EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Dim Bulbs in Congress
Philips, GE, and Sylvania all are ready to market incandescent bulbs that meet higher efficiency standards, while saving money for consumers -- but don't tell tea-partying lawmakers.
Our problem in Washington is this: we have too many 5-watt bulbs sitting in 100-watt sockets.
Any doubt about this was erased in July when House tea partiers joined old-school right-wing ranters to pass a light bulb bill. This was the culmination of a loopy crusade by the billionaire Koch brothers to stop the spread of energy-efficient light bulbs.
Say what? Yes, Koch front groups drummed up a non-issue by howling that Big Government is "telling us what kind of light bulbs we can buy."
Sure enough, an assortment of Koch-headed Congress critters joined the silly circus by trying to undo the rather useful government effort to stimulate production of better bulbs. They rallied round Thomas Edison's old 100-watt energy gulper, claiming that nanny-state Democrats had banned Edison's marvel, requiring that incandescent bulbs be replaced by the cold light of fluorescent bulbs.
This whole crusade is hogwash. There was never a proposed ban on incandescent bulbs — just a new standard for all bulbs to consume less energy. And this standard was not set by Democrats, but by a Republican-sponsored law signed in 2007 by George W. Bush. Also, the descendants of Edison say that he would support such an advance: "The technology changes," said Robert Wheeler, the inventor's great-nephew. "Embrace it."
And guess who was behind the passage of the new energy efficiency mandate: light bulb makers. "Everyone supported it," says a top Philips executive, adding that the law produced a major surge in innovation by the industry. Only four years after the law passed, Philips, General Electric, and Sylvania all are ready to market incandescent bulbs that meet the higher efficiency standards, while saving money for consumers.
Did I mention that the Koch brothers are in the dirty energy business and profit when you have to use more of it to light your house?
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
32 Comments so far
Show AllSometimes, when we look at the things Congress does (or fails to do), we think that most of them are very stupid. Actually, I feel that they are reasonably intelligent but fail to pass beneficial laws because such laws do not fit in with their wealthy lifestyles and the profit agenda of their corporate supporters. Their corruption is much greater than their ignorance.
you feel they are reasonably intelligent do ya
hmmm......
where's your evidence - i see none
Now that you mention it, I have heard some stupid-sounding ones being interviewed on TV. However, I think that most of them are smart enough to get through law school, get elected, run campaigns, etc. They have enough brains. They lack the heart, compassion, concern, community feeling, and passion for justice which would cause them to make wise laws.
I agree they are not stupid, just criminal, oh wait, they make the laws so they can't be criminals, how about unconscienable, unethical, immoral
How many Republicans does it take to change a light bulb?
(Sorry, couldn't resist that one)
just remember frank - you started this
Q: how many democrats does it take to change a light bulb
A: only one, but the light bulb's really got to want to change.........
good one
Q: how many Democrats does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Oh no! we wouldn't do that! Too divisive! Not in this climate! Not in this budget year! Not without both houses of Congress, 6 SC justices and a Democrat in the White House willing to take all the heat! Not with our troops in harm's way (we say that about everything else; why not light bulbs), Not without bi-partisan support, including a bi-partisan "supercommission" made up of malleable hacks on our side and anti-light bulb mad dogs on the other, not without an executive light bulb "czar", not without a 10 year study which we will not fund longer than 5 years, not with our troops in harm's way...oh, did we say that already? Not while under a terrorist threat, not in the lower 48 where we could all be targets, not with these huge deficits, not without raising the debt ceiling, not without finding a way for Wall St to profit immensely from light bulb-based securities. Just not, OK! Go home and leave us alone! Light bulbs are "off the table".
good post.
Just one, with a newspaper.
"The problem lies with the mercury contained in the fluorescent bulbs. There are only four or five milligrams in a compact bulb, said Pushchak, but it's still a neurotoxin and a hazardous material.
Pushchak, who studies waste disposal and environmental impacts, said that more often than not, light bulbs are broken when they're tossed out with the trash. When that happens with a compact fluorescent bulb, the mercury vaporizes, travels in a general northern direction with the atmosphere and is deposited in the environment, where it is absorbed into plant and animal systems, as well as the soil.
Product Milligrams of mercury
Compact fluorescent lamp 5
Watch battery 25
Dental amalgams 500
Home thermometer 500
Source: Natural Resources Canada
Last month, Health Canada issued new recommendations for fish consumption, due to rising levels of mercury that has made its way into the food chain. What's needed, said Pushchak, is a curbside collection system for all household hazardous waste."
"Fortunately we have some time — but not much," he said.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2007/04/30/mercury-bulbs.html
"Since then, the bulbs — known as CFLs — have been revamped, and strict government guidelines have alleviated most of those problems. But while the bulbs are extremely energy-efficient, one problem hasn’t gone away: All CFLs contain mercury, a neurotoxin that can cause kidney and brain damage.
The amount is tiny — about 5 milligrams, or barely enough to cover the tip of a pen — but that is enough to contaminate up to 6,000 gallons of water beyond safe drinking levels, extrapolated from Stanford University research on mercury. Even the latest lamps promoted as “low-mercury” can contaminate more than 1,000 gallons of water beyond safe levels."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23694819/ns/us_news-environment/t/shining-light-hazards-fluorescent-bulbs/
i see them in stores and they cost 8 bucks
almost as much as a mocha latte frappe grande beano greeno coffee at starbucks
hey i'm all for progress
besides let's look at the bright side (pardon the pun) - the rockefeller's and monsanto's gmo is probably gonna be what kills you - that or the rockefeller medications
Add in that cheaper (I mean low-quality) CFLs can still take some time to get to full brightness, and that they're poorly suited for short-cycle use (quick on/off reduces their life span) and also don't do well outdoors in cold temperatures. Mercury is besides the point almost. CFLs are only suitable for certain home lighting needs.
But I greatly prefer the LED lights. In this EXTREMELY hot summer we're having in West Texas I love my Phillips LED replacement. Expensive(!), but to be honest I plan to take it with me when/if I move. I'll throw some cheap re-engineered incandescents in for the new folks. LED is energy efficient, vibration safe (garage door opener), fine for short-cycles, and the Phillips bulbs is admirably bright. The LED bulb's biggest downsides are up-front cost and the fact they don't like to be overheated (not safe as an oven light or elsewhere it can be overheated).
Good content on this comment. I really appreciate the info, thanks.
This issue just shows how money, power and media are driving the tea party agenda rather than it being a grassroots movement. There was no grassroots movement related to lightbulbs; but with the help of the media and financial contributions, so-called teaparty politicians use issues like this to stoke their supporters in an attempt to keep them energized. Granted, the teaparty voters are allowing themselves to be used; however, Democratic and Republican voters regularly fall for similar tactics as they end up voting for personalities rather than policies.
Unlike libertarians, I have no problem banning products that are unsafe, bad for the environment, or both. We should allow lead in gasoline? Uninspected dairies? Asbestos insulation? As far as I am concerned, oversized engines in passenger cars should not be allowed. If the rich, with their capricious interests, want to drive up the price of gasoline for the rest of us by buying a gas-guzzler, then we should slap them down. Same with light bulbs. All those high-energy consuming light bulbs result in how many kilotons of toxic pollutants being released into the air from coal-fired power plants? That's stuff we all have to breathe. To hell with 'em. Ban 'em.
"Our problem in Washington is this: we have too many 5-watt bulbs sitting in 100-watt sockets."
No it isn't JIm...Our problem is a structure and system of government that can no longer function as it was designed to; that has let population growth dilute representation to meaninglessness. We no longer have a "House of Representatives," we have a second Senate, since our super large voting districts force the house to go to the same powerful interests as the Senate to get elected. It was originally conceived this way; but the house voting districts have become stupidly large and completely ruined the institution. STOP THIS...Ratify Article the First
http://voltairez.hubpages.com/hub/Stop-Diluting-Democracy
This is an extremely interesting analysis. I'm eager to read the URL you posted.
Yes, it is all about "Big Government" that recognizes the greed and ultimate stupidity of corporate capitalism. Capitalists can rightfully can be described as "dim lightbulbs" because of their narrow and selfish interests. Capitalism, the corporate monopolistic kind, has made America stupid and at war with the world.
I kind of read between the lines the the big USan lighting companies were the impetus behind the original legislation. Probably too many cheap-A$$ bulbs from asia undermining their sales. This legislation will do wonders for the named lighting companies (Sylvania, Phillips, etc) because they all have their LED products ready to push on consumers. As noted in the article though, the new improved-efficiency incandescents are ready to go. American innovation solves the problem again, and Congress helps out by forcing Americans to the new standards. Yup, big gov't supporting corporate American again, but it's only because the average American isn't "bright" enough to do a cost-benefit analysis.
The big USan lighting companies are big GLOBAL companies, ie they are big global companies in Asia too. Philips is a Dutch multinational. A lot of lighting sold in Asia, cheap ass or not, is made by Philips.
The 5-Watt bulbs in Congress would be pretty much irrelevant if the populace weren't so pliable. Or stupid. It always shocks me how easy it is to manipulate a mob - even a mob of "decent" suburban (formerly) middle-class people. Shakespeare knew - "Julius Caesar" is full of excellent examples of how easy it is to manipulate the mindless masses.
And here, you are talking about consumer problems - is that what Hightower stated in his opening sentence as being the issue?
D-duuhuhhh.
The Koch duo are aiming much deeper than this, they want to belittle anyone who shows an interest in environmental causes. They are trying to make it cool, or groovy, or whatever the hip term NOT to care. They are marketing a morally bankrupt ethos that extends way beyond this particular narrowly seeming saga of light bulbs.
Personally, I was glad to see the quake hit D. C. today. Interesting if the New Madrid line is getting active. That would certainly be an apt response to all the mountain tops blasted off and away, not far from that region. The Shamans of South America recently related that the mountain chains are waking up, and a whole lotta shaking will be going on.
Who among us would not like to see the Capital and Congress shake? Although it's not fashionable to see these types of things as signs or omens, when nature speaks, only a fool would not pay attention. But most are taught to be fools, thinking themselves sophisticated in no longer paying attention to all these mere "superstitions."
And so the waters rise. And the mountains shake. And the storms gather. Nature speaks in the language of the elementals, and since so few seem to care or give a damn, she is being forced to escalate her voice!
Why should so many species be taken for a suicidal ride just because life-negating horrors like the Koch brothers get to write the script that the airwaves then dutifully repeat... tiresome lies told often enough, until most believe them
true. And lost, then, is the cognitive muscle that might take corrective action.
Choices and the Choice denied
It's like when Tesla was working for J.P. Morgan but when Morgan found out that Tesla was working on free energy, Morgan shut him down because there wasn't any money in it.
The choice was made for which we will pay.
Thank you Mr. Hightower for making us aware because although we the people have no choice but to be deinied, at least we know we were denied.
Hmmm
So using this logic we should institute a ban on all luxury cars because they are consuming way to much energy. Of course it won't be a "ban" per say on luxury cars. It will just be illegal to manufacture them. What happened to our free market society? Then again this is the same crowd that swears guns kill people and cars don't. We have fallen down the slippery slope when we let the likes of Congress decide what we can and can't buy.
Just for the record the profit margin on the "new" bulbs is more than double the old one's. Of course I am sure this has absolutely nothing to do with the decision to lobby for the change by such civic minded corporations as GE. Good grief.
Perhaps you didn't read the article. There was no "ban" on anything. There was a change in energy standards.
There is actually a direct correlary to your luxury car example: fuel standards.
Kochs could be among the first perps in hopefully soon to be enacted ecocide laws.
Love the headline...and the only thing worse than the dim-wits in Congress are the "not the brightest bulbs in the box" uneducated, low-information voters who fall for the TV and radio ads that the Supreme Court Citizens United ruling allows the Koch brothers and Karl Rove to buy.
"Stand Up Chuck!... Oh God Bless you."
yesterday's contribution: " I'll not second guess the Chi-com policy restricting families to one child."
The inadvertent plagerizing bafoon is a perfect second banana for our Harvard educated community organizer. On ObamaCare passage: "This is big F'in Deal!"
Congress is supposed to be a place for citizens. The White House should be reserved for our best and brightest, experienced, proven, leaders... duh. Send me another stimulus check please.
Light bulbs will save the planet!
What the Koch brothers are doing would seem to amount to treason, if not of the American public, then of Earth.
Well observed, thanks. But one quibble: Edison did not invest the light bulb.
See: http://didyouknow.org/who-invented-the-light-bulb/
Talk about Dim Bulbs. Perhaps you could give us the bill number so we can look to see who voted how. But like so many "experts," you spew the bullshit but fail to give us background info.
I don't know about their incandescent light technology, but General Electric and Sylvania, protected by US DOT laws, can't produce a lighting system for automobiles that's worth anything. They never have learned how to optically control the light beam to keep it from blinding other drivers, the way French (Cibié and Marchal) H-4 halogen technology does it. US automotive lights are garbage by comparison.