Sounds good to me. That would spur even more effort into improving CFLs (and perhaps LEDs too). Efficiency improvements like this (about 75%) will really help us get to where we need to go.
Sounds good for California but unfortunately, I don't think that would work too well here unless CFL cold weather performance improves or LED's become more affordable and brighter. Also curious how they would work in ovens and fridges and how lifetime would be affected.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(seftonm @ Jan 31 2007, 09:45 PM) [snapback]383640[/snapback]</div> The CFL's I just purchased say they will start at -15F. I haven't had a chance to try them at that low of temperature but I know they light at 10F. I know it gets colder than -15F where you live, but you could easily use them inside. You could use halogen lights outside.
We've got CFLs in our porch lights and I know that I've turned them on in -5F or there abouts weather. They take a few minutes to get up to full brightness for sure but they work. They've been installed for about 2-3 years now. They certainly wouldn't work for motion activated flood lights in those temps but that is likely to change.
It's not going to fly. Unless the lightbulb police are going to start going door to door doing random, warrantless searches, people are going to buy bulbs online and have them shipped in. I'm sure eBay will start to do a booming business.
Godiva has a good point, unless this were done nationally. Though I advocate these bulbs, I have a few complaints including: - poor start-up time on some - ugly color cast - a bulb life that is seriously overstated (why the bulb makers have not been sued for false advertising in this respect amazes me). Regardless, since switching to these bulbs we are down about 15% in electrical use. The last thing I have to wonder about is the environmental impact of the production and disposal of all of these bulbs, since they contain mercury.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jan 31 2007, 08:34 PM) [snapback]383680[/snapback]</div> You know Simon... a true environmentalist would just move to southern california - then you don't have to use heat, or AC... and technical issues like your fluorescent bulbs don't work would not even be an issue... Ooops... meant to say Tripp...
I wonder if they'll have an exemption for Hollywood. I suspect that Movie Set Lighting requires a wide range of options that likely won't be met only by CFLs. Same would go for Photographers and even Stage Lighting I would think. Maybe even Art Museums. There are probably a whole slew of other applications where CFLs aren't suitable that I can't think of.
I personally don't like the color produced by flourescents. The need to fix that before I will get real excited about flourescent lighting. If the ban incandescents, all that will happen is that people will start buying hallogen bulbs. They give a warmer light similar to incandescents, rather than the cooler blue of flourescents.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TimBikes @ Feb 1 2007, 01:44 AM) [snapback]383711[/snapback]</div> How much do these bulbs actually contain? I'm guessing it's less than the mercury dumped into the air by coal burnt to provide the extra power for the incandescent.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(John in LB @ Feb 1 2007, 05:21 AM) [snapback]383807[/snapback]</div> So you want more people in SoCAL?!? :blink: :blink: :blink: I'd love it for the year round sailing. Otherwise, no thanks. I've got relatives in the bay area and it's crowded enough. Nice place to visit but I'll stay in CO. I think the market will eventually solve this one (and in time too) and obviously there will be specialty bulbs that will continue to use other techs. Halogens are incredibly wasteful so I'd expect that they'd get the axe too. The mail order thing actually wouldn't be very difficult to solve. You simply couldn't have them shipped to CA. It would be easy to nail vendors on this one (they'd just comply). EBay would be trickier, but ebay could easily regulate it. For the most part it would create enough of a barrier that most people would say "f$@#k it and just buy what was available. I'm not a huge fan of mandates but we're talking about the lowest of the low hanging fruit here. The Hg issue is a concern. It could be partially solved with easy drop off (maybe at stores where cfls are sold) or something similar. That is something that needs to be addressed anyways as CFLs gain market share.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ShellyT @ Feb 1 2007, 11:36 AM) [snapback]383907[/snapback]</div> Yes, that's exactly what the manufacturers say. And there is less mecury in modern fluorescent bulbs than there was in bulbs manufacture 20 years ago. But manufacturers still suggest you keep them out of the landfill. I'm just going to copy in some material from a prior thread: "On an unrelated note, I had not been aware of the mercury issue mentioned in the article. In the past, my home town had required us to treat regular fluorescent bulbs as hazardous waste, up until a few years ago. So they had to be dropped off at the county hazardous wasted dropoff. (Or, my my case, stacked in my basement and ignored.) Then the bulbs got better and that requirement was lifted. Now I read that it would be preferable to dispose of the CFLs at a hazardous waste facility due to the mercury remaining in them. In fact, GE recommends that (http://www.gelighting.com/na/home_lighting/ask_us/faq_compact.htm). Which I will now do, but until this post, had not realized was still an issue. So, thanks for the post. As an aside, the National Electrical Manufacturer's Assn asserts that CFLs, even if disposed of as regular trash, reduce environmental mercury release due to reduction in coal burning for electricity. So, if they are right, and that's not just propaganda, the bulbs remain a net positive on that front even if disposed of in regular trash. But the upshot is that, if possible, they ought to be handled as routine hazardous waste."
Ya gotta start somewhere. If we waited till all the naysayers and excuse providers had their say we'd still be lighting torches for illumination. One thing I have learned about proposing new laws as I get older is that if you wait till you hone the new law to please everyone and have no flaws, you get nowhere. You start with a concept. Make it a law, and revise it as you go. Granted, there has to be some sort of 'minimal' test, but perfection right out of the chute?
