How Many Congressmen Does It Take To Screw Up a Light Bulb? | By David Doniger, NRDC
The 2007 energy law ordered a make-over for the old incandescent bulb, which hadn't much changed since the days of Thomas Edison, and which wastes billions of dollars of electricity each year. Instead of padding the bottom lines of big power companies and companies that supply coal, natural gas, and other fuels, the new standards will keep those billions in consumers' pockets. All that wasted electricity means more pollution that kills tens of thousands of Americans each year, sickens millions more, and drives dangerous global warming.
Posts
2 comments:
Consumers as a whole will hardly save money
– REGARDLESS of what the energy savings are.
Electricity companies are being taxpayer subsidised
or allowed to raise your Bill rates to compensate for any reduced
electricity use, as already seen both federally and in California,
Ohio etc, and before them in the UK and other European countries
(see http://ceolas.net/#californiacfl )
The savings are small anyway, 2% of grid electricity on DOE data etc,
http://ceolas.net/#li171x - with relevant generation/distribution/consumption alternatives)
All known incandescents -"New" or otherwise, will in fact be banned
Second Phase,
” BACKSTOP REQUIREMENT
—If the Secretary fails to complete a
rulemaking in accordance with clauses (i) through (iv)
or if the final rule [ thus produced]
does not produce savings that are greater than or equal to the
savings from a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lumens per watt,
effective beginning January 1, 2020, the Secretary shall prohibit the
sale of any general service lamp that does not meet a minimum efficacy
standard of 45 lumens per watt. ”
So it will be 45 lumens per watt by 2020 at the latest,
which no incandescent on the market and no sellable incandescent is
near to being able to achieve.
Sure, pigs might fly,
but given the profit-motive behind pushing CFL/LED sales around the world, that is unlikely given the (admitted by GE/Philips/Osram http://ceolas.net/#li1ax) greater CFL/LED profitability
which led them to seek and support this ban in the first place
(also of course, profits apart, why else would someone welcome being told what they can make?)
Post a Comment