Let There Be (Incandescent) Light (Bulbs)!

Not exactly Genesis 1:3-quality stuff, but not bad:

Congressional negotiators struck a deal Thursday that overturns the new rules that were to have banned sales of traditional incandescent light bulbs beginning next year.

That agreement is tucked inside the massive 1,200-page spending bill that funds the government through the rest of this fiscal year, and which both houses of Congress will vote on Friday. Mr. Obama is expected to sign the bill, which heads off a looming government shutdown.

Congressional Republicans dropped almost all of the policy restrictions they tried to attach to the bill, but won inclusion of the light bulb provision, which prevents the Obama administration from carrying through a 2007 law that would have set energy efficiency standards that effectively made the traditional light bulb obsolete.

Stopping the bulb ban was a chief GOP priority coming into this year, with all of the candidates seeking to become chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee saying they would push through a repeal. That bill cleared the House but Democrats blocked its consideration in the Senate.

The spending bill doesn’t actually amend the 2007 law, but does prohibit the administration from spending any money to carry out the light bulb standards — which amounts to at least a temporary reprieve.

Unfortunately, we've already successfully driven all the domestic producers out of business, so those incandescent bulbs we buy in the future will be generating dollars to other countries and not to American workers. As Obama would say, "Mission Accomplished."

Pro-Choice Dems Are Not That Pro-Choice

They're only pro-choice if you choose to do what they want:

House lawmakers Tuesday stymied an initial effort by Republicans to put an end to infamous light bulb efficiency standards.

The bill from Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) to repeal part of a 2007 energy law requiring traditional incandescent light bulbs to be 30 percent more energy efficient beginning in 2012 failed to get the necessary two-thirds support needed for approval under expedited rules. A majority of members — 233 — supported the repeal, including five Democrats. Ten Republicans joined 183 Democrats opposing the measure.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi personally whipped Democratic Caucus members to vote against the bill, a Democratic aide told POLITICO.

“I was concerned that Ms. Pelosi might make it a litmus test issue in her caucus, and she did,” Barton said after the vote. “We only got 5 Democrat votes. Everybody in the Blue Dog caucus and the Black caucus that voted no, voted against their constituents.

So, you will not have the option to choose the lightbulbs of your choice, you'll have to use the mercury-ridden curly fry bulbs of their choice that will turn your home into a toxic waste site if you break one.

Pro-choice my rear end.

Energy Quote of the Day

From Energy Secretary Stephen Chu, defending the law which bans the 100 watt incandescent bulb:

"We are taking away a choice that continues to let people waste their own money."

I thought liberals were all about being "pro-choice"?

What business is it of the Energy Secretary, or any other member of the government, how Americans choose to spend their money? It's our money, and I guarantee you many people don't think incandescent bulbs are a "waste"...not if you want to see when you turn on a light. Rather than spend more per bulb for curly fry lights that take time to come to full power and bathe everything in weird tones, some people "choose" to see things the way they like to.

That used to be the American way.

Don't miss Mark Steyn's take on Chu's comments.

There Will Still Be Light in Texas

As the country descends into murky florescent darkness, it will still be light in Texas (h/t Say Anything):

State lawmakers have passed a bill that allows Texans to skirt federal efforts to promote more efficient light bulbs, which ultimately pushes the swirled, compact fluorescent bulbs over the 100-watt incandescent bulbs many grew up with.

The measure, sent to Gov. Rick Perry for consideration, lets any incandescent light bulb manufactured in Texas – and sold in that state – avoid the authority of the federal government or the repeal of the 2007 energy independence act that starts phasing out some incandescent light bulbs next year.

“Let there be light,” state Rep. George Lavender, R-Texarkana, wrote on Facebook after the bill passed. “It will allow the continued manufacture and sale of incandescent light bulbs in Texas, even after the federal ban goes into effect. … It’s a good day for Texas.”

This takes Texas-manufactured bulbs out from under the authority of the Commerce Clause...as long as they're only sold in Texas. I wonder if lightbulb stores will suddenly appear near the Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico borders?

Do You Think Congress Would Pay Attention to 20,000 CFL Bulbs Smashing on the Capitol Steps?

Coming soon, the end of choice when it comes to lightbulbs:

The United States is on the verge of a lighting revolution that will oust the traditional incandescent in favor of more energy efficient (and less polluting) alternatives. Are you ready?

On Jan. 1, nationwide, a new federal law means the 100-watt incandescent will start disappearing from store shelves. Instead, an expanding line of alternative bulbs will be sold bearing new nutrition-like labels on their boxes. The labels will tout a bulb's lumens, a measure of brightness, rather than its wattage, a measure of energy use. They will also estimate its yearly energy cost.

Less polluting? Do you remember what you have to do if you break one of these in your home? You have an instant toxic waste dump.

Republicans were supposed to try and pass a repeal of the 100 watt lightbulb ban, but so far I haven't seen any sign of action. I wonder if they'd pay attention if 20,000 people showed up on the steps of the Capitol with curly-fry CFL's in their hands poised and ready to smash them all around Capitol Hill?

Then let them tell us they're "less polluting".

CFL = Cancer Florescent Bulbs?

Some scientists say they're dangerous even if they're not broken:

Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on.

Peter Braun, who carried out the tests at the Berlin's Alab Laboratory, said: “For such carcinogenic substances it is important they are kept as far away as possible from the human environment.”

The bulbs are already widely used in the UK following EU direction to phase out traditional incandescent lighting by the end of this year.

But the German scientists claimed that several carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene.

Andreas Kirchner, of the Federation of German Engineers, said: “Electrical smog develops around these lamps.

“I, therefore, use them only very economically. They should not be used in unventilated areas and definitely not in the proximity of the head.”

Sounds like the law of unintended consequences strikes again.

Fighting for the Right to Light

South Carolina wants their incandescent bulbs:

State lawmakers are fed up with the federal government micromanaging their lives. The South Carolina Senate is scheduled to strike back Tuesday with a bill that asserts the 10th Amendment right of the state to tell Washington to take a hike when it comes to the sale of incandescent light bulbs manufactured within state borders.

Ever since then-President George W. Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the clock has been ticking on Thomas Edison’s venerable incandescent. Unless Congress acts before Jan. 1, 2012, federal bureaucrats will begin their campaign to foist the mostly Chinese-made, compact fluorescent bulbs on a public that has shown no interest in buying them on the free market.

Palmetto State lawmakers aren’t interested in waiting for the feds to see the light. The “South Carolina Incandescent Light Bulb Freedom Act” declares any fixture that bears the stamp “Made in South Carolina” is a product of intrastate commerce and thus “is not subject to federal law or federal regulation.” State Rep. William E. Sandifer III, chairman of the South Carolina House Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee, told The Washington Times that the measure he co-sponsored has a very good chance of becoming law. “I believe that it is improper for the federal government to tell us as citizens what light bulbs we can use to light our own private homes or businesses,” he explained. “I think the feds have overstepped our 10th Amendment constitutional rights as they’ve so often done under the Commerce Clause.”

Apparently this is a firm in South Carolina that currently makes incandescent bulbs and would like to expand their operation. And this could be good for the tourist business:

Should Mr. Sandifer’s bill be the first enacted, there is no doubt the South Carolina will see a substantial increase in tourism next year - as drivers fill the trunks of their cars with mercury-free bulbs.

Heh.

However, don't look for the Feds to go quietly on this issue. They'll try to make every argument they can make that these bulbs constitute interstate commerce and therefore are subject to the Commerce Clause and federal regulation.

Bachmann to Democrats: Get Your Hands Off Our Lightbulbs

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is trying to restore some sanity to our government:

Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann on Tuesday reintroduced the "Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act," a bill to repeal a 2007 law mandating that incandescent light bulbs be phased out.

"The government has no business telling an individual what kind of light bulb to buy," she said in a news release Wednesday. "In 2007, Congress overstepped its bounds by mandating that only 'energy efficient' light bulbs may be sold after January 1, 2012. This mandate has sweeping effects on American families and businesses and needs serious consideration before taking effect."

Bachmann says the mandate should only stay in place is (1) there is proof that alternate bulbs save consumers money, (2) there is proof that alternate bulbs significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions and (3) that it's shown that alternate bulbs "would not lead to a health risk for consumers, particularly those in hospitals, schools, day care centers and nursing homes."

Unfortunately, the Democrats have already managed to kill the U.S. incandescent lightbulb industry. The last factory in the U.S. that was making the bulbs closed last September and I can't imagine any company is going to invest in starting up a lightbulb factory again knowing they can be shut down at the whim of Democrats.

Global Warming Cartoon of the Day

Seen on Facebook:

Author of Lightbulb Law Now Wants to Undo the Damage

Given that the last jobs for makers of incandescent bulbs has already left the country, it may be too late to undo some of the damage caused by the law which demands we switch to compact florescents:

Republican Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan – the man running against Texas Rep. Joe Barton to be Chairman of the Energy and Commerce committee in the next Congress– has reversed his position on CFL light bulbs. The move is significant not only because Upton wants to be chairman of one of the House’s most powerful committees, but also because he championed the incandescent bulb ban and switch to CFLs just three short years ago.

Now, Upton says that if he becomes chair of the Energy Committee, he will help undo the law he was instrumental in getting passed. He even went a step further by admitting Congress can make mistakes – a candid admission that symbolizes Upton may be trying to solidify his conservative credentials with the incoming class of “Tea Party” Republicans.

“The last thing we wanted to do was infringe upon personal liberties — and this has been a good lesson that Congress does not always know best,” Upton said in a statement.

The ban on incandescent bulbs was incorporated into the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act that was signed into law by President George W. Bush. Since then, however, consumers have by and large balked at the idea of completely switching over to so-called environmentally friendly bulbs.

As The Daily Caller previously reported, some consumers have even resorted to stockpiling incandescent bulbs before the ban goes into full effect in 2012.

Apparently Upton's act of contrition was enough to convince the GOP leadership to make him chairman of the Energy Committee. A lot of conservatives are unhappy with that.  He better back up his words with actions.

Turn Out the Lights in Winchester, VA

Congressional foolishness costs American jobs:

The last major GE factory making ordinary incandescent light bulbs in the United States is closing this month, marking a small, sad exit for a product and company that can trace their roots to Thomas Alva Edison's innovations in the 1870s.

The remaining 200 workers at the plant here will lose their jobs.

"Now what're we going to do?" said Toby Savolainen, 49, who like many others worked for decades at the factory, making bulbs now deemed wasteful.

During the recession, political and business leaders have held out the promise that American advances, particularly in green technology, might stem the decades-long decline in U.S. manufacturing jobs. But as the lighting industry shows, even when the government pushes companies toward environmental innovations and Americans come up with them, the manufacture of the next generation technology can still end up overseas.

Republicans are being urged to overturn the ban on incandescent bulbs once they get back in power in Congress, but I doubt they could get Obama to sign it.

The ClimateGate Story Will Get Out

Whether the mainstream media chooses to report it or not, word is getting out about the ClimateGate emails. Of course, we'll have to have a Brit tell us about it (from Gerald Warner, UK Telegraph):

Just a few considerations in addition to previous remarks about the explosion of the East Anglia Climategate e-mails in America. The reaction is growing exponentially there. Fox News, Barack Obama’s Nemesis, is now on the case, trampling all over Al Gore’s organic vegetable patch and breaking the White House windows. It has extracted some of the juiciest quotes from the e-mails and displayed them on-screen, with commentaries. Joe Public, coast-to-coast, now knows, thanks to the clowns at East Anglia’s CRU, just how royally he has been screwed.

Senator James Inhofe’s Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works has written to all the relevant US Government agencies, acquainting them with the nature of the e-mails. But the real car crash for Obama is on Capitol Hill where it is now confidently believed his Cap and Trade climate legislation is toast. It was always problematic; but with a growing awakening to the scale of the scientific imposture sweeping the world, as far as the Antipodes, the clever money is on Cap and Trade laws failing to pass, with many legislators sceptical and the mid-term elections looming ever closer.

At the more domestic level, the proposed ban on incandescent light bulbs, so supinely accepted in this servile state of Britain, is now provoking a huge backlash in America. US citizens do not like the government coming into their houses and putting their lights out. Voters may not understand the cut and thrust of climate debate at the technical level, but they know when the Man from Washington has crossed their threshold uninvited.

The term that Fox News is now applying to the Climategate e-mails is “game-changer”. For the first time, Anthropogenic Global Warming cranks are on the defensive, losing their cool and uttering desperate mantras such as “You can be sceptical, not denial.” Gee, thanks, guys. In fact we shall be whatever we want to be, without asking your permission.

At this rate, Copenhagen is going to turn into a comedy convention with the real world laughing at these liars. Now is the time to mount massive resistance to the petty tyrants and hit them where it hurts – in the wallet. Further down the line there may be, in many countries, a question of criminal prosecution of anybody who has falsified data to secure funds and impose potentially disastrous fiscal restraints on the world in deference to a massive hoax. It’s a new world out there, Al, and, as you may have noticed, the climate is very cold indeed.

Congress has already passed a bill banning incandescent lightbulbs in 2012. Who's going to introduce the bill to reverse that?

Charging You for Light Bulbs You Don't Want

FirstEnergy in Ohio is promoting a compact florescent lightbulb "giveaway" which is no bargain:

FirstEnergy Corp. is getting ready to leave two high-efficiency light bulbs on your doorstep. But they're not a gift.

The utility will charge average users 60 cents a month extra on their electric bills for the next three years — $21.60 all together. That covers the cost of the bulbs ($3.50 each), their delivery and the delivery of the power consumers would have used if they didn't have them.

The good news: These compact fluorescent bulbs will reduce your electricity use. If you replace two 100-watt incandescent bulbs with these 23-watt, warm-white CFLs, you'll save $60 by the time they burn out in five to seven years, according to FirstEnergy.

And you'll pay for the bulbs whether you use them or not, so it makes sense to use them.

If you really wanted the bulbs you could buy a five-pack from Ace Hardware for $13.99. This program is a rip-off. FirstEnergy has found a way to increase their profits by forcing purchases on people.

And will FirstEnergy clean up the hazardous toxic waste should any of these bulbs be broken during the delivery process?

Not the Brightest Bulbs in the Chandelier

The Euroweenies are suddenly discovering that the lightbulbs they've mandated for everybody don't light up stuff as well as the old ones:

Soon they will be the only kind of light bulb allowed, but now officials in Brussels have admitted that energy-saving bulbs are not as bright as the old-fashioned kind they are replacing.

From tomorrow a Europe-wide ban on traditional incandescent bulbs will begin to be rolled out, with a ban on 100W bulbs and old-style frosted or pearled bulbs.

Buyers of the main type of energy-saving bulb, compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs), are told on the packaging that they shine as brightly as an old-fashioned bulb. For example, an 11W CFL is labelled as being the equivalent of a 60W incandescent bulb.

However, the European Commission, which was responsible for the ban, has now conceded that this is "not true" and that such claims by manufacturers are "exaggerated".

And in true liberal fashion, we're doing the exact same thing as mandated by Obama and the Democrats.

We're all going to need miner's caps to see what we're doing.

Killing Chinese to Save the Environment

When a nation has over a billion people, what's it to the West if a few thousand (or million) have to be sacrificed so we can be "green":

WHEN British consumers are compelled to buy energy-efficient lightbulbs from 2012, they will save up to 5m tons of carbon dioxide a year from being pumped into the atmosphere. In China, however, a heavy environmental price is being paid for the production of “green” lightbulbs in cost-cutting factories.

Large numbers of Chinese workers have been poisoned by mercury, which forms part of the compact fluorescent lightbulbs. A surge in foreign demand, set off by a European Union directive making these bulbs compulsory within three years, has also led to the reopening of mercury mines that have ruined the environment.

Doctors, regulators, lawyers and courts in China - which supplies two thirds of the compact fluorescent bulbs sold in Britain - are increasingly alert to the potential impacts on public health of an industry that promotes itself as a friend of the earth but depends on highly toxic mercury.

Making the bulbs requires workers to handle mercury in either solid or liquid form because a small amount of the metal is put into each bulb to start the chemical reaction that creates light.

Mercury is recognised as a health hazard by authorities worldwide because its accumulation in the body can damage the nervous system, lungs and kidneys, posing a particular threat to babies in the womb and young children.

Hey, they all look alike anyway...right?

And our own Congress is requiring us to use the CFLs starting in 2012 too.

Don't forget the extraordinary measures you have to do through if you break one of these bulbs in your house. You don't want to end up like Chinese lightbulb workers.

The Problem with CFLs

CFLs (Compact Florescent Lights) may actually be costing much more electrical usage than thought:

"We've seen compact fluorescent lamps start to take over shelf space at the local hardware store. Replacing a 60 watt incandescent with a 13 watt CFL seems like a great savings, though many consumers are disappointed with the slow warm-up times, lower-than-advertised lifetimes, and hassles of disposing the mercury-containing bulbs. Now EDN reports they may use more energy than claimed due to their poor power factor. Mike Grather, of Lumenaire Testing Laboratory, 'checked the power factor for the CFLs and found they ranged from .45 to .50. Their "real" load was about twice that implied by their wattage.' The good news: you're only billed for the 13 watts of real power used. The bad news: the utilities have to generate the equivalent of 28 watts (that is, 28 VA of apparent power for you EEs out there) to light that bulb.

Unintended consequences.

EPA Says CFL's Unsafe In Certain Usages

Our second story in as many days on compact florescent lightbulbs features the Environmental Protection Agency which is warning consumers not to use the bulbs in all applications, despite the fact that they'll be mandated by the new energy bill after 2012:

WASHINGTON – Despite a congressional mandate banning the sale of common incandescent light bulbs by 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is warning that their compact fluorescent replacements are not safe to use everywhere.

The EPA says breakage of the energy-saving, mercury-containing CFLs can cause health hazards, especially for children and pregnant women, suggesting use of the bulbs over carpeted areas should be avoided. If bulbs break over carpeted areas, the cleanup may require cutting out pieces of the carpet to avoid toxic exposures.

Mercury is needed for the lamps to produce light, and there are currently no known substitutes. Small amounts of the toxic substance is vaporized when they break, which can happen if people screw them in holding the glass instead of the base or just drop them.

Mercury is a naturally occurring metal that accumulates in the body and can harm the nervous system of a fetus or young child if ingested in sufficient quantity.

For the Maine study, researchers shattered 65 compact fluorescents to test air quality and cleanup methods. They found that, in many cases, immediately after the bulb was broken – and sometimes even after a cleanup was attempted – levels of mercury vapor exceeded federal guidelines for chronic exposure by as much as 100 times.

In a new Maine study, mercury vapor released by the bulbs exceeded even those higher levels.

In case you break one of your CFLs, you can either follow the cleanup guidelines here or just burn your house down. The latter may be easier.

What to Do When Your Compact Florescent Bulb Breaks

Since Congress has so graciously made incandescent bulbs illegal after 2012, you're going to need to know what to do should one of your legally mandated compact florescent bulbs break. From the Boston Globe:

Compact fluorescent lamps contain small amounts of toxic mercury that can vaporize when the bulbs break, creating a potential health risk for infants, young children, and pregnant women. If a lamp does break, follow these cleanup procedures:

Keep people and pets away. Open windows, and leave the area for 15 minutes before beginning the cleanup.

Do not use a vacuum cleaner, even on a carpet. This will spread the mercury vapor and dust and potentially contaminate the vacuum.

Wear rubber gloves.

Carefully remove the larger pieces and place them in a secure closed container, preferably a glass jar with a metal screw top lid and seal like a canning jar.

Next, scoop up the smaller pieces and dust using two stiff pieces of paper such as index cards or playing cards.

Pick up fine particles with duct tape, packing tape, or masking tape, and then use a wet wipe or damp paper towel.

Put all waste into the glass container, including all material used in the cleanup. Remove the container from your home and call your local solid waste district or municipality for disposal instructions.

Continue ventilating the room for several hours.

Wash your hands and face.

As a precaution, consider discarding throw rugs or the area of carpet where the breakage occurred, particularly if the rug is in an area frequented by infants, small children or pregnant women. Otherwise, open windows during the next several times you vacuum the carpet to provide good ventilation.

Isn't it nice to know that Congress wants you to put dozens of potentially hazardous waste dumps in your home? In a related story, also from the Globe:

Compact fluorescent lamps - those spiral, energy-efficient bulbs popular as a device to combat global warming - can pose a small risk of mercury poisoning to infants, young children, and pregnant women if they break, two reports concluded yesterday.

But the reports, issued by the state of Maine and the Vermont-based Mercury Policy Project, urged homeowners to keep using compact fluorescents because their energy-saving benefits far outweigh the risk posed by mercury released from a broken lamp.

They said most danger could be avoided if people exercised common-sense caution, such as not using compact fluorescents in table lamps that could be knocked over by children or pets and properly cleaning up broken bulbs.

Of course, the article doesn't tell us what to do with our table lamps once incandescent bulbs cannot be legally purchased. Maybe we should start the "Incandescent Bulb Underground" where the lightbulbs we'd all rather have can be smuggled to our homes for a reasonable fee.

Given the information in the first item above, how many people are going to do all those things if they break a CFL? This is a real pending health hazard that's being ignored in the name of the global warming religion.

The Light Just Came On Regarding the Light Bulb Ban

I wrote previously about the silly energy bill which will ban the incandescent lightbulb from American homes in an few years and wondered how such silliness to get passed. Well, it looks like Congress had some help...from the lightbulb industry which will be replacing all those cheap bulbs with much more expensive bulbs according to this item in The Wall Street Journal:

Just like that--like flipping a switch--Congress and the president banned incandescent light bulbs last month. OK, they did not exactly ban them. But the energy bill passed by Congress and signed by President Bush sets energy-efficiency standards for light bulbs that traditional incandescent bulbs cannot meet.

The new rules phase in starting in 2012, but don't be lulled by that five-year delay. Whether it's next week or next decade, you will one day walk into a hardware store looking for a 100-watt bulb--and there won't be any. By 2014, the new efficiency standards will apply to 75-watt, 60-watt and 40-watt bulbs too.

Representatives of Philips and General Electric, two of the biggest lightbulb makers, say there's nothing to be concerned about. And Larry Lauck of the American Lighting Association says, "I think everyone's pretty happy" with the new law. But then, the lighting industry has no reason not to be: People will need light, whatever the law says--according to Randy Moorehead of Philips, there are four billion standard-size (or "medium base") light sockets in America alone.

So if you're GE or Philips or Sylvania, the demise of the plain vanilla lightbulb is less a threat than an opportunity--an opportunity, in particular, to replace a product that you can sell for 50 cents with one that sells for $3 or more.

Yes, the $3 bulb lasts longer. Yes, it cuts your electricity bill. Mr. Moorehead says that when every one of those four billion light sockets has an energy-saving bulb in it, the country will be saving $18 billion a year on its electric bill. That's $4.50 per bulb--and the bulb makers are standing by to make sure a substantial portion of those "savings" get transformed into profits for them.

Thank you, Congress. Read the rest of it here.

Congress Bans 100 Watt Bulb, Saves the World

Praise be to Congress! We're saved and our energy future is now secure thanks to the new energy bill:

"In this bill, we ban by 2012 the famously inefficient 100-watt incandescent bulb," said Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), who co-sponsored that provision.

This means that all of us will be stuck with CFL bulbs that provide poor illumination, don't last as long as they claim, cost a lot more, and are a potential toxic waste hazard if they're broken.

Democrats aren't afraid of terrorists. They're not afraid of Iranian madman dictators. They're not afraid of Saudi oil ministers who have America by the short hairs. No, they're afraid of 100 watt bulbs.

Thanks, Congress.