Am I The Only One Stocking Up?

[TheMightyQuinn]

Quinn - your experience sure doesn't match the rest of the world using CFL's.

That's strange, because when I was experiencing these problems I found many others in similar situation. The general consensus was:

1) CFLs should not be cycled on/off often, and

2) CFLs should not be exposed to moisture.

One problem was that I have a habit of turning off lights when not in use. Bathroom usage is about 1-2 minutes at a time. Note--all the globe CFLs I used took several minutes to warm to full brightness (significantly longer than any other type of CFL i have used.) So I was cycling on/off before the bulb got to full brightness. It was recommended that I leave the CFLs on (this is what Jayhawk calls "efficent".)

Many others have had problems with CFLs outdoors due to environmental conditions, so I inferred the bathroom problem was due to humidity. I also suspect the globe CFLs get hotter due to the globe around the bulb, causing premature failure.

The globe CFLs also produce intolerable color. One could look directly at the incandescent bulbs (40w), which produced a soft yellowish light. The CFL globes could not be viewed directly, not because of intensity but because of only what I can describe as "harshness"--it hurt to look at them. This is a bit of a problems as the bulbs are positioned directly along the top of the mirror. The light produced was cold and sterile, but one expects that from CFLs.

I was really hoping CFLs would help reduce the high energy use in our two bathrooms-a total of 480 watts of incandescent lighting! CFLs could have dropped that down to around 120 watts!

Fortunately people like Jayhawk are are around to accuse me of "oppos[ing] using the resources of this earth efficently". I better head out to Home Depot to consume new products all the in name of "efficency"!

[MormonMama]

You choose the way that you deal with stress. There are stress relieving techniques and therapies around that you can use to change your mindset in dealing with it.

Oh please, you make it sound so easy. You've obviously never dealt with severe stress-induced migraines. When you're stressed because you've lost your job or a loved one has died, or because you suffer from bi-polar disorder and CAN'T easily control your emotions, it's rather hard to just "deal with it". Give me a break! How awesome that you find it so easy to erase stress in your life, but many people can't do that.

And I am light-sensitive as well. I absolutely cannot be out in the sun for more than a few minutes without dark sunglasses or I will get a blinding headache. My sister gets light-sensitive induced migraines, and she has not seen any increase in her migraines since she switched to CFL bulbs. So not everyone with light-sensitivity has an issue with CFL bulbs.

Like another poster has now established, incandescent bulbs are not being banned as the OP has claimed. You're still free to buy them, so go right ahead and stock up if you want to.

That's strange, because when I was experiencing these problems I found many others in similar situation. The general consensus was:

1) CFLs should not be cycled on/off often, and

2) CFLs should not be exposed to moisture.

One problem was that I have a habit of turning off lights when not in use. Bathroom usage is about 1-2 minutes at a time. Note--all the globe CFLs I used took several minutes to warm to full brightness (significantly longer than any other type of CFL i have used.) So I was cycling on/off before the bulb got to full brightness. It was recommended that I leave the CFLs on (this is what Jayhawk calls "efficent".)

We also turn lights off when not in use and we use CFL's in the bathrooms and haven't experienced any of the issues you've mentioned. My current CFL bulbs are all about 4 years old and I haven't had to replace a single one. When I used incandescent bulbs I was replacing them roughly every year.

Edited April 5, 2011 by MormonMama

[TheMightyQuinn]

We also turn lights off when not in use and we use CFL's in the bathrooms and haven't experienced any of the issues you've mentioned.

Globe CFLs are the only ones I've had problems with. Unfortunately, they're the bulbs we use the most.

[Sali]

Oh please, you make it sound so easy. You've obviously never dealt with severe stress-induced migraines. When you're stressed because you've lost your job or a loved one has died, or because you suffer from bi-polar disorder and CAN'T easily control your emotions, it's rather hard to just "deal with it". Give me a break! How awesome that you find it so easy to erase stress in your life, but many people can't do that.

.

Please don't judge me. You have no idea of the stress I have in my life. Yes I have had severe stress induced migraines. If you want I can send you a list of my life stresses via pm but I am not willing to write it all down here. I don't wish to play that game. I never said that you just had to 'deal with it'. No one can do that, but there are techniques that you can learn to help you change the way that you internalise stress. And I never said it is easy, it's darn hard work. I understand that with Bipolar it makes life more complicated to deal with in many ways. My son suffers from it so I do have an understanding of it.

All I know is that my life will become pretty miserable when I can no longer use incandescent bulbs. LED and Halogen lights tend to be too harsh and bright for me. If I thought it was for environmental reasons that the change was being made, then I might be more understanding of the situation. Ever drove through a city at night and seen all the lights in offices lit up like fairgrounds 24/7?

[ribbit]

I wish I could remember but I seem to remember that the government is reconsidering. At this point they are planning on phasing out certain sizes. The issue is how free we are. Are we free to spend more money on our energy use for our own reasons? I, too, am afraid of mercury. I did not find the cleanup instructions 'easy' and while one broken bulb might be a minor issue - we break quite a few over time. But setting aside safe/unsafe issues - the more the government tells us what to do the less power we have over ourselves.

I originally got on this thread because I hoped it was about preservation of foodstuffs! Can we change it to THAT? I need serious help!

[MormonMama]

I never said that you just had to 'deal with it'.

You sure made it sound that way.

No one can do that, but there are techniques that you can learn to help you change the way that you internalise stress. And I never said it is easy, it's darn hard work.

You probably should have said that before, but based on your previous post you appeared to have a "just learn to deal with it" attitude.

I've spent YEARS and a good deal of time working with doctors and therapists learning how to deal with stress, so don't act like a few stress management techniques are going to help. Sometimes they do, but often they don't. If your son has bi-polar disorder and you claim to have an understanding of it, then you should know that sometimes there is no stress management technique in the world that will work.

And again, as has already been stated, incandescent bulbs are not being banned, so I don't see your life getting any worse. Quit trying to make yourself out to be a martyr.

[Blackmarch]

i dont care at all about the issue. Theres bigger fish to fry.

[Sali]

You sure made it sound that way.

You probably should have said that before, but based on your previous post you appeared to have a "just learn to deal with it" attitude.

I've spent YEARS and a good deal of time working with doctors and therapists learning how to deal with stress, so don't act like a few stress management techniques are going to help. Sometimes they do, but often they don't. If your son has bi-polar disorder and you claim to have an understanding of it, then you should know that sometimes there is no stress management technique in the world that will work.

And again, as has already been stated, incandescent bulbs are not being banned, so I don't see your life getting any worse. Quit trying to make yourself out to be a martyr.

I appear to have offended you and that definitely was not my intention.

I really don't appreciate being called a martyr as I don't think I am. I know things can be misunderstood whilst posting on the internet and maybe my style of posting led to a misunderstanding. I'm sorry for that, I don't wish any malice between us at all. :)

Edited April 6, 2011 by Sali

[ribbit]

At least half the time government gets involved - it makes things worse. Intentions notwithstanding. Science is now admitting that DDT isn't so bad as was once supposed. And yet people are still dying of malaria (which DDT once did a fair job of controlling) because POLITICAL types cannot let go of the notion that DDT is that bad (A funny related story is that my husband, as a child, lived on Guam for a few years, on the Air Force base. The kids would run to the DDT spray truck and walk behind it in the cloud of pesticide. They said everyone thought it was funny to see all these little feet and legs walking under this cloud of stuff. ha ha. Anyway, he and his brothers are still going strong in their fifties. I wouldn't recommend this, I'm just saying...)

We personally pay to keep five homes air conditioned. Federal regulations disallow the use of Freon in air conditioners. Air conditioners have had to undergo serious re-engineering in order to use other stuff. Which still doesn't work as well.

We've given up. The cost got ridiculous. We've paid so much money to repair/replace these stupid, less effective air conditioning units that it makes much more sense to replace our large whole house ac units with cheap window units because it is MUCH cheaper to just throw the ugly little suckers out and buy new ones.

How environmentally sound is THAT?

Science is now discovering that the NEW gas they replaced freon with is, in fact, worse than Freon.... When can we expect government to come around and change the regs? um.... Government, it turns out, isn't run by scientists, it's run by politicians. And politicians are driven by dogma, ideology and bureaucracy. Not that government should be run by scientists. Scientists are as prone to be political as anyone else, frankly.

Government, all government, all the time, is anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-choice. Government is fundamentally committed to growing bigger and anything else is secondary to that. WE citizens must limit it to a bearable level, confine government intervention to the realms we want help with and prize their sticky fingers off everything else.

Buy whatever lightbulbs you want. Let everyone do the same! I have some CFLs in areas where I am pretty confident a mercury spill is less likely and people don't sit there all the time inhaling, in places where replacing a bulb is more likely to end in a broken bulb or where people spend a lot of time I use incandescents.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Now that everyone has gotten worked up over the government banning incandescant lightbulbs and mandating that everyone use CFL's instead, it should be clarified that neither is true. Incandescant lights are not being banned and no one has to switch to CFL's. The government is implimenting efficency standards for all lightbulbs. If you can make an incandscant that is meets the standard (which has been done by using halogen gas in the bulbs) then you can still use them. Any other type of bulb that meets the efficency standard can be used, be it CFL, LED, or anything new that one can invent and make work.

So those stocking up are not doing so becuase they like one type of bulb or another, but because they oppose using the resources of this earth efficently. No technology is being banned, we are instead being required to be more efficent.

Incorrect. The "efficiency standards" were designed to eliminate incandescent bulbs just like setting CAFE standards at 100 MPG would eliminate the combustion engine and return us to the buggy age. The efficiency standard is skewed because it doesn't take into account that CFL's produce less light for less electricity and so the savings aren't really savings, it's just a way to make people do with less light.

[ribbit]

Yeah, that's like saying you can sleep with all the women you want as long as the women you sleep with is your wife.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

At least half the time government gets involved - it makes things worse. Intentions notwithstanding. Science is now admitting that DDT isn't so bad as was once supposed. And yet people are still dying of malaria (which DDT once did a fair job of controlling) because POLITICAL types cannot let go of the notion that DDT is that bad (A funny related story is that my husband, as a child, lived on Guam for a few years, on the Air Force base. The kids would run to the DDT spray truck and walk behind it in the cloud of pesticide. They said everyone thought it was funny to see all these little feet and legs walking under this cloud of stuff. ha ha. Anyway, he and his brothers are still going strong in their fifties. I wouldn't recommend this, I'm just saying...)

The driving force behind the banning of DDT was the book Silent Spring written by Rachel Carson. As it turns out all the alarming claims in her book were based on specious junk science. The story of DDT is amazing; discovered in the 1950's, it reduced malaria deaths by millions and it is utterly safe. In fact, some people actually bathed in DDT to show how safe it is to people. I wonder how God will judge the millions of lives that could be saved except for the junk science driven hysteria that banned the cure.

We personally pay to keep five homes air conditioned. Federal regulations disallow the use of Freon in air conditioners. Air conditioners have had to undergo serious re-engineering in order to use other stuff. Which still doesn't work as well.

We've given up. The cost got ridiculous. We've paid so much money to repair/replace these stupid, less effective air conditioning units that it makes much more sense to replace our large whole house ac units with cheap window units because it is MUCH cheaper to just throw the ugly little suckers out and buy new ones.

How environmentally sound is THAT?

Public policies are still being made because of the widely debunked myth of the depletion of the ozone layer by man made chemicals. It's global warming today, and "hole in the ozone layer" in the 1980's. The thing about the Left is that when they're wrong, which is often, they move on to the next apocolyptic hysteria and hope nobody notices.

Buy whatever lightbulbs you want. Let everyone do the same! I have some CFLs in areas where I am pretty confident a mercury spill is less likely and people don't sit there all the time inhaling, in places where replacing a bulb is more likely to end in a broken bulb or where people spend a lot of time I use incandescents.

Isn't that funny how it's been claimed on this forum that it's just a lightbulb and what am I getting so worked up over, and yet the same people agree with a draconian law that forces everyone to use the politically correct light bulb? Why are they so terrified of people making their own choices?

[NeuroTypical]

According to Wikipedia:

In December 2007, ... the federal government enacted the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which requires all general-purpose light bulbs that produce 310–2600 lumens of light be 30% more energy efficient (similar to current halogen lamps) than current incandescent bulbs by 2012 to 2014. The efficiency standards will start with 100-watt bulbs in January 2012 and end with 40-watt bulbs in January 2014.

Light bulbs outside of this range are exempt from the restrictions (historically, less than 40 Watts or more than 150 Watts). Also exempt are several classes of specialty lights, including appliance lamps, rough service bulbs, 3-way, colored lamps, and plant lights.

By 2020, a second tier of restrictions would become effective, which requires all general-purpose bulbs to produce at least 45 lumens per watt (similar to current CFLs). Exemptions from the Act include reflector flood, 3-way, candelabra, colored, and other specialty bulbs.

What I haven't found, is a source to Jayhawk's claim that "you can make an incandscant that meets the standard (which has been done by using halogen gas in the bulbs)"

Jayhawk? Got any substantiation to this claim?

LM

[TheMightyQuinn]

Incandescant lights are not being banned and no one has to switch to CFL's.

Incorrect. The "efficiency standards" were designed to eliminate incandescent bulbs...

Saintmichaeldefendthem1 is correct. For Jayhawk to say incandescent bulbs are not banned is akin to claiming (and please forgive the hyperbole) poll taxes did not prohibit blacks from voting. What a law states is one thing; what a law accomplishes is often another.

[MormonMama]

I appear to have offended you and that definitely was not my intention.

I really don't appreciate being called a martyr as I don't think I am. I know things can be misunderstood whilst posting on the internet and maybe my style of posting led to a misunderstanding. I'm sorry for that, I don't wish any malice between us at all. :)

Yes, I think we've gotten off the original point and this little side argument has just gotten ridiculous. I apologize for any offense I have caused as well. We both suffer from migraines, we both have our triggers and our methods of combating them, and there are going to be times for both of us when no matter what we do we can't get rid of them. And it sucks for both of us.

We migraine sufferers should stick together, not give each other yet another reason to have a migraine, lol! :)

[Sali]

We migraine sufferers should stick together, not give each other yet another reason to have a migraine, lol! :)

LOL indeed!:)

[Jayhawk2421]

LM, you provided the proof yourself. I was referring to the first set of regulations, not the ones that go into effect in 2020. As you stated the requirement is that bulbs need to be 30% more efficent (similar to a halogen lamp). As I said incandescant bulbs cand be made to meet this requirement and you said the same thing. A halogen lamp is an incandescent bulb with a tungsten filament and halogen gas inside the bulb.

I still hold that the goal was not to eliminate incandescant bulbs, but to increase the efficency of bulbs being used. If incandescant bulbs cannot be made more efficent then maybe they do not have a place any longer. However, if you feel that there is some great value to this technology start working to improve the technology.

[Wingnut]

I did not find the cleanup instructions 'easy'...

Really? Vacate the room, ventilate the room, sweep up the pieces and put in a sealed container, and contact your local waste collection agency. Continue to ventilate for a few hours. I'm not sure what's so complicated. I had to do it about two months ago after an accidental drop -- no big deal.

[NeuroTypical]

LM, you provided the proof yourself.

Where?

I was referring to the first set of regulations, not the ones that go into effect in 2020.

I'm not asking you to substantiate opinions of regulations. I'm asking you to substantiate your opinion here:

"you can make an incandscant that meets the standard (which has been done by using halogen gas in the bulbs)"

As I said incandescant bulbs cand be made to meet this requirement and you said the same thing.

Let's be very clear.

1. You said it.

2. I quoted you, and asked you to cite a source.

Again, please give a link or cite a source. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just wanting to read up on what a random anonymous poster is telling me on an anonymous forum.

LM

[Dravin]

Where?. LM

He's probably refering to your Wikipedia quote. It contains the statement:

which requires all general-purpose light bulbs that produce 310–2600 lumens of light be 30% more energy efficient (similar to current halogen lamps) than current incandescent bulbs by 2012 to 2014.

I'm not saying it is proof as:

1. There doesn't appear to be a footnote for that claim (though I didn't look into the linked article about halogen lamps).

2. It can be parsed to be an example of more efficient incandescent lights and not a statement that halogen lamps meet the requirements.

But it may be what he's referring to.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Dravin

[bytor2112]

Sigh....My family and I long ago abandoned ALL artificial light and are now strictly candle people and to prepare for the impending toilet paper ban I have prepared my family by buying a corn crib and saving our.....well you get the picture.

[dahlia]

All I'm going to say is, you are not the only one stocking up. I think this law will be repealed, but the question is, how long will it take? I think a good 3-7 years worth of light bulbs is a good hedge against a do-nothing legislature.

[AltF4Scrabs]

I live in the darkness like an emo faggot. I don't need materialistic goods like light or religion. Cawksuckkers

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Really? Vacate the room, ventilate the room, sweep up the pieces and put in a sealed container, and contact your local waste collection agency. Continue to ventilate for a few hours. I'm not sure what's so complicated. I had to do it about two months ago after an accidental drop -- no big deal.

Was that sarcasm or do you really believe those steps to be easy?

[Soulsearcher]

For some reason this is all that comes to mind.