Slashdot Mirror
Australia Outlaws Incandescent Light Bulb
passthecrackpipe writes "The Australian Government is planning on making the incandescent light bulb a thing of the past. In three years time, standard light bulbs will no longer be available for sale in the shops in Australia (expect a roaring grey market) and everybody will be forced to switch to more energy efficient Fluorescent bulbs. In this move to try and curb emissions, the incandescent bulb — which converts the majority of used energy to heat rather then light — will be phased out. Environmental groups have given this plan a lukewarm reception. They feel Australia should sign on to the Kyoto protocol first. A similar plan was created together with Phillips, one of the worlds largest lighting manufacturers."
The vast majority of people is not informed about the savings that can be realized with EEL and led illumination.
... inform them?
So
Btw, I strongly disagree that this is mostly a matter of being uninformed. I am aware of the cost savings, AND consider any ROR above 13%/year to be awesome.
Do you really, honestly think I don't have a good reason for not switching?
Why do photographers light with incandescents?
Why do autistics?
Why does any kind of office relying on artistic creativity?
They're not gonna use more light just because it's cheaper, as demonstrated in every other part of the world where similar measures where taken.
I didn't claim that. If you'd followed my sig's advice, my concern was that people would simply replace that energy -- not light -- savings with another. So I'm not spending what I'm used to spending for electricity? Great, now I can have more heating.
What energy-free activity do you think people are going to do when they get this windfall of cash?
The point is, to reduce people's energy uses, without changing the incentive structure involved in using energy, is counterproductive.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
Let me guess you are a founding member of the Sahara club? The environment isn't impressed with how much more you are willing to pay. There are secondary costs even beyond CO2 levels. Since you seem to be rich remember this the next time you set down to a nice Sword Fish dinner all that mercury you are dining on comes for industry, mostly coal fired power plants. I get sick of hearing from the Hummer/SUV driving crowd that it isn't their problem and let some one else deal with it. A 100 years ago electric bulbs were starting to get more and more common, 150 years ago no one had them, and no one had cars. Now you absolutely can't live without incandescent bulbs and the biggest tank you can find. A 100 years ago you'd be riding a horse and using an oil lamp ya yahoo. Trust me you'll live if you switch to high efficency bulbs. I've been using them for years and I love the soft even light. I actually use photographic compacts in my computer room because the light is color corrected. In household incandescents have a miserable color temperature and I do graphics. There's nothing insightful about proudly stating you're too selfish to be part of the solution. We need a sad and pathetic category for people like that.
So? Go to any halfway decent camera store and get a "warming" gel pack. Gel your bulbs to taste. Problem solved.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Being a vegan and using a bicycle as a primary means of transport, I probably contribute *vastly* less to CO2 emissions than you do. Please don't tell me what kind of lighting I can/cannot use. Hypocrite. Please take your dips__t feel-good facist legislation and shove it.
To be fair, not everyone who doesn't like CFLs fall into this camp. But if you take out the conservatives who also happen to be "skeptical" of evolution and global warming, you end up with a much, much smaller number CFL "skeptics". The number is inflated by politics.