Should the US Government issue energy saving bulbs to Americans

[Bandit]

Free of charge as Chavez is doing in Venezuela. A regular incadescent 100 watt bulb costs about sixty cents. The florescent bulb equivilent costs about four dollars. A lot of households are finding it tough to replace all of their bulbs even though they wish to do so. IMO the government should make these bulbs available free of charge to any that wish to use them. Might cost the nation about the same as a weeks worth of interest payments on our National Debt, probably not that much though...

[Captain Hilts]

1. They should insist on lower speed limits and enforcement of those limits. nt

[theboss]

24. I would shoot myself

And I think Sammy Hagar would back me up on this.

[Benhurst]

2. The government can't afford to do so.

When you are The World's Only Superpower, you must devote your resources to death and destruction.

Bombs away! We're NUMBER ONE!

[Bandit]

15. Does anyone remember the Rural Weatherization Program

put into place in the late seventies and early eighties? The government provided windows, insulation, weatherstripping, hot water heater wraps and low flow toilets.. All free of charge because of the enrgy crisis going on at the time. As far as I know that program still is somewhat in effect. If the government will provide free windows and free insulation why not a few lightbulbs?

[Benhurst]

18. As I recall, that was under Jimmy Carter.

We are now under Dubya's hobnail boot.

[caligirl]

3. not this gov't Bush would ask for your DNA in exchange.

I wouldn't trust his administration not to use a program like that to gather info and criminalize nonflorescent bulb users.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

4. Ummmmm, Nope.

[wuushew]

13. Why?

Each bulb lasts 10 longer and consumes only a 1/4 of the energy. Despite this fact the lack of universal acceptance can only be attributed to some form of market failure.

Would you be adverse to placing a carbon tax on lightbulbs so that upfront purchase cost rises in relation that of CF bulbs?

I am willing to try anything that agressively promotes these devices a try.


The benefits to the planet and our health would be massive.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

14. Oh Give Me A Break. You Want The Lightbulbs Go Buy The Lightbulbs.

And your solution of increasing the price of regular lightbulbs is one of the most ass backward things I've ever heard.

[wuushew]

17. whatever.....

when did Democrats stop caring about the poor? Did not we just pass a minimum wage bill, do we not advocate targeted tax credits for the poor and working families?

I think a man would have to search long and hard to find the perfect example of an individual whose budget is so stretched and so optimized that no amount personal discretion could result in the purchase of a compact florescent vs incandescent.

Why are you pooh poohing the idea? Viewed solely on its return the switch to CFs are hard to beat as an investment. You don't want to give them away, you don't want incentives and you don't want to add disincentives to incandescents.

I don't see the merits of your status quo position.

[Horse with no Name]

5. I don't believe the federal government should

However, I believe that the electric companies should.

[Bandit]

6. Yeah like they really want you to cut back on your electric useage

Why do people insist it is the Corporations or employers obligation to provide for the people? What would you say is the purpose of government? To me it is to provide for the health and welfare of the nation. What is the purpose of Corporations? Make money...Cutting back on our energy usage is in our national interest as well as our national security. We use less energy means we spend less on foreign oil which appears to be financing people that don't really like us much...:shrug: The people that sell you electricity most definitely want you to use less so they can make less money from you...Yeah right!!!

[Horse with no Name]

7. Possibly because they don't update or upgrade the infrastructure

and decreasing the usage would save on the infrastructure.

[karlrschneider]

11. Many electric utilities will give you a free electric water heater

if it's replacing a gas-fired one. They offered us one but we declined mainly for reliability
reasons...if the power goes out we still have hot water and can run most of the house on our generator
as we did for 2 weeks after the January ice storm.

[Igel]

8. This household doesn't intend to replace all its lightbulbs.

Turning compact fluorescents on and off quickly is bad for them. There are lights in out apartment that never stay on for more than a minute at a time. They're staying incandescent.

We've replaced most of them, and they'll pay for themselves over time; my investment, my savings. If the government paid for them, I'd expect the government (pay-go and all that) to want the money saved. :-)

[Benhurst]

19. I have all my lights on dimmers and only keep lights on

if I am in a room.

I have an all-electric 1600 sq/ft (very well insulated) house and average $80 a month, spread over a 12-month period (higher in summer and winter, lower in spring and fall).

I don't think the new bulbs would reduce my use of electricity.

[Bandit]

28. I don't think the government should force you to accept them

But IMO it should offer them to any and all that want to use them. The savings would amount to way more than the cost in only a couple of years...But you did mention something that throws a monkey wrench into these new bulbs. They do not work with dimmers and that is a real bummer

[Porcupine]

20. Nope, Mythbusters busted that one.

They turned a rack of bulbs on and off repeatedly some 100K times. Only the CFL survived the treatement.

[Igel]

23. It's an intereting myth.

Worth testing. 100k? Cool.

How do they fair in enclosed environments?

[orleans]

9. electric companies should offer a couple free bulbs and major

discounts for cfls to low income/seniors (i think they did that around here, actually. but i could be wrong)

the compact fluorescents are pricey--i've been giving packages of four out to friends for birthday presents, along with an article about them to start encouraging people to use them.

[kestrel91316]

10. Our power company (LA DWP) sent me ONE CFL bulb a few

years ago. It is still in use, btw, joined by a dozen or so others that I bought myself. They are easy to find, and cheap. My Rite Aid drug store has them. I spent about $10 to get a few, and my electric bill went down enough to fund replacing the rest.

[flamin lib]

12. Considering that household electricity use is the largest contributor

to greenhouse gasses it strikes me that some subsidy of CFLs is in order. If a hybrid car is worthy of a few $ thousand in offsets, why not the light bulbs? If a solar water heater is worth a 30% tax incentive, why not the CFLs?

I just walked through my house and counted 51 bulbs (some already CFLs and others as they need replacement). That's a minimum of $200. If I replace the three-ways at $12 each, that's an additional $50. The nine floods add another $100. That's a total of $350 as opposed to maybe $40 for incandescent. That's a number justifies a tax incentive or even a government rebate for low income families.

Everybody wants to do the right thing, but the playing field needs a little leveling to make the technology economically viable.

[G_j]

16. yes! n/t

[Porcupine]

21. No. They should replace your AC with a geo-exchange unit.......

that doubles as a water heater, completely revamp your lighting, replace any windows you have that aren't double-paned w/vinyl or wood frames, insulate your house wherever needed, and help you replace any appliances that are over 10 years old. They should also ban or tax the crap out of any roofing material in hot climates that's not thermal reflective.

They need to do this on EVERY living unit in america that is hooked to the grid. Then they need to refit EVERY commercial building likewise.

In case nobody has wandered over to Environment/Energy climate change is about to smash the world as we know it into flinders.
Here:

On the other hand there's always the suicide booths.

[wuushew]

22. kick

:kick:

[bushcrab]

25. Beware of health hazards from fluorescent lights

Fluorescent fixtures, and the new bulbs, are definitely more energy efficient but they also emit an electromagnetic field (EMF) which has been suspected to cause health problems in some people.

http://www.mercola.com/article/emf/emf_dangers.htm

If you do use these new bulbs for reading, I suggest that you keep the lamp at least two feet away from your head, beyond the concentrated field. This also goes for electric alarm clocks next to your bed, tv sets, and computer monitors, among other household items. Kids especially. If you feel uncomfortable around this light, your body is probably trying to tell you something.

And NO, the gov't doesn't need to provide us with these.

[The2ndWheel]

26. We could turn a light or two off every now and then

You're right, that's insanely crazy.

[sweetheart]

27. no, there are lighter touches

levy an efficiency tax on bulbs that makes incandescent bulbs more
expensive, and this tax, can pay for the carbon offsets of the wasteful
technology.