Even though I believe that solid-state lighting (primarily LEDs, but also electroluminescent technology of other flavors) is the way of the future, I don’t think outright legislation is the way to go for adoption of energy-efficient light sources. I’d much rather see tax credits to manufacturers to reduce the retail price point or other measures and incentives that would inspire marketplace action.
The 490 million citizens of the 27 member states will be expected to switch to energy-efficient bulbs after a summit of EU leaders yesterday told the European Commission to “rapidly submit proposals” to that effect.
Environmentalists said the change would save the public up to £5.4 billion a year in fuel bills and also about 20 million tonnes of carbon emissions every year.
The energy that would be saved in the UK is equivalent to one medium-sized power station.
The biggest problem is that this too-early push means that Chinese made compact flourescent lamps will become the stopgap, and they still have fabrication and materials issues. We should wait and let next-generation SSL push out incandescent lamps in a natural progression. We didn’t need to legislate the LP or videocassette away either.
I don’t think outright legislation is the way to go for adoption of energy-efficient light sources
I disagree. Without legislation, there will always be hold outs who will flat out refuse to modernize. The If it ain’t broke, don’t fix mentality. How many car companies would still be making cars then ran on leaded gas if it wasn’t legislated. You know GM would.
I would have to agree with John.
I bet wally world could get CFLs into the home faster than the E.U A three year plan they say? When Walmart drops the price point of CFLs they could get the job done in a year. We will still have standard bulbs as we should, given the many uses they have. Try a CFL in a oven, under water, or in a home of people with certain types of vision problems. In the case of the E.U. I bet they would have something stupid were you would need a permit to buy a normal lightbulb for those applications. If you want to save money by reducing the use of high power light bulbs. Push to have weed legalized. Those guys who grow it indoors due to fear of the nasty government, use anywhere from 400 to 30,000 watts of power 12 hours a day.
I would have to agree with John.
I bet wally world could get CFLs into the home faster than the E.U. A three year plan they say? When Walmart drops the price point of CFLs they could get the job done in a year. We will still have standard bulbs as we should, given the many uses they have. Try a CFL in a oven, under water, or in a home for people with certain types of vision problems. In the case of the E.U. I bet they would have something stupid were you would need a permit to buy a normal lightbulb for those applications.
If you want to save money by reducing the use of high power light bulbs. One way to do it would to push for gasp, smaller government. Push to have weed legalized. Those guys who grow it indoors due to fear of the nasty government, use anywhere from 400 to 30,000 watts of power 12 to 24 hours a day. Weed is also the number one cash crop, so we are looking at a huge power savings here. Growing it under the sun makes for a better product, and would also save ass loads of those Co2 emissions you greeners always yap about.
#1
Fully agree with you, gquaglia.
I think this is a good first step. The next step is to cut the dependency of coal power. There’s currently a heated discussion between the European nations on what will replace it. The top choices are nuclear power (backed by France) and wind power (backed by Germany and some other countries). It’s good that it’s on the political agenda.
It makes you wonder who’s lobbying for that kind of law.
Never trust free-market capitalism to do the right thing. Greed wins out over the greater public interest every time. Legislation and regulation is the only way to insure public policy for the greater good is enacted.
Yep, I’m all for it. (coal burning eradication, that is).
The problem is that every country’s energy policy still need some reliable, non weather dependent, energy source.
My country has invested in hydroelectric power, up until now. But ecologic habitat preservation has limited future growth. Also, when we have a dry winter, there’s no water reserves to produce power available.
Wind power generation has grown recently, but a lot of people is against it because of aesthetic reasons. Nevertheless Wind power is not constant, and for the power needs of the modern world, we will put up a lot of those propellers…
There will be a coastal lab building a prototype of a Wave power generator. It makes sense on a Country with more coast than terrestrial borders, like mine, but early attempts have shown that the Sea is no candy to deal with. Some rough winters and the early prototype generators were ripped to shreds…
Photo voltaic cells are too expensive and do not deliver huge amounts of energy, still if every house could generate some and feed into the grid…after all we have the longest sunlight exposition in Europe…
So, finally, I guess that Nuclear power will have to come into scene eventually. Just that’s such an expensive investment. And dangerous too.
So will they come into your house and remove all of your interior lights and haul you off to jail? What about the little bulbs inside your appiances? Your oven light? the light inside your refrig? How about the headlights in your car? I mean think how much gas we would save if we switched to alternative lighting systems in our cars! Better yet, don’t allow people to drive at night! Want to save energy? “OUTHOUSES!”
you don’t have to flush!!!! Led flashlights for everyone! (the kind you crank!!) or better yet candles! and solar ovens!
I look forward to the future! wow!
When someone tells me to trust government planning and distrust the market, I am very suspicious.
Beyond suspicious, I am virtually assured that whatever the position they are supporting in opposition to the marketplace is wrong.
The problem with banning incandescent light bulbs is two fold:
1. What I am going to use to keep my pipes from freezing?
2. What I am going to use for incubating eggs?
The simple fact is that incandescent light bulbs are great for both of these purposes and the more modern light bulbs simply don’t give off enough heat!
-Ben.
I disagree with john… this is not like the cassette or vcr, it is about ecological issues, and thus you cannot just wait until the market phases out the technology. Still the deadline might be too soon, but at least I think it is a step in the right direction.
Hey folks..pay attention to the poster… it’s not me. Although I do agree with it completely. But still….
LEARN HOW TO READ A BLOG..
Tutorial is here
#9 Bill, I rest my case. You are the type of person I was talking about in my post.
#1, #4 and #6,
“Without legislation, there will always be hold outs who will flat out refuse to modernize.”
“Never trust free-market capitalism to do the right thing. Greed wins out over the greater public interest every time. Legislation and regulation is the only way to insure public policy for the greater good is enacted.”
Why stop at light bulbs? Here are a few more laws we should pass for “the greater good”
1. Only only child per household. More people consume more resources and generate more pollution.
2. Only one automobile per household.
3. Hard limits on energy usage per household. Once these limits are reached for the month, energy is cut off to that household until the beginning of the next month.
4. Households earning less than the median income should be co-housed with similar income families to save on resources.
I am sure there are many more you guys could come up with.
So where do we draw the line between legislation and totalitarianism?
#14
What post #1 say isn’t that the Government should tell you how to use your lamps, but what lamps should be available to you. Do you see the difference?
Steve, I think you’re going a bit far there by your fourth point and not far enough on point 1.
If we’re really trying to solve the problems of humanity, start with zero children. The problems will end in a single generation.
More seriously though, the ban on lightbulbs makes more sense that Steve is making it sound like. You don’t have to ban use, just ban new incandescents. As they burn out, they’ll be replaced with fluorescents. So no to post #8, no one needs to come to your house to enforce anything.
Just make sure in this legislation though, and even without this legislation, that we do legislate proper disposal of the CFLs since they have mercury in them and are thus toxic waste when dead.
Alix says: I’d much rather see tax credits to manufacturers to reduce the retail price point or other measures and incentives that would inspire marketplace action.
Leaving aside that tax credits are a form of legislation, that approach would nudge the market in the right direction without applying the heavy hand of bureaucratic oversight or however else such laws would be enforced. Makes total sense to me.
#2 – Good point about hidden grow-lite operations, but there are more compelling reasons to drop the idiotic and authoritarian approach now in place regarding grass. Incidentally, there are LED underwater flashlights with 5 to 10 hour battery run times, so I don’t see why underwater lighting should be a problem. Easier, actually, since LEDs run cool. See http://tinyurl.com/324whu for example.
CFL’s are not what they’re cracked up to be in my experience. I’ve installed them throught the house (I currently have about two dozen in use throughout the house) and here is my experience:
First, their reliability is nowhere near what’s advertised. Many actually failed in short order. (I replaced at least eight in the first year.) More than one failed with the emission of smoke or a strong burning odor. The long warranty that came with the units I bought is next to useless. By the time you send a unit back you have spent enough to purchase a new one.
Second, the majority of them omit excessive radio frequency interference. A lamp in the bedroom is enough to make the AM clock radio useless on all but the strongest stations.
As a radio amateur, I find there are places where incandescent bulbs are needed to eliminate RF noise that otherwise would seriously limit communications.
Third, light output seems to vary between units with the same rating. They also don’t put out full brightness when initially turned on after being off for an extended period, which is a minor problem compared to the first two issues.
The larger issue is that our government should not be so busy demanding how we live our lives. They sould provide a better and more economical choice and let people choose. People are smart enough to make a good choice and have the option to switch to alternatives when they deem it beneficial for their particular situation.
C.
I’m all for energy-efficient lighting. And as much as I can I try to use energy efficient lighting. However, I wonder if the gains are realy as much as we make them out to be:
Yes it means less electricity is used to produce light
But has anyone compared the energy cost differences to manufacture them? is it about the same more, less?
In regards to compact-fluorescents when what percentage of people are going to dump them in the trash than dispose of them properly…
I just feel we are looking at one slice of the picture and we need to be looking at all of them to ensure the overall picture is betetr and not just some better and some worse or….
CF’s do create a HUGE amount of RF interference, they also push some of this back into your power lines. Don’t even try to use them with off the shelf home automation equipment. i.e. x10, UPB, Insteon, etc. Z-wave seems to be ok.
From personal experience, you will be sorely disappointed.
BTW> LED’s also have issues with quality, lifespan and output. Especially since most on the market now seem to be made only in low quality chinese factories (as opposed to high quality chinese factories). There are some very promising companies out there (www.permlight.com) but very expensive at this point in the game.
I will gladly remove every incandescent I own as soon as a suitable replacement is found, I have approx 20cf’s in use around my house, and many more pure fluorescent fixtures, but I cannot replace ALL of the incandescents just yet. Especially those in chandeliers and very decorative fixtures.
You are right about AM band radios picking up some noise from the CFLs. I just ran a test and it seems to be true. Try it with the lights off, then with a normal lightbulb, then the CFL. Repeated it about 3 times. Each time with the CFL I would hear a buzzsaw sound on the band when turned on. Which would have to be due to the ballast inside the CFL’s housing. I bet LED lights would not produce the same problem. The CFLs I have are around 5 years old. Bought them at SAM’s club.
I agree with the quality of CFLs. I bought several that were to last five years. Only one is still working in less then three years. They were expensive to purchase and haven’t saved me anything.
I do lean towards incentives to encourage non incandescent use. It should include reliability concerns too.
I’ve been using CFLs for at least 5 years, and haven’t had one fail yet.
Tax credits just make for more complicated tax laws, benefiting lawyers and lobbyists. The market should make the switch on its own eventually, particularly since there are cost savings, but people also don’t like paying more upfront for something that is hard to observe the savings (far more is involved in my electric bill than just lighting, and it fluctuates with the seasons). Carbon taxes are probably not far away.
I’ve been using CFL’s for 6-7 years throughout my house… over 40 of them. I also have a box of burned out CFL’s . Some only lasted 2 years but were used and turned on and off a lot. Calculating initial cost plus energy savings, I saved $10 on the worst and over $100 on the best of those that are dead. They don’t have consistent quality, that’s for sure.
From what I understand, the light spectrum from fluorescents is not great. Too bad we can’t have cheap full-spectrum CF lights, like the type used to treat seasonal affective disorder.
My father used to refuse to turn on his car lights until it was pitch black on the grounds that he was saving petrol (gas). I never could persuade him that the tiny saving would be more than wiped out by the fine if the cops ever caught him – which they never did.
I’d switch to LED lights at home right now if: 1. They were the same price as incandescent bulbs, and 2. I could find them – I’ve yet to see any in my local supermarket.
#8: Nobody will be dragged off to jail in the EU for continuing to use incandescent bulbs – the proposed ban is on the sale of said bulbs. We will be allowed to use our old ones until they burn out.
I am one of those visually handicapped people who can see fluorescents flicker. Some LEDs are much better and some appear to strobe wildly.
Can you imagine going into a room with multiple LED bulbs strobing out of sync with one another? It is bad enough with one in the room, multiple bulbs would force me to stay out of that store, store or home entirely.
The forced rapid adoption of these types of lights before they can be perfected would make the live of people with this problem miserable.
Can anyone remind me of the name of that economic theory which says we should add taxes to items so that they reflect the actual cost — not just the manufacturing cost.
For example, the price of gas should also include the cost of wars for oil.
Or, the price of of beer should also include the costs of drunk driving and spousal abuse.
In that theory, a incandescent bulb shouldn’t cost $0.33.
#28 I don’t know what the theory is called, but those are called externalized costs. Producers/sellers don’t pay the actual cost to society of the product they produce (e.g., pollution, health risks, infrastructure costs, etc.). We do, but they get the breaks. If your company gets sued, just declare bankruptcy. If you want to get rid of your pension costs, just say you can’t pay them and let the federal bailout do it.
MICKEY KAUS has updated his compact fluorescent bulb post, and I’m pretty sure his problem is the dimmer switches. But as a CFL booster, I found this observation rather troubling: “Note the hectoring get-with-the-program, you’re-an-idiot-if-you-flicker, there-is-no-more-debate tone of some of the Fluorescers.”
It’s just a light bulb, people, not a moral crusade. I think that there must be a genetically programmed desire for moral crusading, hardwired into various people to various degrees. If you don’t have religious stuff to crusade about, then you just make up something else to satisfy the need. But . . . light bulbs?