Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: A Bright Idea


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A Bright Idea Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 1:53:40 PM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Can you point me to the post in this thread where someone suggested "Ban the old bulbs!  Mandate the new"? 

I'll save you the trouble of looking.  There isn't one.  Nor have I heard that anyone in RL  has even proposed a mandate to "ban the old bulbs."  On the other hand, starting with Post No 2, you complain about the cost, and throughout the thread seem to take a very condescending attitude to those who have decided these bulbs are cost effective in the long term.  So again, your argument here seems to be that since you can't afford them, no one else should want them.

I get it.  You are are poor and can't afford them.  Sorry.  Thankfully, I am not poor and I intend to replace every bulb in my house with them.  I appreciate the OP bringing them to my attention.  Hope that's OK with you.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

Marc, I am not quite understanding your argument as to why these bulbs are a bad thing. It appears to be that since you can't afford them, it is elitist for others to want and use them. Does that about cover it?


I don't think they're a bad thing in and of themselves. I've read about them (Discover Magazine, I think) and actually think they are a good thing. My problem is with people who condescend to others who object to their high price and regard such people as intellectually and/or morally inferior. I object to the notion (prevalent in both the Left and the Right wings of politics) that we can legislate our way to paradise. "Ban the old bulbs! Mandate the new!" some people cry because it makes them feel wonderfully progressive (a word that too often is used as a euphemism for "I'm intellectually and morally superior). These same people give no thought to the fact that the added expenses of all their wonderfully progressive notions entail simply cannot be met by some people.


_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 2:05:57 PM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Can you point me to the post in this thread where someone suggested "Ban the old bulbs!  Mandate the new"? 

I'll save you the trouble of looking.  There isn't one.  Nor have I heard that anyone in RL  has even proposed a mandate to "ban the old bulbs."  On the other hand, starting with Post No 2, you complain about the cost, and throughout the thread seem to take a very condescending attitude to those who have decided these bulbs are cost effective in the long term.  So again, your argument here seems to be that since you can't afford them, no one else should want them.

I get it.  You are are poor and can't afford them.  Sorry.  Thankfully, I am not poor and I intend to replace every bulb in my house with them.  I appreciate the OP bringing them to my attention.  Hope that's OK with you.


Didn't California ban (or try to ban) incandescent bulbs? I remember reading about that.

I do not object to you or anyone else buying whatever kind of bulb you want. I object to condescending arrogant attitudes that anyone who objects to the high price of LED bulbs must be too stupid to understand that they save energy and are good for the environment.



_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 2:27:35 PM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
If anyone has been arrogant and condescending, it has been you.  Case in point:

Others, all high and mighty, don't give a shit. Satisfying their arrogant ego over how wonderfully progressive they are is more important to them.

In any case, you are partially right.  California has banned 100 watt bulbs.  Federal legislation taking effect this year will eventually end the manufacture of incandescent bulbs. Maybe you should go out and buy a bunch of them. 

LOS ANGELES — The brightest bulb in most homes for more than a century is fading toward darkness this year as California turns out the light on the century-old incandescent.
Beginning Jan. 1, the state began phasing out certain energy-sucking bulbs, federal standards the rest of the country will enact next year. Manufacturers will no longer make the traditional 100-watt bulb and stores will eventually sell out of current supplies. Consumers will have to choose from more efficient bulbs that use no more than 72 watts, including halogen incandescents, compact fluorescents and light-emitting diode, or LED, bulbs.
"These standards will help cut our nation's electric bill by over $10 billion a year and will save the equivalent electricity as 30 large power plants," said Noah Horowitz a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "That translates into a whole lot less global warming pollution being emitted."
The change is part of the federal Energy Independence and Security Act that President George Bush signed in 2007, to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. California was allowed to adopt the national standard one year earlier.
The act requires new bulbs to use 25 to 30 percent less energy beginning in 2012 nationally – starting with the 100-watt bulb. By 2014, other incandescent bulbs, including the 75-, 60- and 40-watt, will also be phased out across the country.
Some specialty bulbs, however, will continue to be available. Consumers will still be able to get smaller lights such as yellow bug lights and aquarium bulbs.
Light bulb manufacturers said they haven't gotten any reports of customers hoarding 100-watt bulbs yet, though that may change once supplies begin to dry up and word gets out. Nick Reynoza, manager at Royal Lighting in Los Angeles, said it's a shame the transition comes at a time when alternatives are so much more expensive. "It's not really an option – you have this or you don't get anything," he said. "The options are more expensive. Four incandescents are $1.00, the halogens are $5.99 and the LED are like $20."
While conservation groups back the change and the lighting industry has invested heavily in new technology, not everyone supports the law. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, who could not immediately be reached for comment, reintroduced legislation this year to repeal the law. "People don't want Congress dictating what light fixtures they can use," said Rep. Barton on his website. "Traditional incandescent bulbs are cheap and reliable."
Adam Gottlieb, spokesman for the California Energy Commission, acknowledged that the change has resulted in a "great deal of hue and cry" on some blogs as well. Recent postings have included the titles "More dim bulbs: California banning 100-watt incandescent light bulbs" and "More evidence that California is nuts."
Gottlieb, however, said it was not a ban and that consumers can still buy whatever bulbs they want as long as they meet the new standards. "After 130 years Tom Edison's old-fashioned light bulb is getting a 20th century makeover," he said. "The simple truth is consumers will save money." The newer bulbs are more expensive than incandescents, but supporters of the technology say they last so much longer that there is a financial savings in the end. For example, while incandescents provide as much as 2,000 hours of light, compact fluorescents can provide light for six times longer. Incandescents, which create light by passing an electric current through a tungsten wire filament, also waste 90 percent of the electricity they use as heat instead of light. Fluorescents, by comparison, apply an electrical current to different types of phosphers to produce light and produce less heat. But fans of the traditional bulb say they provide a softer, more natural light and turn on more quickly. Michael Petras, president of GE Lighting, said the industry is aware of the shortcomings and is working to refine the technology.
"We've got compact fluorescents that look like incandescents," he said from the company's headquarters in Cleveland. "We have a product coming out this spring that's a hybrid of compact fluorescent and halogen that will provide energy savings and a better start up time." Australia was the first to begin phasing out incandescents beginning in 2009, followed by the European Union, the Philippines and Argentina, said Petras. Mexico and Brazil are expected to follow the U.S.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

Can you point me to the post in this thread where someone suggested "Ban the old bulbs!  Mandate the new"? 

I'll save you the trouble of looking.  There isn't one.  Nor have I heard that anyone in RL  has even proposed a mandate to "ban the old bulbs."  On the other hand, starting with Post No 2, you complain about the cost, and throughout the thread seem to take a very condescending attitude to those who have decided these bulbs are cost effective in the long term.  So again, your argument here seems to be that since you can't afford them, no one else should want them.

I get it.  You are are poor and can't afford them.  Sorry.  Thankfully, I am not poor and I intend to replace every bulb in my house with them.  I appreciate the OP bringing them to my attention.  Hope that's OK with you.


Didn't California ban (or try to ban) incandescent bulbs? I remember reading about that.

I do not object to you or anyone else buying whatever kind of bulb you want. I object to condescending arrogant attitudes that anyone who objects to the high price of LED bulbs must be too stupid to understand that they save energy and are good for the environment.




< Message edited by Iamsemisweet -- 3/12/2012 2:32:57 PM >


_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 3:59:59 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

~FR~

Some numbers:

http://www.ccrane.com/lights/led-light-bulbs/geobulb-3-led-light-bulb.aspx

By the figures in the comparison table, and my sightly crude rounding off here, the difference in cost of a single 60W incandescent and a 7W LED is $24.70. The one year 12 hr./day difference in energy cost between them is ~ $29. Lower hours of usage would make the difference less and the break-even time a bit longer. Even at the price of $25 (for the 50,000 hr. bulb) it is not out of reach for many middle class people to replace the 4-6 most used bulbs in the house over a span of 2-3 years. The somewhat lower output bulbs cost $20 and last 30,000 hrs. At 8 hrs./day operation, that's ~ 10 yrs. 4 months bulb life. The 50k hr. bulbs would last a little over 17 years. Just 4-6 bulbs saving ~ $25 a year over ten years ads up ((25*6*10=$1,500)-$150 bulb cost= $1,350). Not to mention that this along with other measures means sooner getting to the point of never needing new large power plants, eventually even shutting a few down.




(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 4:29:27 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Cheapskates who drive AMC Pacers


I am not cheap I am thrifty.
The amc pacer has:
Radialy tunned suspension.
No optical blind spots.
Structural roll bar.
Passenger side door longer than drivers door to facilitate entry into back seat.
8" guard rail down both sides for side impact protection.
Engine "slightly modified" by clifford engineering produces 300hp.
Fuel economy 26 mpg on reg. pump gas.
No one wants to steal it
No one wants to share paint.
It is so ugly naturally that no no one will key it.

(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 4:36:39 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

i hate the idea that China could have a monopoly on certain metals and hold the rest of the world hostage to whatever they wish to charge..


Is it just china or would you hate the idea of any country doing that?

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/12/2012 4:58:59 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
Any country at all.
She even has a problem with Wakanda cornering the vibranium market...


_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:15:12 AM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
I objected to the notion of a light bulb that cost fifty dollars (or twenty or whatever) in what I thought was an obvious mock grumpiness meant to be humorous. Obviously not everyone saw it that way. Fine. My Bad. I failed to remember that for some people fifty dollars is meaningless and that those same people cannot relate to those who would find it a difficult expense to cover. People don’t see far outside of their own windows.

But I don’t need people pointing out the obvious to me as if I can’t do basic math nor do I need them giving me work ethic lectures. Nor do I need them snidely telling me what is or is not in the thread (since when are we not allowed to reference things not mentioned directly in a thread?), or snidely telling me how their going to outfit their entire house with LED bulbs as if I would object. Why would I object?

Again, I do not object to LED bulbs or people using them. I object to underlying presumptions that if someone complains about the price then they must be stupid or lazy. That is a condescendingly arrogant attitude. It is an attitude that is prevalent throughout much of (what passes for) political discourse these days. I’ve come to accept it from the whacko right but it sickens me to see it on the left, the political philosophy that supposedly knows better… but doesn’t. What is the difference between some Republican politician lecturing people who can’t afford health insurance to get a better job (as if all you’ve have to do is wave a wand) and somebody lecturing me to work harder because pulling fifty bucks out of my wallet is something I have to think over before I do it?


_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:19:50 AM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

First, it's $20, not $50. Second, you will spend $20 every year on lighting your cheap bulb.


But not all at once. What I'd like to know is what do I (or someone who is not just struggling in this economy but is truly poor) take that $20 from? Should I take it out of the rent money? The car insurance? Groceries?

It is easy to be snide and dismissive when you don't have to think about such things. It is easy to have high moral standards when the practical consequences don't affect you.

You just have to take out a loan, and buy on time.

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:31:54 AM   
RacerJim


Posts: 1583
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That's my point to you, exactly. The amount of time you burn one light bulb is irrelevant.

Spend as much as you like.

Here's another example.

This spring, I'm building a house. Now, it's costing me more than a traditional house would. However, it will cost almost nothing to heat or cool. And, it will never need outside maintenance. In your view perhaps, a waste of money. In mine, I'll be saving thousands every year forever.

Next year I'll add a windmill, and get paid for electricity instead of paying. Forever.

When you add a windmill be sure to subtract the electric power line, and rely on the wind to blow instead of electricity to flow. Forever.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:37:31 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

i hate the idea that China could have a monopoly on certain metals and hold the rest of the world hostage to whatever they wish to charge..


Is it just china or would you hate the idea of any country doing that?

any country that has a monopoly, just as any corp that has a monopoly.. are ya'll for monopolies or something? do you see a monopoly as a good thing (for anyone other than the monopoly, that is)???

< Message edited by tj444 -- 3/13/2012 8:41:42 AM >


_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:45:07 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That's my point to you, exactly. The amount of time you burn one light bulb is irrelevant.

Spend as much as you like.

Here's another example.

This spring, I'm building a house. Now, it's costing me more than a traditional house would. However, it will cost almost nothing to heat or cool. And, it will never need outside maintenance. In your view perhaps, a waste of money. In mine, I'll be saving thousands every year forever.

Next year I'll add a windmill, and get paid for electricity instead of paying. Forever.

When you add a windmill be sure to subtract the electric power line, and rely on the wind to blow instead of electricity to flow. Forever.

You're making even less sense than normal today.

Most home electrical generation capability is attached to the grid. I have an old friend who just finished the installation of a small hydroelectric system. When he is making more than he uses (normally), he feeds power to the grid and the TVA pays him. When he is using more than he produces, he pays the TVA for that power. He has calculated that after 5 years, he will have recouped his investment and from then on, it's gravy.
It's the same way with solar or wind. The goal isn't to go off grid. The idea is to contribute to the generating capacity of the grid and make some $ in the proccess.
With more people pumping power into the grid, fewer power plants will need to be constructed and a smaller amount of fossil fuels will have to be consumed.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:51:25 AM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

When you add a windmill be sure to subtract the electric power line, and rely on the wind to blow instead of electricity to flow. Forever.


Hahaha... Is every pissy little post of yours about breaking off in embitterment?

It's amazing gow messed with some of you cons got from losing an election 3 years ago.

_____________________________

Looking forward to The Dead Singing The National Anthem At The World Series.




Tinfoilers Swallow


(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:55:37 AM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

When you add a windmill be sure to subtract the electric power line, and rely on the wind to blow instead of electricity to flow. Forever.


That doesn't make any sense. It is not an either/or proposition. Even if someone generated only ten percent of their total energy usage, then it is that much less that must be drawn from power plants that pollute. A windmill here, a solar panel there, pretty soon it begins to add up.

_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 8:59:18 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Next year I'll add a windmill, and get paid for electricity instead of paying. Forever.

just outta curiousity.. did you happen to estimate/guestimate how much surplus electricity your windmill would generate and how much extra income that would be per year?

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/13/2012 9:01:13 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Why do something so stupid and unnecessary?  Is this the way you conduct your affairs, Jim?  If so, lotsa luck to you.
quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim


quote:

When you add a windmill be sure to subtract the electric power line, and rely on the wind to blow instead of electricity to flow. Forever.




< Message edited by Iamsemisweet -- 3/13/2012 9:06:34 AM >


_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/14/2012 7:32:43 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Then there's the LED snowboarding!

Cool!

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/14/2012 7:36:19 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That's my point to you, exactly. The amount of time you burn one light bulb is irrelevant.

Spend as much as you like.

Here's another example.

This spring, I'm building a house. Now, it's costing me more than a traditional house would. However, it will cost almost nothing to heat or cool. And, it will never need outside maintenance. In your view perhaps, a waste of money. In mine, I'll be saving thousands every year forever.

Next year I'll add a windmill, and get paid for electricity instead of paying. Forever.

When you add a windmill be sure to subtract the electric power line, and rely on the wind to blow instead of electricity to flow. Forever.

You are so clueless.

The windmill uses existing lines; when the wind blows, the meter runs backwards. When there's no wind, I get power the usual way, meter running forward.

The power company pays for the excess.

You do need 8 mph winds. But I live on high ground; that's almost every day.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/14/2012 11:37:38 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Next year I'll add a windmill, and get paid for electricity instead of paying. Forever.

just outta curiousity.. did you happen to estimate/guestimate how much surplus electricity your windmill would generate and how much extra income that would be per year?

Even more directly, I talked to people who already have one.

Results vary, but all are reaping a surplus, some substantially so.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: A Bright Idea - 3/14/2012 2:48:09 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
Speaking of long lasting bulbs, here is one that is going on 111 years in operation, ~ 1 million hours. Keep in mind that it is a four watt piece of glass blown art work and is suspected by experts of having a perfect vacuum seal, almost a fluke occurrence in manufacture of bulbs or vacuum tubes (Br. "valves," De. "Elektronenröhren," oder stimpt, "Röhren").

Aside some exceptional exceptions as the above example, the bad deal with incandescents is that long bulb life and kwh efficiency are at cross purposes, improvement of one only as in detriment to the other.

It is worth noting (at the risk of sounding Termy-esque) as well that its widely believed that light bulb manufacturers used planned obsolescence since the 1920's to intentionally shorten the lifespan of conventional incandescent tubes http://www.ted.com/conversations/729/planned_obsolescence_or_why_l.html - its difficult to imagine the sheer scale of the waste of almost 100 years of bulb usage worldwide. The long life of CFL's is a bit of a crock as a result as well because they seem very unreliable. I'm also for green technology but would have favoured slapping a green tax on incandescent technology to make CFL's more competitive (and fund green projects) rather than banning them outright as they did in the EU.

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A Bright Idea Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.426