General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSeriously, they (Republicans who else !) are still fighting about light bulbs?
Daily KosCongressional Republicans renewed their effort to save the traditional light bulb, passing a measure to block federal energy standards that have come to symbolize government overreach for many consumers but are largely embraced by manufacturers as the cost of the newer bulbs has plummeted.
The House passed an amendment to a spending bill late Wednesday to block enforcement of Energy Department rules requiring manufacturers to phase out sales of incandescent light bulbs to cut power use. While the measure faces an uncertain future in the Senate, its sponsor called it an important victory for freedom.
"Congress should fight to preserve the free market," Representative Michael Burgess, a Texas Republican, said on the House floor before the vote. Burgess said he had heard from tens of thousands of people about how the regulations "will take away consumer choice when constituents are deciding which light bulbs they will use in their homes."
Throck
(2,520 posts)meow2u3
(24,761 posts)Traditional bulbs, from my experience, last about a year max. It makes no economic sense to try to save incandescent bulbs.
Stinky The Clown
(67,766 posts)Best_man23
(4,897 posts)They would rather stick with incandescent bulbs that burn out after a few hundred hours of use than use an LED bulb that lasts YEARS and requires a tenth of the power all in the name of "freedom"? The cost difference between LEDs and incandescents is close to negligible.
I switched the lights in my house over to LEDs last year, the house is noticeably cooler in the summer and my electric bill dropped by about 15%. You would think the potential for money savings alone would interest them.
Sheeple.
GeorgeGist
(25,311 posts)Archae
(46,301 posts)For the Easy-Bake ovens in their offices.
longship
(40,416 posts)Silver Swan
(1,110 posts)But I have incandescent bulbs that are fifteen years old and still working. I hate to spend money on replacements that might only last 3 to 5 years.
Canoe52
(2,948 posts)These people are dumber than a box of rocks!
Xolodno
(6,384 posts)Incandescent Bulbs burn out faster = mo money.
Incandescent Bulbs use more electricity = mo money.
Fluorescent, LED, etc. = burn out way later = less money.
Fluorescent, LED, etc. use less electricity = less money.
Note: mo money = mo money out of your pocket.
So, the obvious assumption is that these primitives = Beavis and Butthead => heh..heh..FIRE!...FIRE!
So, easy solution.
Allow property and casualty insurers to exclude fire caused by having indoor torches and those connected to a structure.
Then say, Democrats are against torches.
Phoenix61
(16,994 posts)They have definitely come down in price over the last year or so.
The Genealogist
(4,723 posts)There are so many issues facing America today. How bizarre that the battle some people choose is over keeping inefficient light bulbs that don't last as long.
pansypoo53219
(20,955 posts)never died. think it still worked AFTER being stolen by a drug/ebay rat. the back light lasted almost as long. the bulb in my shower is still the same bulb when we moved in 1989. got a daylight LED for the kitchen & it was AIRPORT! gotta get a softer 1.
madokie
(51,076 posts)haven't replaced a single one yet. I dropped one while installing it in the bathroom and it broke the outer shell. I gave it to my brother and he uses it in his trouble light and have been close to three years now. They're not under a vacuum like an incandescent bulb is so they work as well undressed as they do with the cover on.