December 30, 2011

Last chance for light bulbs.

Make sure you've got enough to last a lifetime... with extras to leave to your children and grandchildren... so that they can know that once there was light... and it was a warm light... there were bulbs that glowed. And the heartless government, which had no feeling for warmth and glow, took those bulbs away.

132 comments:

Ambrose said...

I bought 96. Was going to give out 4 packs as Christmas gifts, but got selfish and kept them all. They are in the basement, next to the food, water and guns

deborah said...

I have a feeling the incandescent ban will go the same way as the ethanol subsidy...green fatigue.

Chip S. said...

After tomorrow you can have both the warm glow from incandescence and the frisson of buying from "bad actors" who flout the ban without consequence.

ricpic said...

All my cabinets are stuffed but I thought congress just lifted the incandescent ban. Yes? No?

Browndog said...

You mean to tell me...you have an object that not only gives off light...

But, simultaneously gives off heat?

EUREKA!!

Long, cold, dark winters--

reduces heating costs while illuminating??

All the world is indebted you , Sir.

....wa--wa--what's that?

*********BANNED************

Don't Tread 2012 said...

If anyone still doesn't understand how embedded the government has become in the affairs of the free market, they need look no further than this absurdity.

People that make their living giving away other peoples money never think about unintended consequences!!!

ironrailsironweights said...

CFL's today are far improved over those from just a few years ago. Instant start, and different types of light tone available (daylight, bright white, soft white). Dimmable versions are now hitting the market.

Peter

Ann Althouse said...

I've never bought a CFL in my life.

I've bought fluorescent tubes... because my house, before I renovated, had a ceiling full of them in the kitchen. I bought some kind of special decorator tubes with a more incandescent color. And I bought that kind of tube for my office and had them installed in place of the standard bulbs.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

@Peter

But, are they 'Easy Bake Oven' ready???

Dust Bunny Queen said...

CFL's today are far improved over those from just a few years ago.

So effing what if they are? I don't give a shit, because they have terrible color quality, don't give off warmth, don't really last that much longer than a good quality incandescent and are expensive.

If they are so fantabulous, then people will buy them.

They aren't and people don't.

MadisonMan said...

Um, that ban was pushed back.

Ann Althouse said...

"Um, that ban was pushed back."

Um, no it wasn't. They just didn't allocate money to enforce it. Question whether there will still be sales.

Also, they don't manufacture them anymore.

Browndog said...

CFL's are improved..

Screw you!

No, they're not-

I just disposed of my 5th one in less that a year-

As an outdoors man, have you ANY idea, how much Mercury will find it's way to the aquifer..lakes. streams..????

All fish will have to be farm raised (steroids)...birth defects..et fucking cetera.

Did I mention they don't fit in anything?

Ambrose said...

Incompetant Republicans can't even repeal a ban. Just because there are no funds for enforcement doesn't mean big retailers are going to knowingly violate the law. In some ways this is a comment on the whole welfare state - the assumption that without vigorous enforcement, everyone will ignore the law.

MadisonMan said...

Guess I didn't read closely. A law that can't be enforced isn't much of a law. Although I still do stop at red lights even at 3 AM when no one is around.

Not to o/t on you, or anything, but is that conspiracy theory of yours still in the works?

KenK said...

Once the avalanche of lawsuits over the massive release of Hg into the environment hit the courts all will be well. For the trial bar any how. Maybe that's how it was meant to be?

Jay Retread said...

I remember thirty years ago conservatives were screaming that the new airbag regulation was going to kill the domestic auto industry. Tens of thousands of lives have been saved since then.

I suspect that the same will happen here. (In fact many people have already made the switch and like the new bulbs just fine.)

Now I realize Ann wants to whip her hillbillies into a frenzy...

Jay Retread said...

I remember thirty years ago conservatives were screaming that the new airbag regulation was going to kill the domestic auto industry. Tens of thousands of lives have been saved since then.

I suspect that the same will happen here. (In fact many people have already made the switch and like the new bulbs just fine.)

Now I realize Ann wants to whip her hillbillies into a frenzy...

ambisinistral said...

I've found an alternative to CFLs. Behold: the light bulb of the future.

Palladian said...

Oh, fuck you, Retread.

Andy R. said...

There has been no ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. Didn't we just do this like two weeks ago?

What is wrong with you people?

Maguro said...

Speaking of hg - What's really fucking stupid is that on one hand the Feds are forcing coal-fired power plants to shut down in name of preventing a minute amount of mercury from entering the environment while on the other hand they try to force everyone to use mercury-filled lightbulbs.

Somehow it all makes sense in the progressive mind.

Palladian said...

My "fuck you" is a substantive comment in this case, as the idea of expending the mental energy to compose a reasoned reply to someone who thinks that it's somehow virtuous to support the limitation of any freedom, even an insignificant-seeming one, is just to wearying to consider. It's also out of the question to bother responding reasonably to the kind of retarded cretin who thinks it clever to call someone a "hillbilly" because they prefer one kind of a lightbulb over another.

Yes, the importance of visual aesthetics is a "hillbilly" trait.

Who the fuck even calls anyone a "hillbilly" anymore?!

Anyway, screw the State and screw in an incandescent bulb.

gail said...

Local news had a bit on the ban...said it wasn't a ban, just a change in energy efficiency. You will notice more LUMENS of light for less wattage.

I don't give a crap how well lit the inside of the livestock waterer may be, I want it WARM so it doesn't freeze.

My barnyard-based common sense tells me an *old* 75-watt bulb is more energy efficient than the manufacture installed 320 watt heat coil. 60-watt bulbs don't give off enough heat in the -20 January cold snaps, or if it's warmed up to zero but windy.

Palladian said...

"What is wrong with you people?"

You're an adult male who wears a fucking crooked baseball cap and you ask what is wrong with us?

Man up, man child, before casting aspersions.

shiloh said...

"Now I realize Ann wants to whip her hillbillies into a frenzy..."

Indeed, her stock-in-trade as she must keep her natives happy!

Her threads are mostly self-fulfilling prophecies, no deviations from the conservative gospel allowed ...

Lawyer Mom said...

I bought several hundred incandescents last month (oh, and don't forget the "torpedo tips" for sconces, chandeliers and porch lights). But I'm heading back to Amazon for more because I don't know how many I will need to live out the rest of my life. I just know I can't live one day without them (and if you break a CFL? Don't even get me started on the mercury exposure).

I even carry them with me on trips so I can switch out the CFLs in hotel rooms. I cannot bear those blasted CFLs.

FYI, I saw the "dimmer" CFLs at Costco today. $29.95 for ONE bulb. Although cheaper than a fire, I suppose. &@#*!%!

Here's a nice (liberal?) family whose house caught on fire when they put a CFL bulb in an ordinary dimmer light.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad7vhHfjgC0&feature=player_embedded

Browndog said...

There has been no ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. Didn't we just do this like two weeks ago?

What is wrong with you people?


As you can probably tell, there is a huge demand for Edison's bulb.

Apparently, everyone else is too stupid to see it, and shut down their manufacturing of said bulb.

Being the smart one, I suggest you take full advantage, and start your own company-

Capitalism

Or, if you prefer, donate your proceeds to OWS.

Rock on....

Dust Bunny Queen said...

A law that can't be enforced isn't much of a law

A product that has been phased out, or to be more accurate now manufactured overseas, and is no longer on the shelves is being enforced by a purposefully made shortage.

The government has crippled an industry in the US that was manufacturing a product that people wanted and used.

And for what? An unproven semi relgious adherence to some sort of Gaia worship and the thumbscrews from the Eco-Nazi Jack Booted Nanny contingent from the left.

There has been no ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. Didn't we just do this like two weeks ago?

The ban on sale IS still in effect, the defunding of enforcement is the best that the limp dick Republicans can do, evidently. Not good enough.

My attitude on all of this green crappola is .....if the government wants me to do it....I won't.

They have lied to us over and over and over about almost everything from whether eggs are going to kill us, global warming, global cooling, salt, butter....the list is too long to go into.

If the government told be to buy ice cream, I would never touch it again. Well, maybe just a bit of strawberry or chocolate.

Lawyer Mom said...

Sorry to serial post but . . . here's a lovely quote from Steven Chu (EPA) re the incandescent ban captured by George Will:

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, whose department has become a venture capital firm for crony capitalism and costly flops at creating “green jobs,” praises the policy of essentially banishing the incandescent light bulb as “taking away a choice that continues to let people waste their own money.”

Bender said...

Incompetant Republicans can't even repeal a ban.

Time to repeal and ban Boehner.

Even to the extent that they did do anything, it was only temporary. So the biggest thing that they did to "fix" the problem was to introduce more UNCERTAINTY into the market -- companies aren't sure what the law might be tomorrow, so they won't bother to even make or sell the bulbs that people want.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

@ Gail

I don't give a crap how well lit the inside of the livestock waterer may be, I want it WARM so it doesn't freeze.

A woman after my own heart.

We use the incandescent bulbs to keep the pump and plumbing from freezing in the pump houses.

An incanscent bulb is hella cheaper than running a pump house heater.

60-watt bulbs don't give off enough heat in the -20 January cold snaps, or if it's warmed up to zero but windy.

Dunno where you are, but it finally after over 20 days has warmed up to above freezing in the day and only in the mid 20's at night. Woo hoo...heat wave.

Note to Congress, you morons and fools, ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.

Andy R. said...

Does anyone want to bet me that incandescent light bulbs aren't being banned?

Bender said...

As for airbags, they too have caused a number of injuries. But what do you expect from having something explode at high velocity and strike you in the face?

Dangerous enough that children must sit in the back seat (where there are no airbags) so they don't get their heads smashed in.

And then there is the danger presented from not being able to see to operate the vehicle after they have deployed.

And don't get me started on the government mandated use of lighter materials to make the cars, which have increased the likelihood of an accident resulting in a fatality, not to mention the higher repair costs even without an injury, which forces people to pay the repair shop money that would otherwise have gone to something like rent or food.

How about this for an idea? Government stay the hell away from people!

Bender said...

Speaking of cars, what with the new CAFE standards that have been dictated by Obama, standards that completely ignore the laws of physics, not only will light bulbs be banned, but most motor vehicles will be effectively banned as well since it is impossible to safely engineer a ton of mass to be moved 55 miles on a single gallon of gasoline, especially if that gas is spiked with ethanol. And even if they can do that with one experimental death-car, having an entire fleet average that mpg will be economically impossible.

Browndog said...

Does anyone want to bet me that incandescent light bulbs aren't being banned?

You gonna whip some up in your garage and sell them to us, since no one will manufacture them anymore due to the arbitrary efficiency statute?

er...guess not-

just because you can't make something, doesn't mean you can't buy it!

(ever wonder where the term "libtard" came from?)

...you shouldn't-

Paul said...

Ann, I have to confess -- I love you like a sister, but I can't fathom your obsession with incandescent light bulbs. You talk about warm light, and glow ... both characteristics you can obtain with compact fluorescent bulbs.

So ... what then ... ? Is it just a libertarian streak that makes it difficult for you to accept having the government tell you what kind of bulb you can have in your house? Okay, that's legitimate ... but I think you should admit it, rather than trying to dress it up in some kind of faux aesthetic critique. It doesn't wash.

Joe Schmoe said...

Just waiting for Barry to announce the "Loot for Light Bulbs" program where you can bring in your old incandies for cash towards new CFLs.

wv: seausescu - eerily close to Romanian commie dictator Ceausescu who had listening devices put on every citizen's phone.

Andy R. said...

Browndog, are you admitting that incandescent light bulbs haven't been banned, or would you like to take my bet?

Browndog said...

Just so you know-

A republican, from the Great Failed State of Michigan sponsored the initial ban-

His name is Fred..

He recently ran for re-election, and won on the promise to repeal his "mistake".

A few months into the term, he, the chairman, brought the repeal to committee.

Using a parliamentary procedure, quashed the legislation.

Then...said..."I did all I can do".

....Hence, the Tea Party movement.

Curious George said...

"Ann Althouse said...
Also, they don't manufacture them anymore."

Sure they do. Just not in the U.S.

Browndog said...

@Andy-

Nope.

I, seek the truth.

Not semantics, word games, and the like-

The 100 watt bulb is just phase 1.

You know, it's been 30 years since it first struck me-

In the age of ever advancing technology, not one person could even make a light bulb--something as simple and basic to everyday life-

Thinking we as a people may need to revisit that-

Thanks to folks like yourself..

The regressives....

Andy R. said...

Thanks to folks like yourself..

I don't even have a position one way or the other on the efficiency standards for the light bulbs, since I don't know enough about it to have a strong opinion about the matter.

I do know enough to know that incandescent bulbs haven't been banned, and so I think its worth pointing out to the tin-foil-hat-black-helicopter conspiracy theorists like Althouse and the commenters here.

Simon said...

Let's imagine a government policy which discourages and thereby disrupts the supply of a particular good. Is the policy analogous to a ban?

As I understand it, the "incandescent lightbulb ban" obliges manufacturers of lightbulbs (of any kind) to meet certain prerequisites ("efficiency"), and it would not be economical for manufacturers to produce compliant incandescent bulbs. The "ban" is thus mediated by private entrepeneurial choice: The regulation doesn't ban incandescent bulbs, it just creates a regulatory framework in which the product becomes unavailable in the marketplace.

Now imagine that a state government imposes a regulation that medical facilities wishing to offer abortion must meet certain prerequisites ("health and safety," informed consent," etc.), and it would not be economical* for clinics to comply. The "ban" is thus mediated by private entrepeneurial choice: The regulation doesn't ban abortion, it just creates a regulatory framework in which the service becomes unavailable in the marketplace. Has the state banned abortion?

___________
*Absent market distortions not present in the lightbulb debate—fanatical pro-abortion ideology could lead some outfits like PP to operate at a loss in some states.

Simon said...

MadisonMan said...
"A law that can't be enforced isn't much of a law. Although I still do stop at red lights even at 3 AM when no one is around."

It still impacts the market because a responsible business with a product cycle of more than four years can't take the risk that the next administration won't be more zealous than its underenforcing predecessor. Unenforced laws aren't lagan so much as they are mines.

Joe Schmoe said...

Chu's comment about saving us from wasting our own money really sticks in my craw.

I pay roughly $100/month for electricity. If I swap out every bulb for a CFL maybe I save 5% overall on my electric bill. Most of our electricity goes to non-light stuff like the oven/range, electronics, etc. So now I'm down to $95. Thanks Mr. Chu.

If I look at my other expenses, I pay tens of thousands of dollars a year towards our house and house-related items. I pay thousands of dollars a year towards cars and car-related expenses. I'm trying to pay thousands a year towards my own retirement fund.

If these fucking Democrat geniuses could find a way for me to save even 3% on my housing or transportation expenses, or add 3% to my retirement, I'd be waaaayyy better off. Instead they spend thousands of dollars writing and printing instruction booklets on how to clean up a broken CFL (it's basically a hazmat site and can't be vacuumed up lest you disperse more mercury into the air! But like some lefty douche said on the thread a few weeks ago, if you've got a pregnant woman in the house just open the window.)

Talk about penny wise pound foolish.

ken in sc said...

A hillbilly is someone who lives in the hills of Northern Ireland and supports William of Orange as King of England. Why do we keep calling people bad names because of things that happened centuries ago.

MadisonMan said...

Well, I learned a new word tonight: lagan.

Thanks!

Ambrose said...

Speaking of Hillbillies:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/30/idUS198763967420111230

ken in sc said...

BTW, have you ever worked in an office that had Florence tubes? When they broke did anyone bring in hasmat teams? I did'nt think so. It's BS.

Jess said...

@Andy R:
I do know enough to know that incandescent bulbs haven't been banned, and so I think its worth pointing out to the tin-foil-hat-black-helicopter conspiracy theorists like Althouse and the commenters here.

Don't be disingenuous. Of course we know that incandescent bulbs haven't been banned in the statutory language. Nevertheless, I will no longer be able to purchase 100W incandescent bulbs at Wal-Mart or Target or their competitors.

AprilApple said...

Now we're stuck with curly light bulbs that contain toxic mercury.
(and insulting light that adds 10 years in the mirror)

Mogget said...

How hard do you think it would be to "fix" Google so that whenever someone typed in "Al Gore" it would complete the entry with "is a dumbass?"

Ambrose said...

Mogget - I think when Al Gore invented the Internet, he added some feature that would prevent that. Just saying.

Dr Weevil said...

Do you think Andy R. would understand if this blog were to ban all comments from anyone who has ever used an avatar with its hat on sideways? Or would he say "Hey, I haven't actually been banned! I can't comment there any more, but the new rule doesn't actually name me personally, so it's no big deal!"

Browndog said...

Honestly, I don't find this subject one bit humorous-

But, if I did....

I'd head over to Insty...for an insty..

and read something that starts with this:

Requires expensive peripherals to work at all!!,

Very disappointed in this product....

Andy R. said...

Do you think Andy R. would understand if this blog were to ban all comments from anyone who has ever used an avatar with its hat on sideways?

Seeing as how under the new regulations one can still go to the store and purchase incandescent light bulbs, I don't know how your analogy makes any sense.

Again, there is no ban. There are incandescent bulbs you can buy, now and in the future.

ironrailsironweights said...

CFL-haters can take a bit of solace in the fact that LED bulbs may become the standard before long. Right now they're very expensive, and the light quality isn't the best, but the prices are likely to drop soon even as the quality rises.

Peter

Browndog said...

@Peter

Aye.

Read a piece the other day saying how CFL's are just the bridge to LED's.

Fine.

That's not how they were sold (to Congress)...that's not how they were marketed...

It's only now--after their epic failure--are they calling them the "bridge"..

in the meantime.....

Let me know when you want to talk about Chevy Volt batteries....and bridges....

Ambrose said...

Irons: For a lot of us, it's not the cost, the quality, the wasted heat, the watts, the lumens or even the mercury - it's having the choice.

Michael said...

Andr R. Perhaps you are intentionally obtuse but i will try to explain.
1. The govt has set specifications for 100 watt bulbs that cannot be met and still sell the bulbs at a profit
2. Since they cannot be met the manufacturers have ceased production
3. They will not be available as a result of 1 and 2
4. Why dont you produce them according to the new impossible standards and sell them cheaply. You can make up your losses in volume

Michael said...

CFL are crap, by the way. I think we should occupy home depot, buy them by the thousands, throw them on the concrete flors and call the newspapers and hazmet.

Michael said...

Andy R. Out of curiosity, what do you think the law we are discussing concerns? Is there actually no law and we are hallucinating? I am interested in exactly howvdumb you reslly are but hoping against hope that you are tooling us.

Dr Weevil said...

Can someone explain what Andy R. is even trying to say in his last?

Is he saying that I can actually buy actual 100-watt incandescents in my local stores after midnight tomorrow? Because that doesn't seem to be true. I got the last box of them at my local Kroger's a week ago, marked down as a closeout.

Or is he saying that I would be able to buy them if they were able to meet the stringent new rules, but they won't, so I can't?

If that's what he means, I'll change my hypothetical. Do you think Andy R. would understand if this blog were to ban all comments from anyone who has ever used an avatar with its hat on sideways, unless said comments were (a) perfect palindromes, and (b) perfectly spelled and grammatically correct? Because that would make it impossible for him to post here, without technically banning him.

Similarly, it will soon be impossible to buy the lightbulbs I want to buy: they will not be available, and anyone who says they are not being banned is a contemptible quibbler playing with the meanings of words in a totally dishonest way.

wv: ingshin - scary movie dubbed into Pig Latin.

Jason said...

No worries, guys. Just pretend those incandescent light bulbs are residual payments going to support the widows of songwriters and studio musicians.

You can't wait to strip those people of their property. So who cares about a light bulb manufacturer?

Andy R. said...

Here is an incandescent bulb that meets the new efficiency regulations that all of you are welcome to buy online or in a store.

What's so confusing about this?

Danno said...

If you look at Andy R.'s profile, he lives in Jerusalem, so I doubt he can help show us where to buy them (incandescents) in the U.S.A. after tomorrow.

Joe said...

Phillips does have high efficiency incandescent bulbs called EvoVantage. They aren't as bright as Phillips own 60 watt bulbs and I haven't been able to find them in town. The Home Depot site lists them at $6 for a six pack. It's break even in my area, though, since the savings doesn't make up for the price.

Andy R. said...

If you look at Andy R.'s profile, he lives in Jerusalem, so I doubt he can help show us where to buy them (incandescents) in the U.S.A. after tomorrow.

Nah, I live in Atlanta now. I guess I haven't updated my profile in the last three years. I didn't realize it said I was in Jerusalem and I should probably change that.

Similarly, that hat picture is, I would guess, 4 or 5 years old, and I think I've worn a hat two or three times since then. I don't actually like them, although I do like that picture for reasons other than the hat being askew.

Ralph L said...

ironrailsironweights said...
CFL's today are far improved over those from just a few years ago.
They're still smooth as glass.

robinintn said...

Andy's link is to a Philips halogen, not incandescent, bulb. It costs approximately 5 times as much (on Amazon) as the now unavailable "equivalent" bulb.

Maguro said...

Here's the issue, hat dude: The only way they can meet the new efficiency standards is to make the filament burn hotter, which means your "high efficiency" light bulbs won't last very long. This is due to the laws of physics.

So technically, you're right, they haven't banned incandescent bulbs, but they've made them worse than they were before. And who knows if incandescents are even a viable commercial product anymore with this new, hotter-burning filament?

Bottom line is, why the fuck is the government even involved with designing lightbulbs? It's unneccessary, overbearing and absurd.

Joe said...

At one point Phillips made very nice 52 watt bulbs that I used in hallways. At my previous place, we had several three light fixtures; I'd just put in two bulbs. At the place before that I tried CFLs. They went green in two months and died. Even when they worked, they were dim; it made you think a light had burned out (had the same experience in a hotel two summers ago--they used the best CFLs I'd seen save for the dimness problem.)

Michael said...

AndyR. Link to a 100 watt bulb, please. Your link is to a 67 watt. We know you can buy bulbs lower than 60 watts.

Joe said...

Michael, it's a 72 watt bulb that produces comparable lumens (brightness; 1490) as a traditional 100 watt bulb (1440).

Biggest problem right now is that they are expensive, though the price should drop in time.

Andy R. said...

We know you can buy bulbs lower than 60 watts.

Who is this "we"? This thread is full of people saying that incandescent bulbs have been banned and refuse to admit that they are wrong even though you can continue to buy them at Home Depot.

Browndog said...

Andy's hat..his profile...where he lives..

Distraction.

A man is his word(s).

At least, though wrong, is standing up to the (incandescent) heat-

(Did you know a German is marketing "heat bulbs" to Europe...)

Capitalism, Baby.

Andy R. said...

Andy's hat..

Distraction


Why do you think the idiots here bring it up every time I embarrass them about something?

Browndog said...

Why do you think the idiots here bring it up every time I embarrass them about something?

The yellow shirt?

Dr Weevil said...

I looked up Andy's recommended bulb on Amazon. The price per bulb was $3.56 - ouch! Then there's the shipping: "Note: $7.03 shipping when purchased from Wayfair. Not eligible for Amazon Prime." So I'm supposed to spend $10.59 per bulb? Why? And the reviewers say these particular bulbs don't last long, and often stick in the sockets. In other words, overpriced crap.

Home Depot charges less ($3.17 for 2), but they advertise a lifetime of 0.9 years, which seems awfully short, and the one (1 star) review says his first two lasted 3 days and 3 weeks respectively. In other words, overpriced crap.

Now let's see Andy R. post his next comment as a grammatically-correct palindrome.

Palladian said...

Like me, Andy R. is a queer; let's appeal to his vanity. Andy, honey, have you ever really looked at your face when lit by fluorescent lights at close range? That pallid light doesn't lie: you're not the twink you used to be, babe.

It's enough to knock your hat crooked!

Christy said...

Saw a bunch of LED Christmas lights this season in some of our more upscale hillbilly neighborhoods. I didn't think their blueish color worked so well with the yellowish incandescent icicle lights.

Truly, I've had long lasting success with the cfls I bought from Walmart over 10 years ago to go in lamps that were inconvenient to change. Still, we have two cabinets of the old bulbs.

Browndog said...

Still looking for that study that says the Edison bulbs wastes 70,80,90% of it's energy...

Impossible to "waste" energy.

It simply transfers...learned it in 4th grade-

...probably before there was a teacher's union

LOL

Chuck66 said...

This right winger can live with CFLs. Its just I don't like the federal government telling me I can't purchase the Edison invented bulb.

Newer CFLs I have turn on instantly and put out a nice bright color. My 2 outdoor ones haven't burned out like the incandescent ones constantly did.

Steve Austin said...

If you want to order some good bulbs, check out the decade bulbs from national hospitality supply. Google them.

I've got my supply and can ride this out until cheap LED's that give off good light arrive.

gadfly said...

Instapundit includes this hilarious complaint that the bulbs for sale on Amazon are unsuitable for camping.

Andy R. said...

What's the over under on how long until Althouse makes another post about how incandescent bulbs have been banned and a bunch of you commenters chime in about it and I have to explain to all of you how you are wrong and you can buy them on Amazon or Home Depot?

Dr Weevil said...

How long until hat-boy admits that the incandescents that will still be for sale after tomorrow are difficult to find (I've never seen one anywhere I shop for bulbs), grossly overpriced, don't last, and generally suck? The government is in fact banning the only bulbs many of us want to buy and forcing us to either (a) buy huge stacks of the good ones now and hope they never send around bulb inspectors to confiscate them, (b) spend way too much money on bulbs that are either sickeningly off-color, poisonous, overpriced, shoddily made, or some combination of those, or (c) sit in the dark.

Hat boy is so proud that he's technically correct that we will still be able to buy incandescent bulbs of some sort, without caring that the ones we will be graciously permitted to buy suck, and that only a stupid law will prevent us from buying the kind that don't suck.

I'm sure he's also proud that he's not technically an anal orifice, but again the technical difference is unimportant compared to the fundamental (see what I did there?) identity.

I like to read in bed, and I find that only traditional incandescents work for me. How dare the government tell me what I can or cannot do in the privacy of my own bedroom?

Sofa King said...

Michael, it's a 72 watt bulb that produces comparable lumens (brightness; 1490) as a traditional 100 watt bulb (1440).

What's your source for these numbers?

Most simple soft white 100 wat bulbs are arount 1700 lumens. These bulbs use less energy because they are dimmer.

Sofa King said...

What's the over under on how long until Althouse makes another post about how incandescent bulbs have been banned and a bunch of you commenters chime in about it and I have to explain to all of you how you are wrong and you can buy them on Amazon or Home Depot?

Certainly not a 1690-lumen incandescent, is the point.

jamboree said...

@Paul

How so? The entire point of fluorescent efficiency is that it gets rid of the "wasted" heat that the incandescent bulbs gave off responsible for the reddish glow and turns it to the straight cold light end of the spectrum thereby using less energy.

Any "warm glow" quality the CF can manufacture to make them less aesthetically repulsive will be fake by definition. It's not imaginary, it's a reality.

We just changed out the heat lights in the bathroom and I'm MISERABLE. I loved those things...better than any heater.

rcommal said...

Althouse: A several months' extension was put in effect so right now this very day is not in fact "last chance" and later we'll find about what really was behind that extension but regardless the truth is that the most important damage already was done and that is this: yet another closing down of a factory/industry in the U.S. full stop.

Make no mistake that at least there are very large entities that will benefit immensely and for them nothing about all of this has been surprising at all including from the very start: The end game is theirs and that was the point start to finish.

rcommal said...

Andy R:

I respect a lot of what you have to say about various things, but not on this subject. You insist on comparing apples to oranges. I will never accept your inapt, and inept, notion of equivalence in terms of light bulbs.

Peace, but no thanks and no buy in.

Nicholas said...


How so? The entire point of fluorescent efficiency is that it gets rid of the "wasted" heat that the incandescent bulbs gave off responsible for the reddish glow and turns it to the straight cold light end of the spectrum thereby using less energy.

Any "warm glow" quality the CF can manufacture to make them less aesthetically repulsive will be fake by definition. It's not imaginary, it's a reality.


That's not correct. "Cooler" colours of light are actually the result of higher temperature incandescence. That's why lamps get more yellow/red as you dim them (and the filament temperature drops due to decreasing power and thus dissipation). It's also why halogen lamps (which are technically a form of incandescent lamp) produce a more "white" light from a hotter filament.

But fluorescent lights work by a completely different mechanism. The colour of light they emit has nothing to do with their temperature. They work by exciting one or more "phosphors" (with ultraviolet light, emitted from a mercury vapour arc) which then fluoresce and give out light at a particular frequency.

By mixing different phosphors, it is possible to produce an emitted light which looks more or less white, although the resulting spectrum is very spikey, hence the generally poor colour rendering index (CRI) of fluorescent lamps.

By fiddling with the phospor mix, you can get a more yellow ("warm") or blue ("cool") looking light. By having more phosphors, the CRI is improved.

I like using fluorescent lamps (not CFLs) with four ("quad") phosphors, in "daylight". To my eyes this is a good approximation of noonday sun although some objects still look the wrong colour. But I live in a warm climate where the extra heat from incandescents is not welcome. YMMV.

BTW Quad Phospor tubes (linear or circular) are also very efficient, at up to 100lm/W. That's better than some LEDs. The best LEDs are around 200lm/W but are very expensive and need serious heatsinking if they are to be sufficiently bright.

JackOfVA said...

I've disassembled several failed screw-in CFLs -- both cheap and moderate price products. All made in China and all built with parts that are incredibly marginally rated for the expected voltage and temperature. The surprise is not that they fail at least as frequently as a typical 1000 hour incandescent but rather that they last as long as they do.

Also, some CFLs are not rated for operation with base up, which is essential in certain fixtures. (The electronics in the CFL base of these lamps do not have adequate heat removal when operated in any orientation other than base down.

I should also mention that CFLs are peak-draw devices. This may be esoteric, but it has major ramifications for the electric power grid. A standard incandescent more or less draws current through the full 360 degrees of the 60 Hz house current waveform. A CFL only draws power during a small portion of the cycle, near the positive and negative peaks. This reduces the efficiency of the electrical power grid. It's possible to spend more money by revising CFL design to correct some of this peak load problem, which will lead to even further regulation and increased costs to CFL purchasers and utilities.

LED illumination may solve some of these problems, but certainly not all.

For those of us who are also ham radio operators, CFLs create enormous levels of "electronic smog" or radio frequency interference. Interference suppression components add cost and are typically not fitted to any of the lamps I disassembled. Indeed, I strongly suspect the lamps I looked at could not comply with even the FCC's loose RFI rules, despite their markings to the contrary. (Not uncommon with Chinese products; the regulator compliance markings are regarded as decorative items to be added for appearance.)

Until they are regulated out (I think it's 2013 or so) I recommend 100 watt screw-in halogen lamps. They have a longer life than a standard tungsten incandescent and emit more light. The color is a bit higher in the spectrum than a standard tungsten lamp, but not so much as to be objectionable.

Nicholas said...

I've disassembled several failed screw-in CFLs -- both cheap and moderate price products. All made in China and all built with parts that are incredibly marginally rated for the expected voltage and temperature. The surprise is not that they fail at least as frequently as a typical 1000 hour incandescent but rather that they last as long as they do.

I understand that in some cases, components in CFLs are used in ways they aren't even designed or rated for. This is why I prefer proper fluorescent lamps. A decent electronic ballast will last for the life of many tubes and the tubes typically last a lot longer than a CFL anyway.

Also, some CFLs are not rated for operation with base up, which is essential in certain fixtures. (The electronics in the CFL base of these lamps do not have adequate heat removal when operated in any orientation other than base down.

Many are also not designed to be operate in sealed fittings; they require air convection for cooling. I'm not sure what we're supposed to put in sealed fittings. Halogen replacements may not be a good idea in sealed fittings either, due to the high operating temperature and sufficiently bright LEDs definitely aren't (if they fit!) for the same reason.

I should also mention that CFLs are peak-draw devices. This may be esoteric, but it has major ramifications for the electric power grid. A standard incandescent more or less draws current through the full 360 degrees of the 60 Hz house current waveform. A CFL only draws power during a small portion of the cycle, near the positive and negative peaks. This reduces the efficiency of the electrical power grid. It's possible to spend more money by revising CFL design to correct some of this peak load problem, which will lead to even further regulation and increased costs to CFL purchasers and utilities.

LED illumination may solve some of these problems, but certainly not all.


CFLs typically have a poor power factor (well below 0.5). This increases transmission losses and causes uneven loading on generators. Utilities can correct it at the substation to some extent. However since domestic lighting loads are a relatively small proportion of all power usage, it isn't a major problem (if it were, utilities would be making more noise about getting it fixed). Note that this is also why forcing people to switch to CFLs is pretty pointless.

Proper fluorescents are sometimes fitted with power factor correction capacitors but they still aren't as good as resistive loads like incandescents or halogens.

LED lamps can have a good power factor if they are driven from power supplies with active power factor correction. They are somewhat complex though and so are perhaps not as reliable as the more standard kind.

For those of us who are also ham radio operators, CFLs create enormous levels of "electronic smog" or radio frequency interference. Interference suppression components add cost and are typically not fitted to any of the lamps I disassembled. Indeed, I strongly suspect the lamps I looked at could not comply with even the FCC's loose RFI rules, despite their markings to the contrary. (Not uncommon with Chinese products; the regulator compliance markings are regarded as decorative items to be added for appearance.)

It's tough to keep the EMI from switchmode power supplies (which is what drives a CFL) to a reasonable level. They operate by switching fairly high currents at moderate frequencies (typically 200-2000kHz) which unfortunately happens to cover pretty much the whole MW/SW band. The internal components can't help but act as antennas and quite a bit of extra shielding and suppression components would be required to filter it out which would substantially increase the size, weight and cost.

It's true that a lot of consumer products carry compliance logos when they likely have never even been tested. The authorities don't seem too concerned.

WV: artifici - the light from a CFL?

Sabinal said...

here's a clue...
why don't you write your congressman to repeal the ban? And if it's important enough, vote someone else in?

This is drama-queenship at it's worse. In the real world no one (yet) is bitching about not having incandescent light bulbs, so long as there are light bulbs available. If anything, people will complain at the expense, but I have YET to hear anyone complain about the warmth of a lifebulb.

This complaining is more in league with conspiracy theories and has done nothing for the democratic process other than sniping. And I find it rather disappointing.

Sabinal said...

and why are y'all so invested in hating Andy because he disagrees with you? It's beginning to get as bad as DU or Huff Post -- when in doubt tease someone about their hat? real grown up there, people

LilyBart said...

why don't you write your congressman to repeal the ban? And if it's important enough, vote someone else in?

I've written my congressman. I've CALLED my congressman's office. There appears to be little will for the congress to change this. Can you explain this to me?

What happened to the concept of being represented? Representation now appears to mean some guy (or gal) gets to tell you what's good for you.

We are no longer a free people - we are like children in kindergarten where they used to say to my daughter, "you get what you get and you don't throw a fit."

Joe Schmoe said...

Sabinal, it seems to me that you haven't been following all of the Althouse posts on the topic. People have legitimate complaints about warmth, or lack thereof, when it comes to non-incandescents.

Andy gets blowback not because of his hat but because of the cocksure way he presents himself. When you make snarky comments you get snark back. Andy's a big boy and has shown he can handle it.

Your other complaint that there's some direct-line easy fix is just wrong and shows a facile understanding of how government regulation works. Creeping regulations are hard to stanch because of people like you saying "Well, I'm happy to have any kind of light bulb" while the reality is that this represents an intrusion of government into free markets and private homes. It will not save money and energy on any large scale, and it will have unintended, negative consequences. Instead of undoing it the government will likely add more regulations to "fix" the unintended consequences. And this accumulates.

Think of these regulations as a massive tangling of cord or string. It's easy to add more string to the tangle, but how are you supposed to untangle the whole thing without cutting the shit out of it?

LilyBart said...

In the real world no one (yet) is bitching about not having incandescent light bulbs, so long as there are light bulbs available.

A LOT of people are angry about this - and the anger will grow as the more commonly used wattage incandescent are phased out (60W & 40W).

Many people prefer the quality of the incandescent - not necessarily the warmth. And they are angry about the government interference with their choices, especially when the alternatives are so sub-par.

I think there are a lot of people who believe the government will reserve itself on this and therefore they see no need to get upset. I hope they’re right.

Joe Schmoe said...

Andy, I appreciate your adherence to the letter of the law, but in addition to market forces there's also a little something called intent. I'm out of my element here posing as someone who knows anything about law, so anyone, anyone, feel free to correct me, but the reason our judicial system is so large is because the letter of the law is not nearly enough, and we expend the most energy deriving intent, both of laws and the defendants' actions.

To me it seems the intent of this law is to pretty much make it impossible to make a certain type of incandescent. Don't confuse intent with explicit text. Sometimes they can be different animals and construed as such all the way up to the Supreme Court.

MarkD said...

"I pay roughly $100/month for electricity. If I swap out every bulb for a CFL maybe I save 5% overall on my electric bill."

Then the electric company lobbies for a 10% rate increase because they aren't making a reasonable profit in the captive marketplace. You get higher electric bills for using less and are forced to buy more expensive bulbs that you don't like.

If it ended there, it would be bad but tolerable. What will happen to that mercury in the CFLs? Everybody will recycle them responsibly for no cost at the free, preexisting recycling centers - or not. None will ever break. Mercury will become nontoxic. The government will actually promote freedom. And Obama will be as good a president as he thinks he is.

PatCA said...

I never use the 100s. I go for the 60s instead for inside. But I will stock up on those, too, and have been.

I hate Big government.

Joe said...

Michael, it's a 72 watt bulb that produces comparable lumens (brightness; 1490) as a traditional 100 watt bulb (1440).

What's your source for these numbers?


I was quoting from Phillips site. As I pointed out previously the lumens they listed for their 60-watt equivalent are lower, so it wouldn't surprise me if the 100 watt is lower as well.

I also pointed out that CFLs suffer a similar problem. My experience is that 15 watt CFLs are equivalent to a 45 watt incandescent, not a 60 watt.

Big Mike said...

Does anybody know what the story is on 3-ways? Nearly all of the table lamps in my house take 30-70-100, with one that takes 50-100-150.

From Inwood said...

I am on an e-mail thread which has a slobbering Dem supporter who has a (science) PhD.

He, as a propagandist, is much given to sophistries which "prove" that, despite what we see with our very eyes, everything is rosy & we, er, dim bulbs should re-elect Obama.

He is treated with much disdain by most, but some treat him as if he were a real person rather than a DNC robot & get mad at me when I question his bona fides.

Here? Andy R has done a bait & switch by showing that the law, in its majestic equality or some such, does not, you know, er, um, ban, repeat ban, 100 Watt incandescent bulbs, & that, in any event, some 100 Watt substitute is really, you know, er, um, the same thing, so what's your problem? He will probably create some doubt in some insecure dolt about why all this fuss.

Mission accomplished.

PS Many a retailer would have us believe that its $200 suit is the exact same suit as a $1,000 name-brand one. I wonder if the Andys or my science guy believe that.

Hey, look a plain “quarterpounder” in MacD’s is, ounce for ounce, probably as nutritional as a prime cut steak in a NY steakhouse.

From Inwood said...

Hey, everytime I get into Manhattan, there's some guy on a street coerner who wants to sell me a "RULUX" watch. It looks like a Rolex...

Jess said...

@Big Mike:
Does anybody know what the story is on 3-ways?

You probably need to go to Anthony Weiner for the scoop on those.

Issob Morocco said...

I wouldn't count your potential profiteering dollars just yet.

This will be the first thing that gets turned over in about 369 days.

Jobs, jobs, jobs.

Something Obama does not quite understand.

Happy New Year!

Rick67 said...

What I don't understand is why they don't start manufacturing 99 watt bulbs and say "ta da!"

For the record, I started switching to fluorescent bulbs before it was mandated because this conservative *does* care about conserving energy. But... it has become apparent they often don't last any longer and sometimes they burn out faster. And how the heck to dispose of them?!? It's a great idea but isn't working out as well as I'd hoped.

From Inwood said...

Big Mike

FYI, a 3-way incandescent lamp is excluded from the ban.

Inwood

PS I went to a restaurant which claimed that it served "Mom's apple pie". Wasn't the same as I remember, but perhaps at my age my mind is playing tricks on me.

From the statute:

‘‘(ii) EXCLUSIONS.—The term ‘general service
incandescent lamp’ does not include the following
incandescent lamps:
‘‘(I) An appliance lamp.
‘‘(II) A black light lamp.
‘‘(III) A bug lamp.
‘‘(IV) A colored lamp.
‘‘(V) An infrared lamp.
‘‘(VI) A left-hand thread lamp.
‘‘(VII) A marine lamp.
‘‘(VIII) A marine signal service lamp.
‘‘(IX) A mine service lamp.
‘‘(X) A plant light lamp.
‘‘(XI) A reflector lamp.
‘‘(XII) A rough service lamp.
‘‘(XIII) A shatter-resistant lamp (including a
shatter-proof lamp and a shatter-protected lamp).
‘‘(XIV) A sign service lamp.
‘‘(XV) A silver bowl lamp.
‘‘(XVI) A showcase lamp.
‘‘(XVII) A 3-way incandescent lamp.
‘‘(XVIII) A traffic signal lamp.
‘‘(XIX) A vibration service lamp.

From Inwood said...

Big Mike

On second thought, maybe Jess is right about experts on three-ways.

Chris Dodd also.

And these experts may explain

‘‘(XIX) A vibration service lamp.

in the statute also

Big Mike said...

@Inwood, much obliged to you.

And yes, I mean then light bulbs and I did not mean the Anthony Weiner kind of 3-way.

Theranter said...

Surprised there was no mention of the poor women and children in China that are ingesting Mercury and enormous amounts of phosphorous during the manufacturing process. And I am sure they have OSHA laws as stringent as ours and a Big Brother union looking out for them. Sickening,hypocritical, idiotic progressives. Another example of their true misogynistic nature. (Especially the "Hey" dude at the top. Lying about his own mother - unforgivable-in most cultures anyhow.)

Theranter said...

Re my previous post:
Not that China cares--
"All forms of mercury penetrate the placental barrier and should be considered terratogenic and reproductive effectors.

The effects from exposure to excessive levels of airborne mercury or skin contact with mercury compounds may not be noticeable for months or years."
http://www.ehs.gatech.edu/chemical/mercury_and_compounds.pdf

RonRonIncan said...

HOW TO STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS

- If a store so much as starts banning just one kind of light (they will start with 100W first), then immediately email and write to them:

"Since you have banned my choice of light bulbs, I will no longer purchase any items from your store. YOU ARE BANNED.

- Speak directly to everyone about what is really going on. It's all about $$PROFIT$$.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

What is Incandescence?

Incandescence is the light produced by a heated object. This light contains BILLIONS of frequencies. It is the highest quality of light you can get.

How NOT to save energy:

- Using light source that cause a disturbing effect on people and environment around them. These sources are cold, aggressive, eerie forms of lighting. These include CFL, Fluorescent, and white-LED.

How TO save energy:

- Solar power
- Wind power
- Turn off electrical when not in use
- Use light dimmers (on INCANDESCENT lights)

(Note: Modern light dimmers use a TRIAC and no rheostat (have not heard that word for 20 years or so). They are VERY efficient. I use trailing edge dimmers and these dimmers also slowly turn on the light (dark to dimmer setting in about 2 secs) to further prolong the life of your INCANDESCENT. Do not be fooled by some of the current false news about light dimmers. They are efficient).

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

HOW TO STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS

- If a store so much as starts banning just one kind of light (they will start with 100W first), then immediately email and write to them:

"Since you have banned my choice of light bulbs, I will no longer purchase any items from your store. YOU ARE BANNED.

This ban will not be lifted until all 40W, 60W, 75W, 100W STANDARD INCANDESCENT clear and frosted BULBS / GLOBES are returned to the shelves. Have a good day."

And then get 5 other friends who will each tell 5 other friends to do the same.

- Speak directly to everyone everyday about this issue. Make sure the entire world is saved from this disaster.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

What is wrong with 'efficient lights'?

- CFL / FLU / white-LED give off a light that is simply unpleasant

- Too bright, Too white halogens are also annoying

- In lighting, more efficient than STANDARD INCANDESCENT just leads to very undesirable light

- Do you paint your walls with pure white? or with cold-off-white? I hope not. If you want comfort, you paint with warm-off-white (the yellow and reds). Just like you would choose an INCANDESCENT (reddish to yellowish-white).

- CFL is cold light (you can try to filter it and get 'warm' but there is a reason why this does not work). White-LED is also cold and eerie.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

Why is INCANDESCENT best source of light:

CFL / FLU / white-LED produces about 5 peaks of light frequencies:

(IR) ____|______|____|__|_______|_____|___ (UV)

(graph looks like dead trees with little fill in)

This is terrible light. And it is summed to a BLUE area of light. Very annoying. Very toxic. Hard to concentrate. Uninviting. Unnatural effect

Fire-place Light, Candle-Light, Incandescent-Light has BILLIONS of frequencies

______________________________
###############################\
###################################\__

The area between the top curve and the base is full of frequencies. It is TOP QUALITY light that is created by HEATING AN OBJECT. This is why it takes a bit more energy to get this quality light.

You can dim it and is calm.

Your eyes see RED / GREEN / BLUE differently according to DNA. EVERYONE will see the COLOR COMPOSITION OF CFL / FLU / LED differently due to the spikes mismatch.

Not true for INCANDESCENCE. All FREQUENCIES exist so we see all there is for any combination of human DNA RED / GREEN / BLUE receptors.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

EVERYTHING IN YOUR ROOM is lit by the light you choose. All this light is reflected, refracted, filtered, so on. It lights your ceiling, floors, sofas, coffee table, clothes, pictures, everything. If you start off with bad light you get strange results. Only full-body INCANDESCENCE can deliver the BILLIONS of frequencies required!

Try RED filter on white-LED. Result is odd BLUE / PURPLE / REDDISH. True test of bad light.

Try RED filter on INCANDESCENT. Result is awesome pure RED amazing light!

I strongly recommend only using STANDARD INCANDESCENTS. You can use the 30% efficient halogen bulbs but it certainly is not as aesthetically pleasing due to internal glass and many also have a metal clip. It really is a waist of effort just to get 30% (I have measured 25% on one).

STANDARD INCANDESCENT is far cheaper to produce and extremely easy to recycle.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

Please note that this BAN is NOT really about SAVING ENERGY.
It is a marketing plan as any other. Make the competing product look bad. Make the new product look better. Plant propaganda to make you feel bad by not going for the new product. Nothing new under the sun here. Marketing 101.

Philips wants to push their baby the CFL so on. A 2003 study showed that take up was only 2.5% for Americans who kept going back to the more pleasing light of the INCANDESCENT bulb. So to cut the story short, the INCANDESCENT was banned to further the sale of other lights (Philips, Osram, GE, LED Industry all would like to have more sales).

The INCANDESCENT is our most important form of calm lighting. It is easy to make and recycle. It is easy to hook up to DC and AC and batteries.

The only other sources for this quality light is Fire-place Light, Candle-Light, Kerosene-Lamp Light.

Don't let $$$PROFITS$$$ and $$$GREED$$$ ruin your country.

Example Australia. Now "Hellstralia" for its bad lighting.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

This BAN is ABOUT $$$PROFIT$$$. Trust me. If you put a kink in their profits, they will complain with greater effect than a mere single citizen to Philips/Osram/GE. If they can only make a profit by selling INCANDESCENTS, guess what follows. Its not rocket science but you have to do as I say or it will not work.

I am for all citizens in the world to have the best and most pleasing form of lighting. Your lighting environment effects how you feel and behave. Their is no excuse for bad lighting. CFL/FLU/white-LED are aggressive, unnatural, dangerous, uninviting, hard-to-concentrate-under "Light for the dead" kind of lighting.

INCANDESCENT is calm, inviting, friendly, romantic, warm, comfortable, safe, "Light for the living" kind of lighting.

For God and Country. America (and the rest of the world). Do not let them take about your INCANDESCENT lighting!

You will regret it!

Come visit Australia. I don't travel Australia anymore.

Australia has such bad and uninviting cold lighting everywhere including hotels, motels, restaurants, coffee shops, shopping centers, so on. Even the street lights have a mix of good and horrible white lighting (it only lights the rain, quite dangerous).
Oh sorry, its now called "Hellstralia".

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

How NOT to STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS

- Sit on your sorry ass crying
- Sign up for all petitions (just doesn't go anywhere)
- Write to the government (usually just ends up in the waist bin)

HOW TO STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS

- Speak directly to everyone
- If a store so much as starts banning just one kind of light (they will start with 100W first), then immediately email and write to them:

"Since you have banned my choice of light bulbs, I will no longer purchase any items from your store. YOU ARE BANNED.

This ban will not be lifted until all 40W, 60W, 75W, 100W STANDARD INCANDESCENT clear and frosted BULBS/GLOBES are returned to the shelves. Have a good day."

And then get 5 other friends who will each tell 5 other friends to do the same.

This BAN is ABOUT $$$PROFIT$$$. Trust me. If you put a kink in their profits, they will complain with greater effect than a mere single citizen to Philips/Osram/GE. If they can only make a profit by selling INCANDESCENTS, guess what follows. Its not rocket science but you have to do as I say or it will not work.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

You want efficiency only and trade it for bad lighting? Just visit Australia. A complete wreck of a place.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

If you need a REST from the bad lighting from CFL or Fluorescents or white-LED Lighting or too-white, too-bright Halogens, just click on this link and sit back a while, taking in the warm glow of the two INCANDESCENT globes...

http://www.lc-cls.com/SafetyFirst/Lighting/

The take action now to STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS as instructed above.

Talk to everyone, warning that they are taking away your safe, calm lighting!

Ban any store or venue that uses CFL / Fluorescent / white-LED or too-white too-bright lighting (including too powerful halogens).

DO. IT. NOW.

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

What is Incandescence?

Incandescence is the light produced by a heated object. This light contains BILLIONS of frequences. It is the highest quality of light you can get.

How NOT to save energy:

- Using light source that cause a disturbing effect on people and environment around them. These sources are cold, aggressive, eerie forms of lighting. These include CFL, Fluorescent, and white-LED.

How TO save energy:

- Solar power
- Wind power
- Turn off electrical when not in use
- Use light dimmers (on INCANDESCENT lights)

RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

How NOT to STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS

- Sit on your sorry ass crying
- Sign up for all petitions (just doesn't go anywhere)
- Write to the government (usually just ends up in the waist bin)

HOW TO STOP THE BAN OF INCANDESCENTS

- Speak directly to everyone

- If a store so much as starts banning just one kind of light (they will start with 100W first), then immediately email and write to them:

"Since you have banned my choice of light bulbs, I will no longer purchase any items from your store. YOU ARE BANNED.

This ban will not be lifted until all 40W, 60W, 75W, 100W STANDARD INCANDESCENT clear and frosted BULBS/GLOBES are returned to the shelves. Have a good day."

And then get 5 other friends who will each tell 5 other friends to do the same.

RonRonIncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RonRonIncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RonRonIncan said...

The Standard Incandescent Light Bulb

Watch this program. Just do it.

The Light Bulb Conspiracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5DCwN28y8o&feature=endscreen&NR=1

- the light bulb that is still working since 1901
- forced 1000 hour maximum life of INCANDESCENT light bulb
- planned obsolescence

Read through this. Take your time.

LIGHT BULB CLARITY:
NEW ELECTRIC POLITICS
http://ceolas.net/#euban

- "Philips: bulb ban sought for profits"

- Dutch Researchers cover Philips involvement:
The Unholy Alliance between Philips and the Greens...

- Remember!
Old simple cheap unprofitable incandescents - No patents!
CFLs, LEDs - Philips, GE, Osram etc - Plenty of profitable patents!

- In fact, light bulbs have been safely used for over 100 years without
significant problems, unlike other lights.

- The irony is that a normal ban would rather be on the main suggested replacement,
compact fluorescent "energy saving" lights (CFLs), with several health and
environmental concerns.