on light bulbs
I sent this off as a letter to the editor this morning. It's not much to start this old blog up again, but it is a start. Enjoy.
This morning I noticed that one of the bulbs in my bathroom light fixture was burnt out and I realized I would have to go buy at least ten of them to sustain me over the next years when incandescent bulbs become unavailable and before I am ready to throw away the entire light fixture and buy a new one. Will someone please save us from useless legislation? Politicians like to be seen to be doing something (anything) and so this time, they have decided to ban the incandescent light bulb for being energy inefficient. Who will object, they think. Anybody who says they want to keep the old bulbs will just be seen as a wastrel. But what about the waste of getting rid of all those light fixtures that cannot fit a compact fluorescent? Politicians, please let the market decide on this one. If you want to been seen to be doing something for the environment, ride a bicycle. I do.
This morning I noticed that one of the bulbs in my bathroom light fixture was burnt out and I realized I would have to go buy at least ten of them to sustain me over the next years when incandescent bulbs become unavailable and before I am ready to throw away the entire light fixture and buy a new one. Will someone please save us from useless legislation? Politicians like to be seen to be doing something (anything) and so this time, they have decided to ban the incandescent light bulb for being energy inefficient. Who will object, they think. Anybody who says they want to keep the old bulbs will just be seen as a wastrel. But what about the waste of getting rid of all those light fixtures that cannot fit a compact fluorescent? Politicians, please let the market decide on this one. If you want to been seen to be doing something for the environment, ride a bicycle. I do.
Labels: fluorescent, incandescent, light bulbs, politicians, politics
posted by JuliaR | 4/30/2007 09:15:00 a.m.
7 Comments:
Yes, and they also don't play well with dimmer switches—perfect way to give yourself a seizure.
There's also a delay when you turn them on, which is a problem when I'm stumbling into my pitch-black apartment in the evening (there's light in the stairwell, but then I close my front door behind me and have to literally feel my way for several feet before I reach the nearest switch). Most of the fixtures in my house take two or more bulbs, so for years I've been putting one of each kind of bulb in them. That way, some light is shed immediately, and then after a few seconds the room brightens.
And they don't work with clip-on lampshades.
What about all the offices buildings where the lights are just left blazing all night? My own office is like this; I turn my own lights off, but all the lights in the main space stay on forever, as far as I know. Seems like that's a larger problem.
BBRUG, I don't mind the new-fangled bulbs and use them where they fit in. But you are right - they don't work with dimmers (and I have several of them around the house) and you can't hang a shade on them (very easily). But the banning of the bulbs reminds me of equally bad breed-specific-legislation. They banned "pit bull type dogs" in Ontario and got the legislation through despite the protests. A stupid, facile, ignorant way of behaving politically and I hope it comes back to bite them in the butt (pun intended).
I've heard of anti–pit bull laws. But the problem with pit bulls—of whom I have known two very nice ones—is their owners. And what does "pit bull type" even mean? How about a pit mix? How about rottweilers, whom I find much more scary, and by whom many more people I know have been attacked? But nobody would ban Carl; he's safe enough for a baby to play with!
Carl looks wonderful! I had heard about his book.
Then there's the small dog that isn't trained or socialized and that bites anything that moves. Fortunately, it's only a little tooth hole! No, it's almost always the dog's owner who is to blame. But it is (or it seems) much easier to ban a certain-looking dog than it is to police the owners. In fact, you just have to make sure the laws you have are enforced and that you give the local enforcement people the political will to do the enforcement.
Maybe "they" should also make it more difficult to own a pet to begin with. I sometimes watch the tv series that features the North Shore Animal Rescue and they won't let you have one of their pets unless you meet certain criteria. Of course, I also think making laws about this sort of thing is wrong too. I believe in consciousness-raising (I was a child of the 60s!) not legislation. Make people more aware and people themselves will rise to the occasion. Mostly.
Great letter; I especially like the part where you urge politicians to ride bikes. LOL. Let THEM do something for a change instead of forcing US to do something!
Anyway, I'm happy to see you've resurrected your Opinion Blog. I have been checking it once in awhile, and I knew one day I'd be pleasantly surprised.
Oh thanks Zoom. You know how it is - you get busy or sick (just a cold) or Mum gets sick... Anyway, I DO have lots of opinions but don't always express them. Sometimes I think it's too obvious, sometimes it's too controversial. I'm just a big chicken sometimes. And if I ever get a real job, I wonder how this will be perceived and if I'll have to give it up except for the sewing. I'll cross that bridge later.
Yes, I know what you mean. I figure if anybody I know stumbles across my blog, they'll know it's me. But my full name is not on it anywhere, so I trust it'll never be found by a prospective employer googling my name. Not exactly a cloak of anonymity, more like a thin veil.
Post a Comment
<< Home