits, Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations, Agriculture Appropriations, FY2004 Foreign Operations Appropriations, U.S.-Singapore Trade, U.S.-Chile Trade, Supplemental Spending for Iraq & Afghanistan, Flood Insurance Reauthorization , Prescription Drug Benefit, Child Nutrition Programs, Surface Transportation, Job Training and Worker Services, Agriculture Appropriations, Foreign Aid, Debt Limit Increase, Fiscal 2005 Omnibus Appropriations, Vocational/Technical Training, Supplemental Appropriations, UN “Reforms.” Patriot Act Reauthorization, CAFTA, Katrina Hurricane-relief Appropriations, Head Start Funding, Line-item Rescission, Oman Trade Agreement, Military Tribunals, Electronic Surveillance, Head Start Funding, COPS Funding, Funding the REAL ID Act (National ID), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, Thought Crimes “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, Peru Free Trade Agreement, Economic Stimulus, Farm Bill (Veto Override), Warrantless Searches, Employee Verification Program, Body Imaging Screening, Patriot Act extention.

Marsha Blackburn Voted AGAINST:
Ban on UN Contributions, eliminate Millennium Challenge Account, WTO Withdrawal, UN Dues Decrease, Defunding the NAIS, Iran Military Operations defunding Iraq Troop Withdrawal, congress authorization of Iran Military Operations, Withdrawing U.S. Soldiers from Afghanistan.

Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
See her unconstitutional votes at :

Publius said...

This Obamanation of an administration wants to tear down by fiat what it cannot undermine through legislation in the way of personal freedoms, rights and responsibilities.
It isn't about light bulbs; it isn't about efficiency; it isn't even about "saving the planet;" Not content with having won the political right to move the nation further to the left, this gang would dismantle the constitutional protections given even the smallest minorities -- whether Tea Partyists, anarchists or Libertarians. All who oppose the notion that the smartasses in Washington know what we need and should want better than the marketplace are targeted by this tyrannical and (Supremes, are you watching?) illegal executive order.

Lynn said...

Not to mention lava lamps.

I have switched to CFLs in most of our fixtures just because I don't have to change them as often but I have one that requires clear incandescents. It simply won't look right with even decorative CFLs. I understand there's an exception for appliance bulbs so I'm thinking that when the time comes I'll use those.

(By the way, if CFLs are more efficient why hasn't my electric bill gone down since I started using them?)

Even if they are better though Congress has no right to tell us what kind of light bulbs we can use but, although everyone hates it, I don't see this ever being a big enough issue to make it to the Supreme Court where it could be declared unconstitutional.

Hector Owen said...

Lava lamps, yes! Are they to be consigned to the dustbin of history?