We do put electric lights on Christmas trees, patios and rooftops for decorative purposes. I imagine these are not going to be covered under the ban, which is targeting lighting for domestic purposes (y'know, house lights, that kind of thing) which is what sucks down the electricity.
You do have a point, though. As someone who never bothers with Xmas decorations, I hadn't thought of that. As for the lamps you mention that you use to ensure correct colour (aren't they called 'daylight' globes?), I was under the impression those are much more efficient that standard light globes already. As in, using those is the same thing.
Maybe I'm wrong. I admit to not being well educated on these issues. I hope I helped anyway!
I replaced the lights in my house with all-flourescent bulbs and cut $90 *per month* off my hydro bill. That's been a huge savings and probably the best home improvement I've ever done.
Oh, and I haven't had to replace one yet in over two years.
I haven't bought incandescent bulbs for years. It is kind of sad that people don't realize this by themselves, the new breed of bulbs last so much longer that you could easily save the extra cost before you even look at the utility bill.
Guy I know was bitching about that. Kind of an idiot, all obsessed with any and all public policy action or government regulation as being "nanny state", thinks that if fluorescents are better environmentally and financially, then market forces will correct automatically. Hates the Chicago foie gras and NY trans fat bans, too.
... where was I? Oh yeah. Emissions standards are good, and cracking down on things that violate those standards is even better, particularly when the alternative product is better in all regards.
Same here. It seemed so obvious when a light burned out, and I went to the store, and saw a bulb that was twice the cost of the ordinary ones, but promised 10x the lifespan. It's the Boots theory all over again.
All well and good, as power consumption goes. I have mostly CFBs.
However, when are bulb makers going to print Kelvin color value on their boxes? I replaced one bulb recently with something that borders on Wal-Mart fluorescent. Looks frickin' hideous.
It's against an energy efficiency standard, rather than an outright ban on incandescents. I would expect the standard to say something along the lines of "for household lightbulbs x watts per lumen, for photographic work, y watts per lumen, etc."
BTW folks, fluorescent bulbs are only more environmentally friendly *if and only if* there is a competent and universal bulb recycling program. Fluorescent bulbs all contain a little bit of mercury, and if they are just thrown in the rubbish bins, they can (and do) break, posing both a significant threat to groundwater and to the health and safety of those unlucky people who have to handle our trash.
For this reason alone I refuse to put another compact fluorescent bulb in my house. The fact that they give off ugly, flickery light and don't always fit into standard covered light fixtures is beside the point. That, and I don't want to have to drive 5 miles and spend $1/bulb, just for the privilege of disposing of a burned-out bulb.
Luckily for everyone who hates fluorescent that in the next few years we will have practical LED bulbs. Which use less engery, last longer and shed cleaner light than the CFBs.
Halogen bulbs are actually even less efficient than standard incandescents, from what I recall. They work by getting even hotter than regular bulbs, and using chemicals which glow spectacularly, but only at that higher temperature. They consume more electricity, and waste more of that higher amount by proportion as heat, which is of course totally not helpful for human vision.
I can see photography, medical examination equipment and the like needing incandescent bulbs, and I doubt this legislation is targeted at them, so much as home consumers.
See, our city has a hazardous waste day. You don't just drag out the one lightbulb, you also bring out the umptybillion used batteries, old paint cans, old car oil, and all that other junk that can't go in the garbage. You don't drive 5 miles for the one lightbulb that might burn out in a year, you drive 5 miles with a huge ass basket full of crap. 's free, too.
You can do it any other day of the year, but you do pay some kind of convenience fee. We only go every few years, and acumulate a LOT of crap in the mean time.
The compact fluorescents I buy at the store are slightly *smaller* than the old incandescents, are not flickery, are instant-on, and give off better colour of light than the incandescents I replaced them with. But I don't buy the cheapest ones available either. If you shell out the extra $3 or so per bulb, you get a huge improvement in product.
The less expensive ones are shitty green and have badly timed balasts, I totally agree. We got a package of those and I hate them. I relocated them to the basement fixtures after about two days. I don't care if the laundry room looks like ass - I don't spend enough time down there to get a headache, and it's all bare concrete anyways so it's totally unlovely and depressing at the best of times.
I don't see any difference between the compact fluorescents that replaced my normal lights and the incandescents, in terms of colour or amount of light. They take half a second to come on, but they're otherwise identical to the old bulbs.
WHAT is with the "hydro bill" thing? You've got to be Canadian, they're the only people I know of who speak of such things.
when I get my electrical bill, I don't call it my "coal bill" or my "nuclear bill"... and in fact, we pay for our water and sewage so that would get *really* confusing.
Heh. The company I (and most of the people around here, go monopolies!) pay is 'Ottawa Hydro'. But yes, it's a fairly common Canadian thing, despite about half our power being nuclear now.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 12:52 am (UTC)You do have a point, though. As someone who never bothers with Xmas decorations, I hadn't thought of that. As for the lamps you mention that you use to ensure correct colour (aren't they called 'daylight' globes?), I was under the impression those are much more efficient that standard light globes already. As in, using those is the same thing.
Maybe I'm wrong. I admit to not being well educated on these issues. I hope I helped anyway!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 01:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 01:14 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 01:38 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 01:44 am (UTC)Oh, and I haven't had to replace one yet in over two years.
-K"H"S
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 02:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 04:20 am (UTC)Guy I know was bitching about that. Kind of an idiot, all obsessed with any and all public policy action or government regulation as being "nanny state", thinks that if fluorescents are better environmentally and financially, then market forces will correct automatically. Hates the Chicago foie gras and NY trans fat bans, too.
... where was I? Oh yeah. Emissions standards are good, and cracking down on things that violate those standards is even better, particularly when the alternative product is better in all regards.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 04:21 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 05:05 am (UTC)However, when are bulb makers going to print Kelvin color value on their boxes? I replaced one bulb recently with something that borders on Wal-Mart fluorescent. Looks frickin' hideous.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 05:19 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 09:10 am (UTC)For this reason alone I refuse to put another compact fluorescent bulb in my house. The fact that they give off ugly, flickery light and don't always fit into standard covered light fixtures is beside the point. That, and I don't want to have to drive 5 miles and spend $1/bulb, just for the privilege of disposing of a burned-out bulb.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 10:33 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 12:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 12:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 02:17 pm (UTC)I can see photography, medical examination equipment and the like needing incandescent bulbs, and I doubt this legislation is targeted at them, so much as home consumers.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 02:24 pm (UTC)You can do it any other day of the year, but you do pay some kind of convenience fee. We only go every few years, and acumulate a LOT of crap in the mean time.
The compact fluorescents I buy at the store are slightly *smaller* than the old incandescents, are not flickery, are instant-on, and give off better colour of light than the incandescents I replaced them with. But I don't buy the cheapest ones available either. If you shell out the extra $3 or so per bulb, you get a huge improvement in product.
The less expensive ones are shitty green and have badly timed balasts, I totally agree. We got a package of those and I hate them. I relocated them to the basement fixtures after about two days. I don't care if the laundry room looks like ass - I don't spend enough time down there to get a headache, and it's all bare concrete anyways so it's totally unlovely and depressing at the best of times.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 02:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 05:37 pm (UTC)when I get my electrical bill, I don't call it my "coal bill" or my "nuclear bill"... and in fact, we pay for our water and sewage so that would get *really* confusing.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 05:40 pm (UTC)-K"H"S
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 06:26 pm (UTC)And I keep said huge ass basket where in the meantime, living in an apartment?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 06:27 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 06:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 06:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 06:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-21 06:33 pm (UTC)