This news item that US legislators want to ban incandescent light bulbs really ticks me off. Here’s a fine example of politicians taking “a convenient target” to make points without properly thinking it through. Which I suppose is what politicians do best.
So here’s a few points AGAINST a complete ban and banishment of the incandescent light bulb:
- Incandescent bulbs are virtually “instant on,” which means that as soon as you flip the switch, you get light. Fluorescents take several seconds to fire up before you see the light. To me, this is a safety issue in some situations, such as lighting stairs and doorways.
- “The mercury vapour inside fluorescents can damage the environment if the bulbs are broken.” So we’re saving a little energy, but at what cost?
- Compact fluorescents, which are supposed to take the place of standard format incandescents, aren’t exactly the same: they don’t really give off the same light level, and they don’t really fit the same fixtures.
I’m not saying I’m against compact fluorescents; I have several of them in my house. I’m just against a complete ban on them.
One Response to What a bunch of knee-jerks!