+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 55

Thread: Light Bulb Scam

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    15,510

    Light Bulb Scam

    In January 1, 2012 buying normal traditional light bulbs will be a thing no more. There is alot of controversy over this with hippies and old school traditionalists. The government has banned these bulbs. Will there be a black market for them? Some people question America's freedom, now being controlled in a somewhat controversial subject. Rates keep raising, we use less power, more power gets sold at higher rates. The rape of Americans again by Big Brother. The government has to control the way you light your house...really weird. What's next? Candy banned?
    Last edited by Administrator; 05-19-2012 at 09:30 AM.

  2. #2
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Is that why the gov is flush with money? SFB.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by Sviat View Post
    In January 1, 2012 buying normal traditional light bulbs will be a thing no more........The government has to control the way you light your house...really weird. What's next? Candy banned?
    (For some reason the word e n e r g y gets replaced by ***** below!)

    The scam (or "great play"!) was also how the profit-seeking lobbying global major light bulb manufacturers
    somehow sang hand-in-hand with anti-global anti-profit green activists, to achieve a ban on cheap unprofitable alternatives,
    and push CFL alternatives with subsidised replacement programs etc

    Mainly USA:
    http://ceolas.net/#li12ax
    The process of the EU ban:
    http://ceolas.net/#euban

    Besides, apart from affecting people's product choice,
    the actual switchover savings are not that great anyway =
    less than 1% of overall ****** use, and 1-2% grid electricity is saved,
    as shown by USA Dept of ******, EU statistics and other official information
    http://ceolas.net/#li171x
    with alternative and more meaningful ways to save ****** in
    generation, grid distribution or consumption.

    Light bulbs don't burn coal or release CO2.
    Power plants might.
    If there's a problem - deal with the problem,
    rather than a token ban on simple safe light bulbs,
    light bulbs that people obviously like to use
    (or there would not be a "need" to ban them!)

    Described taxation (which could subsidise cheap ****** saving alternatives),
    or, better, stimulated free market competition, where new products could be helped to the market,
    are both preferable policies also to save ******, for reasons further described there.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    The scam (or "great play"!) was also how the profit-seeking lobbying global major light bulb manufacturers
    somehow sang hand-in-hand with anti-global anti-profit green activists, to achieve a ban on cheap unprofitable alternatives,
    and push CFL alternatives with subsidised replacement programs etc

    Mainly USA:
    http://ceolas.net/#li12ax
    The process of the EU ban:
    http://ceolas.net/#euban
    Last edited by sodabread; 12-06-2011 at 04:19 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    ( the word e n e r g y gets replaced by ****** ! )

    Besides, apart from affecting people's product choice,
    the actual switchover savings are not that great anyway =
    less than 1% of overall ****** use, and 1-2% grid electricity is saved,
    as shown by USA Dept of ******, EU statistics and other official information
    http://ceolas.net/#li171x
    with alternative and more meaningful ways to save ****** in
    generation, grid distribution or consumption.

    Light bulbs don't burn coal or release CO2.
    Power plants might.
    If there's a problem - deal with the problem,
    rather than a token ban on simple safe light bulbs,
    light bulbs that people obviously like to use
    (or there would not be a "need" to ban them!)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    In comparison,
    Canada 2 year ban delay to 2014 (at least),
    Texas legal manufacture since June....
    6 other US states seeking to repeal the ban...
    http://freedomlightbulb.blogspot.com...-official.html

    The Canada delay is required...

    "in order to strengthen communication activities, to allow for technological innovations and to consider the concerns expressed about the availability of compliant technologies and perceived health and mercury issues, including safe disposal for compact fluorescent lamps"



  7. #7
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    You do know that there is NO BAN on light bulbs, right?
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    15,510

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    It will be changing in 2012!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by sodabread View Post
    ( the word e n e r g y gets replaced by ****** ! )

    Besides, apart from affecting people's product choice,
    the actual switchover savings are not that great anyway =
    less than 1% of overall ****** use, and 1-2% grid electricity is saved,
    as shown by USA Dept of ******, EU statistics and other official information
    http://ceolas.net/#li171x
    with alternative and more meaningful ways to save ****** in
    generation, grid distribution or consumption.

    Light bulbs don't burn coal or release CO2.
    Power plants might.
    If there's a problem - deal with the problem,
    rather than a token ban on simple safe light bulbs,
    light bulbs that people obviously like to use
    (or there would not be a "need" to ban them!)
    1-2% of total electricity is a LOT. Considering you are saying that is coming just from replacing light bulbs.

    It pretty much sums up just how inefficent the old bulbs are.

  10. #10
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong. User Rank
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by Sviat View Post
    It will be changing in 2012!
    Hooray for that!

    The cost savings from the bulbs themselves will be staggering. Instead of replacing all my bulbs every year with a $0.50 bulb, now I replace them once every 10 years with a $2 bulb.

    I like the new color too.

    And my electric and AC bill went way down too.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    You do know that there is NO BAN on light bulbs, right?
    Sure it is a ban

    http://freedomlightbulb.blogspot.com...it-is-ban.html

    1. Setting a standard that does not allow certain products is of course the same as banning them.

    2. Setting ****** efficiency standards (45 Lumen per watt by 2020 at the latest) that does not allow any of today's known or indeed announced incandescents - Halogen or otherwise, usually being around 20 lumen per watt, maxing at around 25-30 lumen per watt - is the same as banning them too.

    3. To say that if I climb Mount Everest then I can smoke a cigarette,
    does not really mean that I can smoke a cigarette.

    4. Even if manufacturers could make
    appropriate incandescents, they hardly would, since they searched for the ban in the first place on this comparatively unprofitable technology
    http://ceolas.net/#li12ax
    -- which nonetheless small local startups could easily make, if they were allowed, also since they can't make the more complex bulbs
    -- sustainability, local jobs, enviro-green local transport , no mercury recycling needed etc etc...
    but no, the Green thing is to ban
    (OK "phase-out") the bulb

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    Hooray for that!
    The cost savings from the bulbs themselves will be staggering. Instead of replacing all my bulbs every year with a $0.50 bulb, now I replace them once every 10 years with a $2 bulb.

    I like the new color too.

    And my electric and AC bill went way down too.
    Of course,
    it's good if you're happy with your choice
    And I agree that all light bulbs have advantages.
    But that does not mean that incandescents need to be banned
    (the "ban" bit see elsewhere here)

    RE Money Savings...

    Not necessarily so...
    apart from the more well known incandescent heat benefit
    (to whatever degree), also,
    for example

    1. Because of the "power factor" of most CFLs (if you use them) the
    power plant uses twice the ****** to what your meter says - but users
    pay anyway, in higher bills
    http://ceolas.net/#15eux Dept ****** + Sylvania refrences

    Conversely,
    2. from utility subsidies and/or from them being allowed to raise charges,
    because of expected decrease in sales - in more and more US states.

    Apart from , of course, not saving much when using expensive bulbs in
    little used lamps...
    US households average 45 lighting points (also, any breakages, losses..)

    Ban proponents just use the commonest used lamps to calculate supposed savings.
    Also, as referenced on the above website, the supposed lifespan, brightness and other
    CFL/LED Lab values don't correspond to Real life use.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    14

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    1-2% of total electricity is a LOT. Considering you are saying that is coming just from replacing light bulbs.
    It pretty much sums up just how inefficent the old bulbs are.
    If saving electricity was such a big deal,
    then electricity could simply be taxed.

    But OK, in a fuller context:

    1. 1-2% is small in relative terms,
    compared to all the other (generation, grid, consumption) savings
    that are both more relevant, and do not affect choice.

    2. En ergy saving is not the ONLY thing
    that makes a good light bulb - or anything else
    Standards limiting allowed en ergy use compromise product characteristics,
    whether on buildings, cars, washing machines or light bulbs.

    3. People pay for the electricity and its provision
    - and there is no En ergy SHORTAGE justifying regulating people's usage.
    Note:
    Even if there was a shortage
    - which would anyway be on finite (say Coal) rather than all the
    renewable alternatives -
    then the price of coal rises,
    which limits use anyway - no need for dumbass regulations to ensure it.

    4. Obviously, as said,
    polticians can simply tax electricity, to reduce use:
    Much simpler.
    And, unlike bans, gives Govmt income, that can pay for the insulation
    of affected poorer homes - or whatever.
    Bans give Governments no such money.

    5. And, if the bulbs really need targeting,
    taxing them in turn gives income that can go to reduce the prices of
    Energ y saving alternatives
    (on your presumably liberal ideology)
    - athough stimulating open competition on free markets is in my view best,
    also to deliver desirable E nergy saving bulbs.

    ==========


    RE "inefficiency"

    "Ene rgy" efficiency is not the only
    "efficiency" there is.

    There is no other lighting technology, which so efficiently and cheaply allows the construction of bright lighting
    - and , to boot, bright lighting that is broad spectrum and omnidirectional.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by sodabread View Post
    If saving electricity was such a big deal,
    then electricity could simply be taxed.
    Politically that is impossible and you know it.

    It would also be economically unwise since it would raise the cost of goods across the country. While not actually fixing any problems. Since you couldn't separate electricity rates by use.



    But OK, in a fuller context:

    1. 1-2% is small in relative terms,
    compared to all the other (generation, grid, consumption) savings
    that are both more relevant, and do not affect choice.

    2. En ergy saving is not the ONLY thing
    that makes a good light bulb - or anything else
    Standards limiting allowed en ergy use compromise product characteristics,
    whether on buildings, cars, washing machines or light bulbs.

    3. People pay for the electricity and its provision
    - and there is no En ergy SHORTAGE justifying regulating people's usage.
    Note:
    Even if there was a shortage
    - which would anyway be on finite (say Coal) rather than all the
    renewable alternatives -
    then the price of coal rises,
    which limits use anyway - no need for dumbass regulations to ensure it.

    4. Obviously, as said,
    polticians can simply tax electricity, to reduce use:
    Much simpler.
    And, unlike bans, gives Govmt income, that can pay for the insulation
    of affected poorer homes - or whatever.
    Bans give Governments no such money.

    5. And, if the bulbs really need targeting,
    taxing them in turn gives income that can go to reduce the prices of
    Energ y saving alternatives
    (on your presumably liberal ideology)
    - athough stimulating open competition on free markets is in my view best,
    also to deliver desirable E nergy saving bulbs.

    ==========


    RE "inefficiency"

    "Ene rgy" efficiency is not the only
    "efficiency" there is.

    There is no other lighting technology, which so efficiently and cheaply allows the construction of bright lighting
    - and , to boot, bright lighting that is broad spectrum and omnidirectional.
    Well considering the US has a total power capacity of about 1,076,000MW.
    2% would be 21,520MW
    The average Nukclear plant has a capacity of about 1,000MW

    That means by reducing power grid requirements by 2% would mean that 21 Nuclear plants or 80+ Coal plants would not have to be built.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/******_..._United_States

    That's probably about $ 147 Billion that the US will not have to spend on power infrastructure.

    Considering how much the people hated a stimulus package of $700 Billion I'd think they would like not paying that by inches to build or retrofit more power plants over the next 5 years.


    You are probably also hoping that capitalistic forces will take there course. However, what you are not considering is that they already have....... Why would a light bulb company sell you a bulb that would last 20x as long at half the price over time???? The simple answer is that they wouldn't. It would cut into there profits. Far more money for them to sell you an inferior product at your expense.

    Guaranteed obsolescence, They do it in Cars, They do it for phones. why don't you think they wouldn't do it for light bulbs? the only difference is that light bulbs really haven't improved much over the last 20 years so your not even getting a better product in the end.


    As much as you don't like this the reality is that you can't make everyone happy.

    The average house hold will be happy because they will get a better product and they will save money.

    The environmentalists will be happy because they reduced there carbon emissions by 2% in swoop.

    The government will be happy because they didn't have to spend $173 billion during a recession and that cost wasn't passed on to the American public.

    The light bulb companies won't be super happy but they will be content knowing that they are all in the same boat and that no one company is going to wipe them all out on an unlevel playing field.

    The consumer will also be happy because companies will actually spend some money on R&D to improve the lightbulb to beat there competition.
    Last edited by Spector567; 12-16-2011 at 12:18 PM.

  15. #15
    Yawn...'s Avatar
    Yawn... is offline I ain't got time for pedantic Ghandi type internet nerds User Rank
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6,289

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by sodabread View Post
    If saving electricity was such a big deal,
    then electricity could simply be taxed.....
    It is taxed.

    May states charge service tax or fee - which is in essence a tax.
    For Example: Pacific Gas & Electric 'Collects' for the State of California $.00029 per kilowatt hour.

    And the public utility can collect other taxes & fees for various sub-divisions of the Government.

    Other States have similar taxes.

    Politically that is impossible and you know it.

    It would also be economically unwise since it would raise the cost of goods across the country. While not actually fixing any problems. Since you couldn't separate electricity rates by use.
    If you increase Price via a tax, Demand will be reduced.

  16. #16
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong. User Rank
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Light Bulb Scam

    Quote Originally Posted by sodabread View Post
    1. Because of the "power factor" of most CFLs (if you use them) the
    power plant uses twice the ****** to what your meter says - but users
    pay anyway, in higher bills
    http://ceolas.net/#15eux Dept ****** + Sylvania refrences
    Really? Now you're talking my language. Power factor. That's the "imaginary" current caused by a non-resistive load. If it's an inductive load, like any kind of motor or transformer, it will cause the current to be out of phase with the voltage.

    And.... The only time this would matter would be if you have a larger shift on Phase A than you do on Phase B. (North american homes have 220V with a center tap) So.... Since you normally use all kinds of transformers like wall warts on almost all of your devices, including furnace fans and Air conditioning, you always have a different power factor.

    Assuming you are using both phases of your power, and you balance them appropriately, the power factor of phase A will cancel the power factor of phase B.

    Quote Originally Posted by sodabread View Post
    Conversely,
    2. from utility subsidies and/or from them being allowed to raise charges,
    because of expected decrease in sales - in more and more US states.

    Apart from , of course, not saving much when using expensive bulbs in
    little used lamps...
    US households average 45 lighting points (also, any breakages, losses..)
    Now there is a good point. They shouldn't be allowed to run "for profit". Period.

    Using less power overall will require fewer power plants, and the end user pays for the power plants. You are saving money in the long run. They're only allowed to make so much profit. If they get too greedy someone else will step up to produce power for cheaper.
    Quote Originally Posted by sodabread View Post
    Ban proponents just use the commonest used lamps to calculate supposed savings.
    Also, as referenced on the above website, the supposed lifespan, brightness and other
    CFL/LED Lab values don't correspond to Real life use.
    They do in my house. I converted every single bulb in my house to CFL back in 2006 and have only had to change two bulbs since. I used to have to change every bulb in the house at least once/year.

    The time I save getting into the light fixtures every year to change the bulbs is worth it right there. The bulb cost savings is probably a push by now, and the electricity savings was immediately seen on my bill.

    Sorry, but it's a win win win for me. I don't support a ban, but you really should change over.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

Similar Threads

  1. Florida Power and Light Late Payment Scam
    By SCAMS in forum Mail Order Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-20-2015, 03:07 AM
  2. All the people that "have seen the light" scam
    By Administrator in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 09-02-2014, 02:54 PM
  3. Leftist Light-Bulb Freaks
    By pwrone in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-16-2011, 12:29 PM
  4. I've seen the liberal light
    By gussser in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 08-11-2007, 01:40 AM
  5. somebody shed some light please....
    By umdkook in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 03-10-2006, 12:33 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •