Lights Out: Congress Making 100-Watt Power Grab?

Freitag, 1. Juni 2012

Lights Out: Congress Making 100-Watt Power Grab?

HOLLOWVILLE, N.Y. -- For more than 130 years, Thomas Edison's incandescent bulb has lit up homes around the world. Now, the light bulb as we know it may soon be a thing of the past.

Beginning this year, the federal government plans to phase out traditional incandescent light bulbs. The first to go is the 100-watt bulb.

It's all a part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Republicans in Congress are fighting its enactment. But if they fail, the law will go into effect later this year.

Is this an energy-saving move or another example of a government power grab?

Energy-Saving Move?

The law requires basic light bulbs to be about 25 percent more efficient and would remove traditional incandescent bulbs from the market.

"I think it's very wise because maybe 40 or 50 years ago, it wouldn't have worked because there weren't alternatives," Sandra Miles, a veteran of the telecommunications and lighting industries and president of the Goeken Group Corp., told CBN News.

"But now you have plenty of great energy efficient alternatives that give you the same look and feel of an incandescent," she explained.

Those alternatives primarily fall into two categories: CFLs, known for their curly shape, and light-emitting diodes or LEDs. They're supposed to save energy and last a lot longer than traditional light bulbs.

However, lighting professional Howard Brandston isn't ready to give up on a bulb that's not broken. Brandston is known for lighting structures like the Statue of Liberty and Malaysia's twin towers.

Brandston stands by Edison's invention, using traditional incandescent bulbs to light his home.

Save the Bulb

Under current law, the standard 100-watt incandescent light bulb is to be phased out this year, a move he strongly opposes.

In fact, Brandston considers it a moral obligation to speak out against the phasing out of incandescent bulbs. He's even launched a campaign entitled, Save the Bulb.

"Look at all the people who have lost their homes," he told CBN News. "Look at all the people who are out of work. Look at all of that, and now we're going to impose a new... a new financial burden on them."

On his website, Brandston wrote, "I see no good reason to relegate one of America's greatest inventions to the dustbin of history -- other than to suit the particular interests of uninformed politicians, light manufacturing giants, and their lobbyists, and energy zealots."

"I know a couple of senior researchers in the lighting industry, who've started to hoard light bulbs, and me included, because I might not win this fight, although I'm dedicated to it," he said.

That dedication includes a lifetime supply of bulbs stored in his basement.

Expensive, Toxic Bulbs?

So why won't this lighting designer embrace the future? For one, the CFL alternative contains mercury.

"They banned mercury in thermometers," Brandston said. "Now they're saying, 'Hey, in light bulbs, it's okay, but in thermometers, no.' That's because it's been pushed by the lamp manufacturers and what I call the 'green machine.'"

Miles, whose company specializes in LED lighting, agrees with Brandston when it comes to the toxicity of CFLs.

"I think they're dangerous; I don't like to use them," Miles said. "I had one fall on my carpet the other day from just where I was testing and photographing them, and even on soft carpet, it just smashed into smithereens because of the thin glass."

"And immediately my secretary left the room. I called somebody else to help clean up. They wouldn't have anything to do with it," she said.

The Environmental Protection Agency states the use of CFLs helps reduce mercury emissions in the U.S. because of "their significant energy savings."

Yet, the EPA also has detailed instructions on its website of what to do if a CFL breaks in your home.

"With an enormous cleanup procedure... then you've got to pick up the parts, put them in a sealed glass jar, or double bag them in sealed plastic bags," Brandston said. "Nobody's going to do this; you can't vacuum it up."

Unlike CFLs, Miles said LED lighting is not delicate.

"These are virtually unbreakable, and 50,000 hours of warrantied life," she said. "They are going to be more available, and one of the exciting things is the creativity that is allowed."

"In a bulb like this, we're actually able to use the LEDs and make a sign of the Cross," she said.

But be prepared to pay quite a bit more for the LEDs and CFLs.

For example, you can pay a buck for a three-pack of traditional bulbs, while a three-pack of CFLs can cost around $10 to $15. LEDs cost the most.

"You could be anywhere from $10 to $25, $30 a lamp, depending on the wattage equivalent -- the more LEDs, the more expensive," Miles said.

Light Bulb Socialism

Miles hopes the attraction of energy savings and long life will win over consumers.

Brandston bases his skepticism on the uninterrupted, smooth color spectrum emitted by Edison's safe, low-cost bulb.

But his opinion may not matter unless the new effort by conservatives in Congress can stall what has been called "light bulb socialism."

Voice of the Gospel Christian Radio - Radio Stimme des Evangeliums

Freitag, 1. Juni 2012

Lights Out: Congress Making 100-Watt Power Grab?

Lights Out: Congress Making 100-Watt Power Grab?

Keine Kommentare:

Kommentar veröffentlichen