TreeHugger.com: Only in America: The \"Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act\"
Craig
· 1 year ago
Never mind the amount of mercury that is released into the atmosphere due to burning coal to supply the extra energy needed to use incandescent lights.
Galls
· 1 year ago
And I was falling in love with her until she wanted me to sit through a sermon about damnation.
Catherine
· 1 year ago
I grew up in Paul Wellstone's Minnesota and I find it extremely embarrassing that the people of my state elected this woman. Don't think poorly of the rest of us!
Joel
· 1 year ago
By the way I'm one of those great "workingest" Minnesotans she loves. Having two jobs makes my life so much more meaningful. Lets face it, she is insane and her district should be moved from Minnesota to a slowly sinking island in the arctic.
Icelander
· 1 year ago
I thought Minnesota was one of the more liberal states in the Union. What gives?
Scott
· 1 year ago
Reading her bio, she is a terrifying wackjob. But I will say she looks great (at least in this photo) for being over 50.
Buceri
· 1 year ago
I love conservative women. You just want to ask them: "honey, who gave you the right to vote and be here instead of the kitchen? A liberal or a conservative?"
MN
· 1 year ago
We're ashamed of her. Very ashamed. She was bad when she was at the state level. She's worse at the national level. What happened was that the neuvo-rich moved out to Washington County on the St. Croix river and their money overwhelmed the blue-bloods out there. It'll reverse just as soon as enough of them default and have to move to a cheaper rental in the city. Sadly we haven't gotten rid of her yet. She's known for her hating and bashing about. As well as her inaccuracies.
A mother of 5 and a former tax attorney, she was. Go figure.
Gerald Shields
· 1 year ago
Yeah. The woman is a total whacko, one that would ensure that we waste needless energy on standard florescent bulbs.
Let's face it: If we phase out flourescents for CFLs and LED bulbs, we wouldn't need as much "juice" from power plants and we probably wouldn't need to build new ones.
Willy Bio
· 1 year ago
Just doing her best to fend off the looming spectre of obscurity the only way her very small brain knows how.
Sweetie, just like you can't beat the onslaught of wrinkles and sagging, you can't do anything to stay relevant much longer. Look at it this way, if you fade into obscurity, that means you won't be being held responsible for your crimes against humanity. Pray for obscurity, pray.
Gerald Shields
· 1 year ago
Yeah. She's a total whacko. Everyone knows that if you phase out incandescents, then you won't need as much electrical power to run them. Hopefully, her fellow congressmen democrat and republican will toss her bill out and laugh at her face!
Grant
· 1 year ago
While I disagree with many of Ms. Bachman's political stances, in this case I agree with her. While I have personally converted many of the lights in my home to CFLs, the government has no business forcing me to do so. There are many applications where CFLs are not a good choice, and banning incandescents stifles competition and innovation.
Yes, we should strive to move people towards more energy efficient options, but making them do it by force is not the right way.
Joe Light Man
· 3 weeks ago
innovation is going crazy... setting efficiency standards that will make current incandescent light bulbs illegal to sell has forced companies to innovate and compete. Who knew we would be engineering incandescent light bulbs that are 30-100 percent more efficient???? So if your scared of being stuck with CFL bulbs, you should be thankful they are here, I would partially blame them for the advancement of incandescent technology, which hasn't seemed to change since the 1930's. If the new incandescent technology fails to ever hit the market, well I'm still okay with using CFL bulbs and possibly new LED bulbs if they develop to a feasible level. Anyway check it out.... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/business/ener.... By the way, I've been using the 14 watt CFL bulbs from Home Depot for many years, instant on, they are wonderful.
JE
· 1 year ago
We should be able to choose what kind of light bulbs we want to use. Although I haven't read it, I suspect that the "Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" is a reaction to actions our government has taken to ban the use of incandescent light bulbs. If electricity is more expensive, then market forces will lead consumers to make the best decison. That may be turning lights off when not needed, buying compact flourescent bulbs, or budgeting more money to pay the electric bill. I happen to prefer Incandescent lighting in certain applications. I'm also adverse to paying a massive price premium for compact flourescent light bulbs.
Mandy Lu
· 1 year ago
Well - this is only her first term - so we'll fight to get her out of office this fall.
Matt
· 1 year ago
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) outline a series of steps that homeowners should take to clean up broken fluorescent lights: Open windows, use rubber gloves, dispose of all material in sealed bags and remove it to a hazardous waste facility."
This seems excessive to me. Are these things easily breakable?
Brian
· 1 year ago
She is such an embarrassment to Minnesota. I still can't believe she won that election. That woman is 100% nuts.
MyDogRex
· 1 year ago
How dare the US Government dictate what kind of light bulbs we can use! Why I think we should all write in to congress expressing our outrage! It clearly stifles the Free Market to have the government step in! What is this communist Russia!
The Free Market should decide not the government... that is unless the market fails and the government needs to bail out my banking and investment firm, or if a small upstart competitor appears that threatens a larger more established group (that's what lobbiests are for!).
This is clearly misleading political garbage from a Jr Congress woman looking to make a name for herself. If people are really that upset about the government overstepping its bounds they have chosen the wrong place to wage battle. People should be less upset about a light bulb and more upset about how our civil rights continue to be eroded.
tyga
· 1 year ago
Just when I think that these people cannot get any more stupid, someone comes along and says something even more stupid. This stupidity knows no bounds.
Seriously, if I didn't already know that the USA has many very smart and innovative people, I'd think that the USA was full of complete wack jobs.
Can someone PLEASE get a hold of the insanity that has swept across the USA and restore some semblance of sanity, PLEASE?
Juan
· 1 year ago
"Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" is what makes America great, and that's choice. I see it time and time again. We should remember that America is not just one country. We 're 50 countries and Minnesota can do what ever the hell it wants. Also Why are you a wacko for standing up for ideas like, that you have the right to own a gun .You can in the 2nd and 14th amendment (that I always remind my liberal freinds.) What so wacko about not want to pay some much in taxes, or being against school teachers that pulls the mic away from a high school class victorain for say God Bless America. Or believing that killing your baby on demand is a bad thing. The green movement should step back a moment and analyze how you going make these changes because it lately its been sounding alot like what Johan Goldberg been saying http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsFoiVZDSRs&feat...>
Willy Bio
· 1 year ago
Grant and JE,
Sorry, but you are both DEAD WRONG. They said the same thing about mandated auto safety measures and emissions. This wacko Amurcan mindset that the individual freedom of choice trumps all social impacts is arcane. Grow the hell up. This ain't the infinite open space it was perceived to be, 100 years ago. Its a tiny ball of rock with 7 billion, soon to be 20 billion, crowding the F out of it.
Incandescent technology is done, over, finite. Toss it in the waste bin of excess and ignorance. If someone suddenly develops an incandescent technology that trumps CFL and LED and OLED, great. I'm sure they'll be able to get a waiver. But guess what, nobody is doing any R&D on that, BECAUSE ITS OVER.
maggiemae656
· 1 year ago
I am waiting for someone to complain about forcing us to use light bulbs that are know to trigger migrane headaches.
Let those who want to pay the added cost for the flourescents, and don't mind living off of headache pills, have them. Let those of us who are subjected to that lighting all day at work have the opportunity to use whatever bulbs we want to use when we come home.
Can you seriously tell me that if I am going to destroy the world by using an incandescent light bulb for a few hours in the evening? Give me a break...my lights are off all day long, and during the night when I sleep. Why in the world does each and every minute of my life have to be subjected to government legislation???????
Willy Bio
· 1 year ago
Maggie, only faulty ones do that. Return it and get a new one. Problem solved.
Why is there a need for government legislation for stuff like this? Because the free market does not react anywhere near fast enough when problems crop up. That's why, like I said above and you seem to have missed, it took legislation to implement things like seat belts, airbags, crash safety standards. emissions controls.
Get it? Good. Now move along and replace those incandescents.
Chris
· 1 year ago
excuse the pun, but she's a dim bulb.
JM
· 1 year ago
I hope the government never finds out you broke an incandescent light bulb in your home. Can you imagine the cost to clean up the mercury? Lights bulbs, HD television, what's next? These are small details in life, government has no business being in.
JM
· 1 year ago
I hope the government never finds out you broke an incandescent light bulb in your home. Can you imagine the cost to clean up the mercury? Lights bulbs, HD television, what's next? These are small details in life, government has no business being in.
Becky
· 1 year ago
And what about people with Scotopic Sensitivity Disorders for whom fluorescent lighting looks like strobe and to whom mandatory fluorescents are tantamount to torture?
Do they matter, or should they just endure the mood problems and migraines caused by CFLs and "take one for mother earth?"
My husband has Mears-Irlen syndrome. Here's what we'll do. We'll replace all the bulbs in your house with strobe lights and see what your quality of life is like after only a few short months.
Deal?
Andrea
· 1 year ago
I'm all for energy efficiency and have those bulbs in my own home. Bbut the truth is flourescent light bulbs have a strobe-like quality to them that are very difficult for children with autism and seizure disorders to tolerate.
Debbie
· 1 year ago
The bulbs seem to be better for people with small children because they don't get as hot, so if a lamp is knocked over, there is less risk of fire. As for them breaking, they are made of plastic, and I have dropped a few of them, I am very weak on the right side of my body, so drop things easily. I am more careful now that I found out about the mercury, but I have never broken a single bulb. I don't know about the problems with the flickering, I am blind, but my husband and children have said that we had one that flickered, but we took it back and got a new one and the new one didn't flicker anymore. I think there is more problem with the florescent tubes that have been used for years! What i want to know is, if you have the old kind of tube fixtures, will the government help to replace those? I seriously doubt that! That is the only major problem I have with the government telling us that we have to change!
What ver happened to Land of t
· 1 year ago
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
-- C.S. Lewis
Smoking, light bulbs, dietary fat, speech codes.
Soon to follow: mandatory exercise, correct haircuts, one child per household and compulsory abortions.
Liberal fascism.
What is not compulsory is forbidden.
Because we know what's best for you.
Devil's Advocate
· 1 year ago
Will you people please listen to yourselves.
You are banning a light bulbs.
Even if nobody used light bulbs and lit their homes by candle, it would not change the temperature of the Earth.
This is just a stupid law, and it will increase the amount of mercury in our homes and in our landfills. What a terrible idea!!!
David
· 1 year ago
It's surprising how many of you want to reliquish control of your life to a few politicians.
If a vocal minority declares cotton plants are destructive to the environment, will you support banning cotton clothing?
The issue is FREEDOM. This is what our country was founded to create. Whether or not a bulb is good or bad for the environment should have no bearing on this issue. If it's bad, then convince individuals, and give individuals freedom to decide. Instead you're handing over the power to a FEW individuals instead of everyone.
Wendy
· 1 year ago
I want to know how are poor people who can barely afford to buy a 50 cent regular 'ol lightbulb afford to buy these? FORCING (not suggesting) and LEGISLATING something as ridiculous as this is not what the Framers intended.
The thing that drives me nuts about environmentalists is why are they so quick to accept mercury in a light bulb that is in our homes but practically have an apoplexy if there is a trace amount found in a fish?
Strange dichotomy, eh?
Sara
· 1 year ago
Right to light...need I say more? You want the government to stay out of your womb, then you envirowhackos need to stay out of my house!
Tim Donlan
· 1 year ago
The bills needs to be passed because:
1) It is NOT a Federal issue, it is a State issue. No where in the Constitution is a person's choice of light bulb up for legislation
2) Global warming caused by humans is a political cause, not a scientific truth.
3) Given the current enviromental laws, the cumulative mercury that will pile up in landfills will be a violation of those laws. And culturally, we have a very negative reaction to even ridicuously small amount of mercury.
Tom Williams
· 1 year ago
Rep. Bauchman is 100% correct in what she is trying to do. I work in the lighting industry and one thing I am sure of, this move by the government to ban incandescent light bulds is BS. The only ones to benifit from this are the big CFL manufactures which by the way are mostly made in China. Can you say MERCURY
Tom Williams
· 1 year ago
Rep. Bauchman is 100% correct in what she is trying to do. I work in the lighting industry and one thing I am sure of, this move by the government to ban incandescent light bulds is BS. The only ones to benifit from this are the big CFL manufactures which by the way are mostly made in China. Can you say MERCURY
Donna
· 1 year ago
The government has no right to tell me what light bulbs to use. If Congress it wants to continually take it from behind from the environmental whackos, have at it, but stay the heck out of my house. I am sick and tired of the whole global warming scam, and the constant badgering on alternative energy "needs". Fact is, we have huge oil reserves within our reach, drilling and refining would bring down the cost of oil and gas. The ethanol scam is driving up the cost of food. Wind energy takes away land, coal is dirty, nuclear is clean but it is a dirty word.
We are destroying this country from within, terrorists can sit back and watch. Big business is running us, and they own BOTH parties of Congress.
Bob
· 1 year ago
The government has the right to encourage the use of certain light bulbs, but they have NO RIGHT to force the American people to buy a particular type of light bulb.
Justin
· 1 year ago
You guys are zombies. You have no brains to think for yourself and just jump on whatever thing the media or hollywod tells you to do. I have seen theses lightbulbs. Did you know that the warranty is void if you use it for more than 4 hours a day??? Ya they will last you longer, if you hardly use it. Sure the box says you get thousands of hours, but you can't use it for a long time, or it will burn up. And then you will have to throw them out, increasing the crap in land fills, and get a new one. You regects probably use your left hand to wipe your ass and bury your crap in the backyard to save water and paper.
LA: funny, the one over my desk has been going for three years, ten hours a day, and of the 16 in my house I have had exactly one burn out. One can disagree, but there is no need to be nasty.
Curt
· 1 year ago
Those of you who are upset by a biased discription of Michelle Bachman are missing the greater point which is as follows: The federal government should not be permitted to mandate the type of light-bulb you choose to use in your own home!
That is a point with which only a highly biased person would disagree. Else the federal government and citizenry of our USA edge even closer to fascism than it already is.
PS You tree hugging environmental global warmers are being duped into a lock-step fascist, nationalist mentality based on complete and utter inaccurate nonsense regarding so-called global environmental crises, which, by the way, do NOT exist.
PSS. Seek ye knowledge and wisdom....
Kent
· 1 year ago
I'll probably be flagged and removed because there's nothing you first amendment loving libs hate worse than someone exercising their 1st amendment rights.
1st - Julia Bovey of the Natural Resources Defense Council needs to do her homework before she opens her pie hole. I'm sure they make tinfoil hats her size. Mercury amalgam fillings wouldn't release 1/100th the inhalable mercury vapor that one broken mad hatter bulb would (google mad hatter for those that don't get the reference).
2nd - If I weren't married, Michelle Bachman would be the pin-up on my wall. She's intelligent, informed, honest and better looking than Shrill-ary. Her talents are wasted on paste like you. However not everyone in your state can be mindless Gore-ists because she won in a popular election. Thank goodness conservatism isn't dead in Minnesota (although I haven't figured out the whole Jesse Ventura thing yet).
3rd - You look which states gave women the right to vote before the 19th amendment and then reconsider the idea that some Dem gave women the right to vote.
In parting, I'd like to say, keep drinking the Gore Kool-Aid. Eventually we conservatives will out number you by the mere fact that we procreate and you abort.
scout
· 1 year ago
The liberals are once again showing their angst. The woman makes a comment and puts forth a recommendation to be voted on and the libs here want her tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. The in case you people are too dumb to get it, the bill mandating fluorescent bulbs is a very expensive law, that BTW, also incurs on the freedom that you all claim that you cherish.
Liberal compassion, is an oxymoron.
Personally I could care less what you people think, shes a politician and her job is to work on legislation. If you don't like it vote her out, if you don't vote her out then quit your bitching.
All that being said, don't ask me to pay for the HAZMAT team that you will need to change your light bulbs if they break and spill mercury on your carpet.
If Ms Bachman fails, I will soon be lighting my home with the coal oil lamps and candles, that ought to help in the global warming hoax started by the guy who invented the internet, and the only person in history to tell a good enough lie to get an Oscar and Nobel prize for doing nothing more than giving a power-point presentation.
Gore the Clintons, and Obama, don't you people ever get tired of voting for the most guttural of liars?
Troy
· 1 year ago
You who don't realize the importance of this act are truly ignorant, quiestionless followers...
The simple matter at hand here is the choice to buy any light bulb you choose - and not - have the govt in your business while trying to make a very simple purchase.
This is a scenario where the market should be deciding which bulbs we all use - not the govt. If people want BFLs they can spend the extra cash and buy them. If they prefer the safer choice of the trusty incandescent - they can spend their cash that way.
This is a market decision not a govt decision- plain and simple.
Trishah
· 1 year ago
As a person with an inability to work in florescent lighting, the idea that the government is going to make it every HARDER for me to get my disability compensated in the workplace AND force me to stockpile or buy black market light bulbs just so that I can see without splitting headaches is crazy.
There are other ways to save energy without forcing this on people who's health is already an issue.
I'm green and I'm against mandatory fluorescents.
http://www.lightbulbchoice.com
Janet Kaye Love, LPC
· 1 year ago
The push to use fluorescent lights could be very bad for many people with disabilities. The Job Accommodation Network (http://www.jan.wvu.edu) lists reduction or elimination of fluorescent lighting as an appropriate accommodation for many conditions. In addition to causing headache, fatigue, and problems with light sensitivity, they are listed as problematic for individuals with epilepsy, migraine, lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, and vertigo (related to cardiovascular problems, multiple scleroses, and several other disorders.) I have also seen accounts of difficulties faced by individuals with hyperactivity, autism and anxiety. Fluorescent treatment of depression can have the side effect of mania.
When I talk about my own sensitivity (resulting in seizure activity regardless of the type of fluorescent), approximately 15% of the population respond with stories about symptoms from this type of lighting, most commonly headache, fatigue and confusion. I find that many people are not aware that their lights are causing their symptoms, until they start thinking about the circumstances the problems occur in.
Doctors are not talking about this either; they are using the troublesome lights. I had uncontrollable seizures for 20 years before I figured out the lights were triggering most of my problems. The doctor said he was not surprised, and told me about some of the many other problems people have! No one even suggested I consider it before that.
When standard lighting triggers severe health problems, one is excluded from many important activities. It seems to me that if cement were as valuable as energy, we would be telling people in wheelchairs that it is not reasonable to expect a ramp. I was very disappointed to learn that cities have started developing building codes encourage, or even specify, that this health hazard be implemented in much of the new construction.
Compact fluorescents for household use should come with a hazard warning! The ideal would be to exclude fluorescents from commercial use with accessibility standards. Certainly, with the recent increases in problems experienced by children, this issue should at least be addressed in schools.
Please consider taking action to reverse this trend. Write your city, state and national legislators to make them aware of this problem. They are starting to pass laws to make incandescent bulbs illegal, which would leave some of us completely in the dark. We need to look further for alternatives that do not harm any one, or leave them stuck outside, or in the dark.
For my part, I am writing letters, and making requests to be accommodated at public meetings. Not being able to participate seems to be percieved as "Reasonable" many places.
Chad
· 1 year ago
Where do I go to sign this petition? Any chance I get to overturn liberal wackjob ideas, I'm there!
Steven E. Davis
· 1 year ago
The incandescent Light Bulb Ban violates the founding freedoms of this nation. Even if this were not a huge issue (and it is), the CFL backers are basing their agenda on junk science. CFL's are far more harmful to people than the old incandescent bulbs in every way (light color, light quality, strobe and scotopic effects, seizures, epilepsy, autism , migraines, headaches, etc...).
Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, they are far more complex and resource intensive to manufacture, requiring far more mined materials and use of fossil fuels to produce than the old bulbs. They contain vastly greater amounts of copper, lead, mercury, steel, aluminum, magnesium and other metals than the old bulbs, and they contain plastic (OIL) which is not even present in the old bulbs. They are far heavier than the old incandescent buls and therefore require more diesel or jet fuel to transport. They have far more failure modes than the old bulbs due to their numerous electronic components. I am an educated scientist (geologist), and I can assure you these new CFL bulbs are far worse for the environment and for people than the old ones.
Americans should demand the repeal of this light bulb ban on freedom and constitutional as wel as scientific grounds.
Dave
· 1 year ago
As a citizen of Minnesota I apologize about Mrs. Bachmann. I don't believe this is about our Constitutional rights, but more because she doesn't believe in global warming or science except where it can be misused/misinterpreted for her conservative values.
John Taylor
· 1 year ago
Wazzat? A "Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" ????????
Since when were choices restricted? Never!!!
Having the more beneficent choice recommended and perhaps even subsidized is far far from choice restriction.
Can you still buy old style inefficient incandescent bulbs in Minnesota?
Yes, you can, and you can also get rid of Representative Michelle Bachman, for outrageously lying to her constituents. She is an embarrassment to humanity.
JohnB
· 1 year ago
The government is telling us what lightbulbs we can and cannot use today, what are they going to tell us tomorrow? People who welcome government control over their lives get what they deserve.
You can laugh and make jokes about the people relating lightbulb choice to LIBERTY and FREEDOM, but once the government starts taking away the things that really matter to YOU, you'll be standing right next to the rest of us wishing that we had done something to stem the tide of rampant government legislation a long, long time ago. And by the time that comes, I'm sure the govt will have taken away all our guns, you know 'for our own safety', as well and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it then.
Tom Miller
· 1 year ago
Hey Michelle!
Sounds like you are one of the last true conservatives! Come to Arizona. We love our guns, religion, and the right of an unborn child to live! What's so wack about that? Freedom of choice is great, but the choice begins with the act, not after the fact. What are we, dogs in heat? The next thing you know they will put a tax on the methane gas we emitt. I do not want to buy anything from china!!
The governments job is to maintain the infrastructure, and protect us from our enemies. Nothing else! Stay out of our private lives. Let us vote on all of the issues. This is America. We cannot let a Judge, or small group of people who claim to represent us, dictate our lives! I believe most hard working Americans would agree with me!
Eric S
· 1 year ago
If would appear that the Senator from MN got word of the story and sent over the posse.
I don't know where all the hate comes from. One of the functions of government is to protect us. From ourselves if necessary.
That said, even speaking as a treehugging, baby-killing, hippie (not really, but there are apparently only 2 sides to any argument anymore) I still think mandating my light bulb selection is fairly ridiculous. Incandescent bulbs being compared to not wearing a seat belt isn't a very good analogy.
Both sides always talk like the worst case scenario has already happened. With your boy Bush in the White House there's zero chance of a "liberal" federal light bulb banning bill anyway.
ashleelisbeth
· 1 year ago
Minnesota, what were you thinking!?
I find it extremely amusing to think that people still believe that global warming is some sort of liberal ruse, some hoax that we created just for shits and giggles and to push "our agenda".
Look around, there are smog clouds over our major cities, rivers are clogged with pollution, we have mountains of waste, the Iditarod had to be moved farther north, species of animals are disappearing as I type this. Although I'm not sure banning Incandescent bulbs outright is perhaps the best measure, Congress should be probing environmental issues further, and allocating funding to finding solutions (like making affordable LEDS for home use, perhaps). I am strongly convinced that if the world keeps living like we are today, being wasteful and overly consumptive and apathetic towards the environment, in a few decades the world will no longer exist as we know and knew it.
K
· 1 year ago
I agree with Eric S. 100%. I am not sure what to believe here but i think that arguing over a light bulb is pretty trivial.
I am going to share this page with my history teacher and see what he thinks.
mike
· 1 year ago
I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Most places in Minnesota requires heat through a good portion of the year. When you factor that into your heating bill, all light bulbs are 100% efficient--the light is useful, the heat is useful.
Most people, use CFL's in fixtures in which they weren't designed and end up using more energy than they need anyway. A good quality Par or MR lamp is often more efficient than many CFL are in many applications. (you can't just count the efficiency of the bulb, you have the count the efficiency of the light fixture and also how it affects your pupils--glare=smaller pupils=more light requred=more energy)
If we are going to legislate anything, why don't we just cap the amount of electricity a house can use (or make it really expensive above a certain point). That way people can pick how they want to accomplish that goal.
Oh yeah, and I still haven't seen any data on the amount of embodied and manufacturing energy, pollution of a CFL vs an Incandescent.
Mike
PS--I use CFL bulbs--where it makes sense to and good quality incandescents (halogen, xenon), where it doesn't.
I have a lighting design and electrical engineering background. I believe that a million people replacing all their lightbulbs isn't going to make as much difference as people learning about and hiring lighting designers that actually know how to make the whole system (not just one component) efficient and pleasing.
Norma
· 1 year ago
It is very concerning to me that we would be forced to use CFL as a citizen of a country that prides itself on Freedom. As ridiculous as it sounds to be fighting an issue as trivial as lightbulbs, I just can't believe that I have to be involved in such a battle. I too, have an illness that is exacerbated by these bulbs and have now found myself becoming more and more isolated because of the use of these bulbs in most public facilities. I somehow could accept the frustration of giving up the "fun times" of dining out and shopping, but when the time came for me to take an ailing son to a medical professional and I could not sit in the office, that was just too much for any mother to handle. So, do I think that the government should mandate the use of these bulbs? Do I think that these bulbs should be used at all? Absolutely Not !!! They are very harmful to the environment and to many individuals. You can do the research and if you do you will see that their are many studies that show an increased concern that these bulbs will cause cancer because of the radiation that is emitted from them, among other issues. Their will most definitely be an increase in Migraine headaches, seizure disorders, skin conditions, and the list goes on.
So, yes I hope that this act passes, and I really don't care what type of woman Ms. Bachman is, she has the right idea.
paul p
· 1 year ago
I am an environmentalist to the core, though, I do it by choice.
I value my freedom to be an individual and hold it above my environmental values.
When you force people to make good decisions, they are not genuinely on your side.
Environmental impact lessening cannot be dictated or enforced, it must be logically transitioned to.
Environmentalism must not become the right hand of oppression!
Where are your ideals people?
This is not just a trend that you should blindly jump behind, it should be a lifestyle, a voluntary lifestyle, and nature will take its course.
Do not lose your ideals as one who values both nature and liberty, for they are not contradictory.
Ask yourself if Thoreau, Ghandi, or Captain Planet would advocate bandwagon oppression in order to save some electricity.
One who conscientiously uses an incandescent will have a lower impact than someone who spitefully retains their lifestyle but is forced to use a certain bulb.
Look at the Patriot Act, it was not lifestyle changing but it was a foot in the door for Big Brother. After our light-bulb choices are curbed, what's next?
Social change is most effective from the bottom-up, NOT from top-down.
Anyone read 1984?
Rashid
· 11 months ago
I want to use CFL, and do prefer them very much. However, they aren't the solution!
It seems that we all agree that incandescent bulbs drain more electricity from the grid, mostly at night. This is the time when the power plants actually discard their extra electricity, which is why it is cheapest for us to obtain at night! Either way, it is useless energy being burnt up--the power shortages in CA were due to Enron's manipulations, not limited supply!
Hence, the incandescent enemy isn't my focus of attack to saving the environment. I am sure wars (using depleted uranium, which enters the soil and waters etc), and prison camps that wars necessitate to condemn the captives (see Abu Ghraib), use up very much more energy and create much more pollution than this silly little bulb we are spending countless hours (on our power hungry computers) arguing about.
U may LOL :-)
One final point, mercury is a neurotoxin, meaning that very minute quantities (in the low 10's of milligrams) ruins the endocrine system of animals (fish) and humans (from water), which is why "tree-huggers" (NOMERCURY.ORG) condemn corporate America for polluting our seas and lakes with the very quantities of mercury (being diluted) that we are okaying in our CFL's. CFL's will be disposed eventually, most breaking in the large plastic recycling bins our cities give us!
It isn't an argument to suggest that thermometers have more mercury; you rarely toss an old thermometer frequently, with NEW thermometers NOT using mercury.
Further, our power plants aren't only producing energy for light bulbs, but other more energy intense devices (computers, tv's, manufacturing, cooking and so on.)
Thus, a billion grams (each bulb has one to five grams max) of mercury being disposed of in the landfills, or sent to China for "recycling," every two to four years isn't going to help us! I am sure we are wasting money on and time designing mercury light-bulbs.
I'd love to hear your response!
Nick
· 11 months ago
Reading a few comments here, it seems like some are OUTRAGED at the government "dictating what light bulbs we can use", yet they have no problem with Bachmann when she tries to outlaw the pill and other things 'in our home'.
Republican fanatics pick and chose what to call communist, yet they try to implement laws that dictate what people can't do in their own homes.
lighbulblover
· 10 months ago
Just because someone isn't socialist and won't follow the latest fads, they're not automatically crazy. I love my incandescent light bulbs. In fact - I'm hoarding them. My take: Global warming is here because there's big money in "proving" it and making changes to stop it. If it wasn't found by 'scientists,' to exist everywhere, 'scientists' would be unemployed. This same string of logic was used in the 70s for "global cooling." Hmm...
Lib_Lover
· 8 months ago
I thought Liberals as typically smarter. WAKE UP.
YOU ARE GOING TO HATE HAVING NOTHING BUT CFLs.
THEY DO NOT WORK WITH DIMMER LIGHTS.
CFL LIFE IS AS LITTLE AS 1/10 TENTH STATED LIFE WHEN USED IN PLACES WHERE THE CFL LIGHT IS FREQUENTLY LIT LESS THAN 15 MIN. AT A TIME >>> (IE. BATHROOMS & BEDROOMS)
GOOGLE IT.... CFL life span
Dennis
· 8 months ago
Buying a cfl from China rather than a soft white made in Kentuky should remain a choice. Personally, I can't read using cfl's no matter what you may say. I am stockpiling the soft whites.
If there were no human life at all on this planet, there would be only 3% less carbon dioxide produced. Even if carbon dioxide caused global warming common sense and math will tell you humans could only have an extremely small effect on golbal warming. The natural fluxuation on carbon dioxide produced by natural God made occurrances is often more than 3% in a year. Trying to play God is an expensive task!
rebecca
· 5 months ago
This is a bad law. I get migraine headaches from these bulbs. What choice will I have if I can't buy incandescent bulbs? Just because a small number of people are affected this way does not make the headaches any less debilitating. If I am exposed to CFL's for 15 minutes i will have headache, photo- and noise- sensitivity and vomiting for two or three days. Take the percentage of the population that will be disabled by this law, add up their lost work hours, lost productivity, and medical bills and tell me that for them it will be cheaper to switch to light bulbs that cost twice as much. Add in the value of being able to go into public places with non-natural light (ie stores, schools, and even libraries.) Why is the government doing this? Would these environmentalists support a vaccine that made a few million people permanently disabled, based on a theory that it would save energy in the long run?
All Comments
Never mind the amount of mercury that is released into the atmosphere due to burning coal to supply the extra energy needed to use incandescent lights.
And I was falling in love with her until she wanted me to sit through a sermon about damnation.
I grew up in Paul Wellstone's Minnesota and I find it extremely embarrassing that the people of my state elected this woman. Don't think poorly of the rest of us!
By the way I'm one of those great "workingest" Minnesotans she loves. Having two jobs makes my life so much more meaningful. Lets face it, she is insane and her district should be moved from Minnesota to a slowly sinking island in the arctic.
I thought Minnesota was one of the more liberal states in the Union. What gives?
Reading her bio, she is a terrifying wackjob. But I will say she looks great (at least in this photo) for being over 50.
I love conservative women. You just want to ask them: "honey, who gave you the right to vote and be here instead of the kitchen? A liberal or a conservative?"
We're ashamed of her. Very ashamed. She was bad when she was at the state level. She's worse at the national level. What happened was that the neuvo-rich moved out to Washington County on the St. Croix river and their money overwhelmed the blue-bloods out there. It'll reverse just as soon as enough of them default and have to move to a cheaper rental in the city. Sadly we haven't gotten rid of her yet. She's known for her hating and bashing about. As well as her inaccuracies.
A mother of 5 and a former tax attorney, she was. Go figure.
Yeah. The woman is a total whacko, one that would ensure that we waste needless energy on standard florescent bulbs.
Let's face it: If we phase out flourescents for CFLs and LED bulbs, we wouldn't need as much "juice" from power plants and we probably wouldn't need to build new ones.
Just doing her best to fend off the looming spectre of obscurity the only way her very small brain knows how.
Sweetie, just like you can't beat the onslaught of wrinkles and sagging, you can't do anything to stay relevant much longer. Look at it this way, if you fade into obscurity, that means you won't be being held responsible for your crimes against humanity. Pray for obscurity, pray.
Yeah. She's a total whacko. Everyone knows that if you phase out incandescents, then you won't need as much electrical power to run them. Hopefully, her fellow congressmen democrat and republican will toss her bill out and laugh at her face!
While I disagree with many of Ms. Bachman's political stances, in this case I agree with her. While I have personally converted many of the lights in my home to CFLs, the government has no business forcing me to do so. There are many applications where CFLs are not a good choice, and banning incandescents stifles competition and innovation.
Yes, we should strive to move people towards more energy efficient options, but making them do it by force is not the right way.
We should be able to choose what kind of light bulbs we want to use. Although I haven't read it, I suspect that the "Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" is a reaction to actions our government has taken to ban the use of incandescent light bulbs. If electricity is more expensive, then market forces will lead consumers to make the best decison. That may be turning lights off when not needed, buying compact flourescent bulbs, or budgeting more money to pay the electric bill. I happen to prefer Incandescent lighting in certain applications. I'm also adverse to paying a massive price premium for compact flourescent light bulbs.
Well - this is only her first term - so we'll fight to get her out of office this fall.
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) outline a series of steps that homeowners should take to clean up broken fluorescent lights: Open windows, use rubber gloves, dispose of all material in sealed bags and remove it to a hazardous waste facility."
This seems excessive to me. Are these things easily breakable?
She is such an embarrassment to Minnesota. I still can't believe she won that election. That woman is 100% nuts.
How dare the US Government dictate what kind of light bulbs we can use! Why I think we should all write in to congress expressing our outrage! It clearly stifles the Free Market to have the government step in! What is this communist Russia!
The Free Market should decide not the government... that is unless the market fails and the government needs to bail out my banking and investment firm, or if a small upstart competitor appears that threatens a larger more established group (that's what lobbiests are for!).
This is clearly misleading political garbage from a Jr Congress woman looking to make a name for herself. If people are really that upset about the government overstepping its bounds they have chosen the wrong place to wage battle. People should be less upset about a light bulb and more upset about how our civil rights continue to be eroded.
Just when I think that these people cannot get any more stupid, someone comes along and says something even more stupid. This stupidity knows no bounds.
Seriously, if I didn't already know that the USA has many very smart and innovative people, I'd think that the USA was full of complete wack jobs.
Can someone PLEASE get a hold of the insanity that has swept across the USA and restore some semblance of sanity, PLEASE?
"Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" is what makes America great, and that's choice. I see it time and time again. We should remember that America is not just one country. We 're 50 countries and Minnesota can do what ever the hell it wants. Also Why are you a wacko for standing up for ideas like, that you have the right to own a gun .You can in the 2nd and 14th amendment (that I always remind my liberal freinds.) What so wacko about not want to pay some much in taxes, or being against school teachers that pulls the mic away from a high school class victorain for say God Bless America. Or believing that killing your baby on demand is a bad thing. The green movement should step back a moment and analyze how you going make these changes because it lately its been sounding alot like what Johan Goldberg been saying http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsFoiVZDSRs&feat...>
Grant and JE,
Sorry, but you are both DEAD WRONG. They said the same thing about mandated auto safety measures and emissions. This wacko Amurcan mindset that the individual freedom of choice trumps all social impacts is arcane. Grow the hell up. This ain't the infinite open space it was perceived to be, 100 years ago. Its a tiny ball of rock with 7 billion, soon to be 20 billion, crowding the F out of it.
Incandescent technology is done, over, finite. Toss it in the waste bin of excess and ignorance. If someone suddenly develops an incandescent technology that trumps CFL and LED and OLED, great. I'm sure they'll be able to get a waiver. But guess what, nobody is doing any R&D on that, BECAUSE ITS OVER.
I am waiting for someone to complain about forcing us to use light bulbs that are know to trigger migrane headaches.
Let those who want to pay the added cost for the flourescents, and don't mind living off of headache pills, have them. Let those of us who are subjected to that lighting all day at work have the opportunity to use whatever bulbs we want to use when we come home.
Can you seriously tell me that if I am going to destroy the world by using an incandescent light bulb for a few hours in the evening? Give me a break...my lights are off all day long, and during the night when I sleep. Why in the world does each and every minute of my life have to be subjected to government legislation???????
Maggie, only faulty ones do that. Return it and get a new one. Problem solved.
Why is there a need for government legislation for stuff like this? Because the free market does not react anywhere near fast enough when problems crop up. That's why, like I said above and you seem to have missed, it took legislation to implement things like seat belts, airbags, crash safety standards. emissions controls.
Get it? Good. Now move along and replace those incandescents.
excuse the pun, but she's a dim bulb.
I hope the government never finds out you broke an incandescent light bulb in your home. Can you imagine the cost to clean up the mercury? Lights bulbs, HD television, what's next? These are small details in life, government has no business being in.
I hope the government never finds out you broke an incandescent light bulb in your home. Can you imagine the cost to clean up the mercury? Lights bulbs, HD television, what's next? These are small details in life, government has no business being in.
And what about people with Scotopic Sensitivity Disorders for whom fluorescent lighting looks like strobe and to whom mandatory fluorescents are tantamount to torture?
Do they matter, or should they just endure the mood problems and migraines caused by CFLs and "take one for mother earth?"
My husband has Mears-Irlen syndrome. Here's what we'll do. We'll replace all the bulbs in your house with strobe lights and see what your quality of life is like after only a few short months.
Deal?
I'm all for energy efficiency and have those bulbs in my own home. Bbut the truth is flourescent light bulbs have a strobe-like quality to them that are very difficult for children with autism and seizure disorders to tolerate.
The bulbs seem to be better for people with small children because they don't get as hot, so if a lamp is knocked over, there is less risk of fire. As for them breaking, they are made of plastic, and I have dropped a few of them, I am very weak on the right side of my body, so drop things easily. I am more careful now that I found out about the mercury, but I have never broken a single bulb. I don't know about the problems with the flickering, I am blind, but my husband and children have said that we had one that flickered, but we took it back and got a new one and the new one didn't flicker anymore. I think there is more problem with the florescent tubes that have been used for years! What i want to know is, if you have the old kind of tube fixtures, will the government help to replace those? I seriously doubt that! That is the only major problem I have with the government telling us that we have to change!
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
-- C.S. Lewis
Smoking, light bulbs, dietary fat, speech codes.
Soon to follow: mandatory exercise, correct haircuts, one child per household and compulsory abortions.
Liberal fascism.
What is not compulsory is forbidden.
Because we know what's best for you.
Will you people please listen to yourselves.
You are banning a light bulbs.
Even if nobody used light bulbs and lit their homes by candle, it would not change the temperature of the Earth.
This is just a stupid law, and it will increase the amount of mercury in our homes and in our landfills. What a terrible idea!!!
It's surprising how many of you want to reliquish control of your life to a few politicians.
If a vocal minority declares cotton plants are destructive to the environment, will you support banning cotton clothing?
The issue is FREEDOM. This is what our country was founded to create. Whether or not a bulb is good or bad for the environment should have no bearing on this issue. If it's bad, then convince individuals, and give individuals freedom to decide. Instead you're handing over the power to a FEW individuals instead of everyone.
I want to know how are poor people who can barely afford to buy a 50 cent regular 'ol lightbulb afford to buy these? FORCING (not suggesting) and LEGISLATING something as ridiculous as this is not what the Framers intended.
The thing that drives me nuts about environmentalists is why are they so quick to accept mercury in a light bulb that is in our homes but practically have an apoplexy if there is a trace amount found in a fish?
Strange dichotomy, eh?
Right to light...need I say more? You want the government to stay out of your womb, then you envirowhackos need to stay out of my house!
The bills needs to be passed because:
1) It is NOT a Federal issue, it is a State issue. No where in the Constitution is a person's choice of light bulb up for legislation
2) Global warming caused by humans is a political cause, not a scientific truth.
3) Given the current enviromental laws, the cumulative mercury that will pile up in landfills will be a violation of those laws. And culturally, we have a very negative reaction to even ridicuously small amount of mercury.
Rep. Bauchman is 100% correct in what she is trying to do. I work in the lighting industry and one thing I am sure of, this move by the government to ban incandescent light bulds is BS. The only ones to benifit from this are the big CFL manufactures which by the way are mostly made in China. Can you say MERCURY
Rep. Bauchman is 100% correct in what she is trying to do. I work in the lighting industry and one thing I am sure of, this move by the government to ban incandescent light bulds is BS. The only ones to benifit from this are the big CFL manufactures which by the way are mostly made in China. Can you say MERCURY
The government has no right to tell me what light bulbs to use. If Congress it wants to continually take it from behind from the environmental whackos, have at it, but stay the heck out of my house. I am sick and tired of the whole global warming scam, and the constant badgering on alternative energy "needs". Fact is, we have huge oil reserves within our reach, drilling and refining would bring down the cost of oil and gas. The ethanol scam is driving up the cost of food. Wind energy takes away land, coal is dirty, nuclear is clean but it is a dirty word.
We are destroying this country from within, terrorists can sit back and watch. Big business is running us, and they own BOTH parties of Congress.
The government has the right to encourage the use of certain light bulbs, but they have NO RIGHT to force the American people to buy a particular type of light bulb.
You guys are zombies. You have no brains to think for yourself and just jump on whatever thing the media or hollywod tells you to do. I have seen theses lightbulbs. Did you know that the warranty is void if you use it for more than 4 hours a day??? Ya they will last you longer, if you hardly use it. Sure the box says you get thousands of hours, but you can't use it for a long time, or it will burn up. And then you will have to throw them out, increasing the crap in land fills, and get a new one. You regects probably use your left hand to wipe your ass and bury your crap in the backyard to save water and paper.
LA: funny, the one over my desk has been going for three years, ten hours a day, and of the 16 in my house I have had exactly one burn out. One can disagree, but there is no need to be nasty.
Those of you who are upset by a biased discription of Michelle Bachman are missing the greater point which is as follows: The federal government should not be permitted to mandate the type of light-bulb you choose to use in your own home!
That is a point with which only a highly biased person would disagree. Else the federal government and citizenry of our USA edge even closer to fascism than it already is.
PS You tree hugging environmental global warmers are being duped into a lock-step fascist, nationalist mentality based on complete and utter inaccurate nonsense regarding so-called global environmental crises, which, by the way, do NOT exist.
PSS. Seek ye knowledge and wisdom....
I'll probably be flagged and removed because there's nothing you first amendment loving libs hate worse than someone exercising their 1st amendment rights.
1st - Julia Bovey of the Natural Resources Defense Council needs to do her homework before she opens her pie hole. I'm sure they make tinfoil hats her size. Mercury amalgam fillings wouldn't release 1/100th the inhalable mercury vapor that one broken mad hatter bulb would (google mad hatter for those that don't get the reference).
2nd - If I weren't married, Michelle Bachman would be the pin-up on my wall. She's intelligent, informed, honest and better looking than Shrill-ary. Her talents are wasted on paste like you. However not everyone in your state can be mindless Gore-ists because she won in a popular election. Thank goodness conservatism isn't dead in Minnesota (although I haven't figured out the whole Jesse Ventura thing yet).
3rd - You look which states gave women the right to vote before the 19th amendment and then reconsider the idea that some Dem gave women the right to vote.
In parting, I'd like to say, keep drinking the Gore Kool-Aid. Eventually we conservatives will out number you by the mere fact that we procreate and you abort.
The liberals are once again showing their angst. The woman makes a comment and puts forth a recommendation to be voted on and the libs here want her tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. The in case you people are too dumb to get it, the bill mandating fluorescent bulbs is a very expensive law, that BTW, also incurs on the freedom that you all claim that you cherish.
Liberal compassion, is an oxymoron.
Personally I could care less what you people think, shes a politician and her job is to work on legislation. If you don't like it vote her out, if you don't vote her out then quit your bitching.
All that being said, don't ask me to pay for the HAZMAT team that you will need to change your light bulbs if they break and spill mercury on your carpet.
If Ms Bachman fails, I will soon be lighting my home with the coal oil lamps and candles, that ought to help in the global warming hoax started by the guy who invented the internet, and the only person in history to tell a good enough lie to get an Oscar and Nobel prize for doing nothing more than giving a power-point presentation.
Gore the Clintons, and Obama, don't you people ever get tired of voting for the most guttural of liars?
You who don't realize the importance of this act are truly ignorant, quiestionless followers...
The simple matter at hand here is the choice to buy any light bulb you choose - and not - have the govt in your business while trying to make a very simple purchase.
This is a scenario where the market should be deciding which bulbs we all use - not the govt. If people want BFLs they can spend the extra cash and buy them. If they prefer the safer choice of the trusty incandescent - they can spend their cash that way.
This is a market decision not a govt decision- plain and simple.
As a person with an inability to work in florescent lighting, the idea that the government is going to make it every HARDER for me to get my disability compensated in the workplace AND force me to stockpile or buy black market light bulbs just so that I can see without splitting headaches is crazy.
There are other ways to save energy without forcing this on people who's health is already an issue.
I'm green and I'm against mandatory fluorescents.
http://www.lightbulbchoice.com
The push to use fluorescent lights could be very bad for many people with disabilities. The Job Accommodation Network (http://www.jan.wvu.edu) lists reduction or elimination of fluorescent lighting as an appropriate accommodation for many conditions. In addition to causing headache, fatigue, and problems with light sensitivity, they are listed as problematic for individuals with epilepsy, migraine, lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, and vertigo (related to cardiovascular problems, multiple scleroses, and several other disorders.) I have also seen accounts of difficulties faced by individuals with hyperactivity, autism and anxiety. Fluorescent treatment of depression can have the side effect of mania.
When I talk about my own sensitivity (resulting in seizure activity regardless of the type of fluorescent), approximately 15% of the population respond with stories about symptoms from this type of lighting, most commonly headache, fatigue and confusion. I find that many people are not aware that their lights are causing their symptoms, until they start thinking about the circumstances the problems occur in.
Doctors are not talking about this either; they are using the troublesome lights. I had uncontrollable seizures for 20 years before I figured out the lights were triggering most of my problems. The doctor said he was not surprised, and told me about some of the many other problems people have! No one even suggested I consider it before that.
When standard lighting triggers severe health problems, one is excluded from many important activities. It seems to me that if cement were as valuable as energy, we would be telling people in wheelchairs that it is not reasonable to expect a ramp. I was very disappointed to learn that cities have started developing building codes encourage, or even specify, that this health hazard be implemented in much of the new construction.
Compact fluorescents for household use should come with a hazard warning! The ideal would be to exclude fluorescents from commercial use with accessibility standards. Certainly, with the recent increases in problems experienced by children, this issue should at least be addressed in schools.
Please consider taking action to reverse this trend. Write your city, state and national legislators to make them aware of this problem. They are starting to pass laws to make incandescent bulbs illegal, which would leave some of us completely in the dark. We need to look further for alternatives that do not harm any one, or leave them stuck outside, or in the dark.
For my part, I am writing letters, and making requests to be accommodated at public meetings. Not being able to participate seems to be percieved as "Reasonable" many places.
Where do I go to sign this petition? Any chance I get to overturn liberal wackjob ideas, I'm there!
The incandescent Light Bulb Ban violates the founding freedoms of this nation. Even if this were not a huge issue (and it is), the CFL backers are basing their agenda on junk science. CFL's are far more harmful to people than the old incandescent bulbs in every way (light color, light quality, strobe and scotopic effects, seizures, epilepsy, autism , migraines, headaches, etc...).
Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, they are far more complex and resource intensive to manufacture, requiring far more mined materials and use of fossil fuels to produce than the old bulbs. They contain vastly greater amounts of copper, lead, mercury, steel, aluminum, magnesium and other metals than the old bulbs, and they contain plastic (OIL) which is not even present in the old bulbs. They are far heavier than the old incandescent buls and therefore require more diesel or jet fuel to transport. They have far more failure modes than the old bulbs due to their numerous electronic components. I am an educated scientist (geologist), and I can assure you these new CFL bulbs are far worse for the environment and for people than the old ones.
Americans should demand the repeal of this light bulb ban on freedom and constitutional as wel as scientific grounds.
As a citizen of Minnesota I apologize about Mrs. Bachmann. I don't believe this is about our Constitutional rights, but more because she doesn't believe in global warming or science except where it can be misused/misinterpreted for her conservative values.
Wazzat? A "Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" ????????
Since when were choices restricted? Never!!!
Having the more beneficent choice recommended and perhaps even subsidized is far far from choice restriction.
Can you still buy old style inefficient incandescent bulbs in Minnesota?
Yes, you can, and you can also get rid of Representative Michelle Bachman, for outrageously lying to her constituents. She is an embarrassment to humanity.
The government is telling us what lightbulbs we can and cannot use today, what are they going to tell us tomorrow? People who welcome government control over their lives get what they deserve.
You can laugh and make jokes about the people relating lightbulb choice to LIBERTY and FREEDOM, but once the government starts taking away the things that really matter to YOU, you'll be standing right next to the rest of us wishing that we had done something to stem the tide of rampant government legislation a long, long time ago. And by the time that comes, I'm sure the govt will have taken away all our guns, you know 'for our own safety', as well and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it then.
Hey Michelle!
Sounds like you are one of the last true conservatives! Come to Arizona. We love our guns, religion, and the right of an unborn child to live! What's so wack about that? Freedom of choice is great, but the choice begins with the act, not after the fact. What are we, dogs in heat? The next thing you know they will put a tax on the methane gas we emitt. I do not want to buy anything from china!!
The governments job is to maintain the infrastructure, and protect us from our enemies. Nothing else! Stay out of our private lives. Let us vote on all of the issues. This is America. We cannot let a Judge, or small group of people who claim to represent us, dictate our lives! I believe most hard working Americans would agree with me!
If would appear that the Senator from MN got word of the story and sent over the posse.
I don't know where all the hate comes from. One of the functions of government is to protect us. From ourselves if necessary.
That said, even speaking as a treehugging, baby-killing, hippie (not really, but there are apparently only 2 sides to any argument anymore) I still think mandating my light bulb selection is fairly ridiculous. Incandescent bulbs being compared to not wearing a seat belt isn't a very good analogy.
Both sides always talk like the worst case scenario has already happened. With your boy Bush in the White House there's zero chance of a "liberal" federal light bulb banning bill anyway.
Minnesota, what were you thinking!?
I find it extremely amusing to think that people still believe that global warming is some sort of liberal ruse, some hoax that we created just for shits and giggles and to push "our agenda".
Look around, there are smog clouds over our major cities, rivers are clogged with pollution, we have mountains of waste, the Iditarod had to be moved farther north, species of animals are disappearing as I type this. Although I'm not sure banning Incandescent bulbs outright is perhaps the best measure, Congress should be probing environmental issues further, and allocating funding to finding solutions (like making affordable LEDS for home use, perhaps). I am strongly convinced that if the world keeps living like we are today, being wasteful and overly consumptive and apathetic towards the environment, in a few decades the world will no longer exist as we know and knew it.
I agree with Eric S. 100%. I am not sure what to believe here but i think that arguing over a light bulb is pretty trivial.
I am going to share this page with my history teacher and see what he thinks.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Most places in Minnesota requires heat through a good portion of the year. When you factor that into your heating bill, all light bulbs are 100% efficient--the light is useful, the heat is useful.
Most people, use CFL's in fixtures in which they weren't designed and end up using more energy than they need anyway. A good quality Par or MR lamp is often more efficient than many CFL are in many applications. (you can't just count the efficiency of the bulb, you have the count the efficiency of the light fixture and also how it affects your pupils--glare=smaller pupils=more light requred=more energy)
If we are going to legislate anything, why don't we just cap the amount of electricity a house can use (or make it really expensive above a certain point). That way people can pick how they want to accomplish that goal.
Oh yeah, and I still haven't seen any data on the amount of embodied and manufacturing energy, pollution of a CFL vs an Incandescent.
Mike
PS--I use CFL bulbs--where it makes sense to and good quality incandescents (halogen, xenon), where it doesn't.
I have a lighting design and electrical engineering background. I believe that a million people replacing all their lightbulbs isn't going to make as much difference as people learning about and hiring lighting designers that actually know how to make the whole system (not just one component) efficient and pleasing.
It is very concerning to me that we would be forced to use CFL as a citizen of a country that prides itself on Freedom. As ridiculous as it sounds to be fighting an issue as trivial as lightbulbs, I just can't believe that I have to be involved in such a battle. I too, have an illness that is exacerbated by these bulbs and have now found myself becoming more and more isolated because of the use of these bulbs in most public facilities. I somehow could accept the frustration of giving up the "fun times" of dining out and shopping, but when the time came for me to take an ailing son to a medical professional and I could not sit in the office, that was just too much for any mother to handle. So, do I think that the government should mandate the use of these bulbs? Do I think that these bulbs should be used at all? Absolutely Not !!! They are very harmful to the environment and to many individuals. You can do the research and if you do you will see that their are many studies that show an increased concern that these bulbs will cause cancer because of the radiation that is emitted from them, among other issues. Their will most definitely be an increase in Migraine headaches, seizure disorders, skin conditions, and the list goes on.
So, yes I hope that this act passes, and I really don't care what type of woman Ms. Bachman is, she has the right idea.
I am an environmentalist to the core, though, I do it by choice.
I value my freedom to be an individual and hold it above my environmental values.
When you force people to make good decisions, they are not genuinely on your side.
Environmental impact lessening cannot be dictated or enforced, it must be logically transitioned to.
Environmentalism must not become the right hand of oppression!
Where are your ideals people?
This is not just a trend that you should blindly jump behind, it should be a lifestyle, a voluntary lifestyle, and nature will take its course.
Do not lose your ideals as one who values both nature and liberty, for they are not contradictory.
Ask yourself if Thoreau, Ghandi, or Captain Planet would advocate bandwagon oppression in order to save some electricity.
One who conscientiously uses an incandescent will have a lower impact than someone who spitefully retains their lifestyle but is forced to use a certain bulb.
Look at the Patriot Act, it was not lifestyle changing but it was a foot in the door for Big Brother. After our light-bulb choices are curbed, what's next?
Social change is most effective from the bottom-up, NOT from top-down.
Anyone read 1984?
I want to use CFL, and do prefer them very much. However, they aren't the solution!
It seems that we all agree that incandescent bulbs drain more electricity from the grid, mostly at night. This is the time when the power plants actually discard their extra electricity, which is why it is cheapest for us to obtain at night! Either way, it is useless energy being burnt up--the power shortages in CA were due to Enron's manipulations, not limited supply!
Hence, the incandescent enemy isn't my focus of attack to saving the environment. I am sure wars (using depleted uranium, which enters the soil and waters etc), and prison camps that wars necessitate to condemn the captives (see Abu Ghraib), use up very much more energy and create much more pollution than this silly little bulb we are spending countless hours (on our power hungry computers) arguing about.
U may LOL :-)
One final point, mercury is a neurotoxin, meaning that very minute quantities (in the low 10's of milligrams) ruins the endocrine system of animals (fish) and humans (from water), which is why "tree-huggers" (NOMERCURY.ORG) condemn corporate America for polluting our seas and lakes with the very quantities of mercury (being diluted) that we are okaying in our CFL's. CFL's will be disposed eventually, most breaking in the large plastic recycling bins our cities give us!
It isn't an argument to suggest that thermometers have more mercury; you rarely toss an old thermometer frequently, with NEW thermometers NOT using mercury.
Further, our power plants aren't only producing energy for light bulbs, but other more energy intense devices (computers, tv's, manufacturing, cooking and so on.)
Thus, a billion grams (each bulb has one to five grams max) of mercury being disposed of in the landfills, or sent to China for "recycling," every two to four years isn't going to help us! I am sure we are wasting money on and time designing mercury light-bulbs.
I'd love to hear your response!
Reading a few comments here, it seems like some are OUTRAGED at the government "dictating what light bulbs we can use", yet they have no problem with Bachmann when she tries to outlaw the pill and other things 'in our home'.
Republican fanatics pick and chose what to call communist, yet they try to implement laws that dictate what people can't do in their own homes.
Just because someone isn't socialist and won't follow the latest fads, they're not automatically crazy. I love my incandescent light bulbs. In fact - I'm hoarding them. My take: Global warming is here because there's big money in "proving" it and making changes to stop it. If it wasn't found by 'scientists,' to exist everywhere, 'scientists' would be unemployed. This same string of logic was used in the 70s for "global cooling." Hmm...
I thought Liberals as typically smarter. WAKE UP.
YOU ARE GOING TO HATE HAVING NOTHING BUT CFLs.
THEY DO NOT WORK WITH DIMMER LIGHTS.
CFL LIFE IS AS LITTLE AS 1/10 TENTH STATED LIFE WHEN USED IN PLACES WHERE THE CFL LIGHT IS FREQUENTLY LIT LESS THAN 15 MIN. AT A TIME >>> (IE. BATHROOMS & BEDROOMS)
GOOGLE IT.... CFL life span
Buying a cfl from China rather than a soft white made in Kentuky should remain a choice. Personally, I can't read using cfl's no matter what you may say. I am stockpiling the soft whites.
If there were no human life at all on this planet, there would be only 3% less carbon dioxide produced. Even if carbon dioxide caused global warming common sense and math will tell you humans could only have an extremely small effect on golbal warming. The natural fluxuation on carbon dioxide produced by natural God made occurrances is often more than 3% in a year. Trying to play God is an expensive task!
This is a bad law. I get migraine headaches from these bulbs. What choice will I have if I can't buy incandescent bulbs? Just because a small number of people are affected this way does not make the headaches any less debilitating. If I am exposed to CFL's for 15 minutes i will have headache, photo- and noise- sensitivity and vomiting for two or three days. Take the percentage of the population that will be disabled by this law, add up their lost work hours, lost productivity, and medical bills and tell me that for them it will be cheaper to switch to light bulbs that cost twice as much. Add in the value of being able to go into public places with non-natural light (ie stores, schools, and even libraries.) Why is the government doing this? Would these environmentalists support a vaccine that made a few million people permanently disabled, based on a theory that it would save energy in the long run?