Drop, charge, and lose the cords
Buzz Out Loud Lounge: i encourage people using incandescent light bulbs!
Molly's Tax Concern are on the Mark
by MammothCave - 3/11/07 7:38 PM In reply to: Yes... by Nicholas BuenkA tax on incandescent light bulbs is where it starts, then what? More people die in automobile accidents because of alcohol, so let's tax alcohol beverages by 100% and give the money to the survivors. Since most scientists agree that methane gas from cows is a major contributing factor lets tax beef by 100%. It is EXACTLY this kind of foolish thinking that makes the non-greenies look at the environmentalist crowd as a bunch of whackos.
Instead of telling people why they are evil for using a mode of energy that you find problematic, show them why your alternative is so much better for them. Tom did a great job by talking about how his newest compact florescent bulb was better than earlier models and didn't flicker. The makers of the bulbs all package to show how much money they will save by using those bulbs. That draws people to a solution, as opposed to those who would punish those who disagree with them.
Molly got it right, try again.
aahhh, yes...I like that idea better...
by shawnlin - 3/11/07 8:09 PM In reply to: Molly's Tax Concern are on the Mark by MammothCaveinspire or encourage "greener" habits by showing the rewards rather than penalizing bad behavior... I like.
Alcohol's are highly taxed already
by Nicholas Buenk - 3/12/07 12:56 AM In reply to: Molly's Tax Concern are on the Mark by MammothCaveAt least in Australia where I live, and there is justification for it, if you're drinking alcohol, you're more likely to incur costs on the government, think police and medical costs of an accident. Therefore it's completely fair to put a tax on it, it's nothing to do with giving money to survivors, it's simply a group of people who cost the government more. It's similar with global warming the government is going to have to deal with the problems it creates that will be expensive.
The adoption of compact fluoresces has been terribly slow anyway, and this is too much of an important issue to leave alone. If we're willing to put up with airport security to deal with terrorism it's simply ridiculous that people won't put up with anything in order to avert climate change. It's a threat that's easily on a similar level, with the affect on farming and the eventual slow flooding of major cities. We've already felt some of the impact, just look to New Orleans, climate change adds more energy to storms.
And BTW ;)
by Nicholas Buenk - 3/12/07 12:59 AM In reply to: Alcohol's are highly taxed already by Nicholas BuenkYou can find compact fluorescent lights that have a warm yellow tone just like incandescent lights. They come in 2 varieties these days, white light, and warm light. There's simply no good reason not to us them the quality of light they provide is just as good as incandescent and they last a lot longer.
Again, missing the point.
by MammothCave - 3/12/07 5:45 AM In reply to: Alcohol's are highly taxed already by Nicholas BuenkYour environmentalist babble is exactly the reason that so many non-environmentalists are turned off. Global warming didn't cause the floods in New Orleans, the city engineers who built a city 6 feet below sea level caused a flood. The mayor of New Orleans isn't suing light bulb makers, he is suing the people responsible for keeping the levees strong. A city built above sea level doesn't need that level of protection. And if you accept the premise that there are more hurricanes each year because of global warming them you have to be scratching your head wondering where they all went this past year when there weren't any. I toured New Orleans the year it was hit and the tour guide laughed and said that one good hurricane would destroy the city. Everyone knew it, no one was surprised. The problems were in a government (local, state, national) who had absolutely no plan in place for when it would happen. The problem was in the levee system, that is why you can go there today and find one area totally destroyed and go over a block (and a levee) and find an area totally untouched, such as the famed French Quarter.
You can beat the drum all day long about how we are all going to die because you believe in global warming, but you will continue to push more and more people away. But when you show the world that an alternative is better for the individual user by increasing some benefit in their lives, saving them money, or making more sense than the way that they are now doing it, then you will move these alternative energies into the main stream.
Err
by Nicholas Buenk - 3/13/07 12:52 AM In reply to: Again, missing the point. by MammothCaveIt's hardly outlandish. Climate change does affect storms, and that would certainly be a factor in New Orleans, it makes the probability of such a storm higher. I'm not blaming the event on global warming, but it's a contributing factor.
PS
by Nicholas Buenk - 3/13/07 12:57 AM In reply to: Err by Nicholas BuenkThe point of bring up New Orleans, is an example of what happens when a city gets flooded, think about the sea level. Granted it'll happen some what slower, but it wreck cities regardless.
my city is sea level!
by aribeiro2 - 3/13/07 5:28 PM In reply to: PS by Nicholas Buenkand i'm concerned!
what will happen in 50 years?
i know that my city is growing towards the sea... i don't know how i say this in english, but they take sand, mud and garbage (or whatever!) from somewhere, and then create some more area that you can build stuff...
my university is placed in an island built for the university...
if the water comes 5 meters higher, most part of the island will be under the water...
Rio de Janeiro has a lot of green areas, it has the biggest urban forest in the world! But the city is far from being green 
As someone from New Orleans I can say this.
by minimalist - 12/30/08 6:54 AM In reply to: PS by Nicholas BuenkClimate change is very much a part of our problem. The storms definitely getting bigger and stronger. But man also brought much of this on himself in other ways:
1. Until the 20th Century the people of New Orleans knew to stick to the high ground (the French Quarter various ridges, and the part of the city closest to the river where silt deposits made the ground a few feet above sea level. Periodic floods were simply a part of life (and none these old areas flooded during Katrina).
2. Modern engineering changed all that: The construction of levees gave people a false sense of security to build in previously unbuildable land (many of the areas that flooded were at one time swamps that were 10 and 14 feet below sea level). Instead of using conventional foundations and building their homes off the ground, they started building their homes on grade with concrete slabs.
The levees built up and down the Mississippi to protect farmland in the north also speed up the river causing it to erode much of the wetlands that had naturally built up over centuries at the mouth of the Mississippi... wetlands that used to offer New Orleans protection from storm surges and the full brunt of a hurricane.
It would also we wise for those that blame New Orleans for building below sea level to realize that disasters can and will happen to them as well. Engineering has given people all over the world a false sense of security as well. California will have its day of reckoning too, as will cities built in the desert, or people who built in tornado alley, etc, etc.
Molly got it right, but you ain't quoting Molly
by Renegade Knight - 3/14/07 7:30 AM In reply to: Molly's Tax Concern are on the Mark by MammothCaveA tax on lower effieciency light bulbs that is used 100% to pay for making the higher efficiency bulbs less expesnive and have a better color spectrum could be sold. If you doubled the price due to the tax they would still be cheaper than the compact flouresent.
This type of progressive thinking is EXACTLY why we have goverments. Becuae Joe Light Bulb doesn't care. He just see's 99 cents for 2 at Wally World vs. 5 bucks for 1 and goes with the cheaper deal.
One bulb doesn't make much difference. 300 Million people does.
Molly's right. Don't ban them, but I rather like the idea of a tax. Especially if it fixed the issues with color spectrum and price. Plus a tax based on a lumens per watt threshould would open the door for the new higher efficiency incandesent bulbs.
Energy is a national policy and a personal interest.
Molly got it right, Tom got it right. You need to try again. 
I think the objection to outlawing incandescent light bulbs
by minimalist - 12/29/08 10:48 AM In reply to: Yes... by Nicholas Buenkhas to do with a belief that change in a free market county is much more effective if it comes via market forces. Simply outlawing incandescent bulbs is not nearly as effective as giving people economic incentives to use more efficient technologies. Not only is a <i>complete</i> ban on incancesdents impractical (fluorescents don't work well in cold climates and LED's just aren't ready for prime time) but it also smacks of nanny statism which inevitably leads to a backlash which just hurts the green movement in the long run. Remember the old saying about catching more flies with honey than vinegar? It definitely applies here. I think its important for advocacy to always remain positive.
That said, the argument that compact fluorescents produce and unpleasant cold light does not seem all that valid anymore. I too use to hate the old ugly cold CFL's but they now come in warm versions (look for 2700 K light temperature in the specification). Combine those with a warm colored shade and you'll be hard pressed for me to tell the difference.
Low-energy fluorescents are also quite non-green
by DKhoji - 12/29/08 9:55 AM In reply to: i encourage people using incandescent light bulbs! by aribeiro2At least according to some studies I've seen recently low-energy fluorescent bulbs have a lot of problems that are still being swept under the carpet. They don't last nearly as long as the manufacturers claim, particularly when they are switched on and off frequently. Also, their half-life is even shorter because their light output drops sharply as soon as they start to age a little. They are toxic to manufacture and even more toxic to dispose of, as most of them are full of highly-toxic chemicals.
What is worst for me, however, is the horrible light they produce. I'm as green as anyone else, but since incandescent bulbs are going to be phased out and made illegal soon here in Europe I am going to be among the many people here who are going to be buying a BIG stockpile of incandescents before the ban comes into effect. The light from fluorescents makes me depressed and gives me a headache, I refuse to live with it no matter how much power they save.
All CFL's are not equal.
by minimalist - 12/29/08 10:55 AM In reply to: Low-energy fluorescents are also quite non-green by DKhojiI too used to HATE flourescent light. It sucks the life out of colors and makes you feel like you are in a fast food restaurant. Traditional cool white florescent light is just plain ugly (Metal Halide lamps are even worse).
But all CFL's are not the same and if you get the 2700 degree Kelvin ones (the higher the number the colder the light) and use them in lamps with warm white or warm colored shades it is as close to incandescent light as I've ever seen. Just switching all the lights in my house to warm CFL's and installing a programmable thermostat is saving me about 20-25% on my month electrical bills. It really has made a difference. And I didn't have to give up anything aesthetically to do it.
Yeah, I've heard they'v got better
by DKhoji - 12/29/08 12:07 PM In reply to: All CFL's are not equal. by minimalistwill have to have a look at the better new ones before I make a final decision...
If I put them outside, they get stolen...
by robstak - 12/29/08 8:16 PM In reply to: i encourage people using incandescent light bulbs! by aribeiro2in my outdour sconces, people steal them... this is gonna be a rough transition in cities, lol.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
