Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(59,602 posts)
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 08:21 AM Feb 2019

Because Own The Libtards: Shitstain Begins Process To Eliminate Light Bulb Efficiency Standards

Sure, it'll add 500 million more tons of GHGs to the atmosphere and cost consumers $100 billion, but Freedumb!

President Donald Trump wants to roll back efficiency standards for light bulbs, at a cost to consumers of over $100 billion — some $1,000 per household — by 2030. The Department of Energy (DOE) announced in the Federal Register that it has started a process to undo those standards, despite projections that they will prevent the release of 540 million tons of greenhouse gases and hundreds of thousands of tons of the pollutants that worsen asthma, cardiopulmonary disease, and premature death.

So, in the annals of Trump’s blinkered pursuit of undoing everything President Barack Obama did, no matter how basic or commonsense, this move ranks near the top.

The original DOE lighting standards were part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. They did not ban incandescent light bulbs, but instead encouraged innovation by requiring manufacturers to increase efficiency by 27 percent through 2014. It was a completely non-controversial bill that had bipartisan support, was strongly supported by light bulb manufacturers, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

But after Obama was elected and Republicans regained control of Congress, GOP leadership immediately went to work to undo the standards, continuing their longstanding opposition to federal energy-saving rules.

EDIT

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-light-bulb-rollback-cost-2b10f0720303/

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Because Own The Libtards: Shitstain Begins Process To Eliminate Light Bulb Efficiency Standards (Original Post) hatrack Feb 2019 OP
Jesus H. Just a nonstop onslaught of stupidity in the name of spite JDC Feb 2019 #1
It doesn't do much good to halve the wattage per bulb and then triple the number of lights Blues Heron Feb 2019 #2
LEDs use a lot less than half the wattage of an incandescent htuttle Feb 2019 #3
I'm not talking about replacing bulbs one to one Blues Heron Feb 2019 #4
Huh? zipplewrath Feb 2019 #5
We're squandering the savings by tripling the number of lights Blues Heron Feb 2019 #6
Well zipplewrath Feb 2019 #7
more like half if your going from cfl to led Blues Heron Feb 2019 #8
Yeah, I've thought about that too zipplewrath Feb 2019 #9

Blues Heron

(5,952 posts)
2. It doesn't do much good to halve the wattage per bulb and then triple the number of lights
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 08:42 AM
Feb 2019

That's what seems to be happening - these leds are in every conceivable place you could put a bulb. An example - the supermarket just installed individual led bulbs on every single shelf in the wine section. Almost every bottle now has an individual light.

htuttle

(23,738 posts)
3. LEDs use a lot less than half the wattage of an incandescent
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 08:51 AM
Feb 2019

More like going from 40w down to 6w, for the same amount of light.

Personally, I find LED bulbs to be far brighter, but we've always used smaller incandescents (like 40-60w for a ceiling light, instead of 100w), so that's what I'm comparing them to.

Blues Heron

(5,952 posts)
4. I'm not talking about replacing bulbs one to one
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 08:56 AM
Feb 2019

I'm talking about a tsunami of lights that didn't exist pre-LED. Also, a lot of the bulbs being replaced are CFLs so the savings in wattage aren't nearly as dramatic. Relatively few LEDs are replacing incandescents - that heavy lifting already happened with CFLs for the most part.

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
5. Huh?
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 09:12 AM
Feb 2019

Our entire parking lot was replaced with LED's. All of our buildings are getting retrofitted with LED's FROM florescents. The street lights on our street were replaced with LED's. I'm seeing WAY less CFL's these days. LED's "cure" all the problems that CFL's had. I know what you mean about the flood of LED's in retail places. But my interpretation is that it presents the ability to distribute light in a more "controlled" fashion by having alot of small lights, and still having an overall reduction in the power consumption.

Blues Heron

(5,952 posts)
6. We're squandering the savings by tripling the number of lights
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 09:17 AM
Feb 2019

They just replaced our street lights too - and gave us twice the number of lights. Security lights - everywhere now where there were none. Our neighborhood is now lit up like a prison yard. The lights themselves are incredibly obnoxious - piercing glaring unshaded.

Count me out on this BS

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
7. Well
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 09:22 AM
Feb 2019

As someone else points out, these bulbs are on the order of 6W or so. Thus, one would have to put something like 10 times as many bulbs out just to get back to the kinds of watts they are replacing. But they last a crap load longer too which reduces maintenance costs (which I sometimes think was my companies primary focus, getting rid of the full time bulb replacer). I'd bet that the largest savings this country is experiencing is the parking lot and street light usage. But I have no data to back up such a claim.

Blues Heron

(5,952 posts)
8. more like half if your going from cfl to led
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 09:26 AM
Feb 2019

We'll see how long they actually last - we were told the same thing about CFLs. the light bulb makers aren't going to invent themselves out of business, that's for sure.

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
9. Yeah, I've thought about that too
Wed Feb 13, 2019, 09:32 AM
Feb 2019

CFL's were touted as lasting forever, but it turned out that's only if you turn them on and leave them on. We'll see how LED's play out. Admittedly, LED's have been used alot longer than CFL's had been when they first came out. But these higher wattage ones still need to prove themselves out in real usage. They are higher efficiency because they generate way more light than heat (unlike incandescents) but they still produce some heat, which causes thermal cycling every time they're turned on and off.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Because Own The Libtards:...