If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Jones)   Republicans will buy greener light bulbs as long as you don't tell them they are good for the environment   (motherjones.com) divider line 180
    More: Stupid, environments, Wharton School of Business, Energy Star, global warming controversy, Drudge Report  
•       •       •

2120 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Apr 2013 at 8:30 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



180 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-30 09:08:37 AM
i62.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-30 09:09:26 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: C'mon.  You buy lightbulbs out of spite?  How pathetic does someone's life have to get before they lower themselves to that?  And other than good sense, what do you think you're spiting, exactly?


I'm surprised to find myself defend  cman,but his original post did admittedly say he  feltthe same way.  Felt,as in past tense.

I interpreted that as meaning he changed his mind after thinking objectively about it.
 
2013-04-30 09:10:39 AM

cman: I also once believed that global warming did not exist

I was very partisan at that point. I felt that buying those types of green products gave the left a bit of an edge. This is the mindset that is plaguing America.


And you're surprised to be ridiculed for believing these things?  I have to hand it to you, despite having been wrong about basically everything for as long as I've ever seen you here, you still manage to react with sincere shock when someone points it out.  I don't know what it takes to achieve that, but you've got loads of it.
 
2013-04-30 09:13:12 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: cman: I also once believed that global warming did not exist

I was very partisan at that point. I felt that buying those types of green products gave the left a bit of an edge. This is the mindset that is plaguing America.

And you're surprised to be ridiculed for believing these things?  I have to hand it to you, despite having been wrong about basically everything for as long as I've ever seen you here, you still manage to react with sincere shock when someone points it out.  I don't know what it takes to achieve that, but you've got loads of it.


So no one can ever make any bad decisions in life and see the error in their ways and repent?

FFS, man. Al Gore was against abortion before he was for it and yet no one gives him shiat for that.
 
2013-04-30 09:13:37 AM
You know, there's a lot of stigma associated with CFLs just not being very good at doing their job as light bulbs.  And yeah, I've used some pretty crappy ones.  You know, the ones that produce hardly any light until you've left them on for about 20 minutes?

I could easily see the "energy efficient" label being the trigger that tips people off that those might be the bulbs we're talking about.  So, you present two comparative "fact sheets" that don't include warm-up time, but otherwise indicate the CFL is a better bulb and consumers pick it.  Now you throw in a hint towards the long warm up time and boom nobody's picking it anymore.
 
2013-04-30 09:16:36 AM

Tomahawk513: Saiga410: It is all about the messaging.  If you harp on and on about the green aspects of a product I zone out/stop caring, I dont care. Wax poetically about efficiency gains and a payoff period and I am like an 8 year old that found the lingerie section of the Sears Catalog.

Different strokes for different folks.

There's a difference between apathy toward environmental friendliness, and outright disgust as the article suggests.


See I do not see the disgust.  There is a small subsect that is probably spiteful but I suggest it is more to deal with crowding out the message with information that the consumer does not care about.  If I read the article right the study was based off of package information.  You only get a small window for someone to absorb the information.  If you add something of neutral recognition level to the packaging, people will look at it and shift informational awareness away from the more affective message.
 
2013-04-30 09:17:50 AM

cman: So no one can ever make any bad decisions in life and see the error in their ways and repent?


Eventually dropping a belief that any five-year-old could immediately see is ridiculous on its face doesn't shield you from all future criticism.  "I was very partisan" isn't an explanation.  What the Hell made you think that your lightbulb purchases gave "the left a bit of an edge".  What the fark does that even mean?
 
2013-04-30 09:21:26 AM

Saiga410: Tomahawk513: Saiga410: It is all about the messaging.  If you harp on and on about the green aspects of a product I zone out/stop caring, I dont care. Wax poetically about efficiency gains and a payoff period and I am like an 8 year old that found the lingerie section of the Sears Catalog.

Different strokes for different folks.

There's a difference between apathy toward environmental friendliness, and outright disgust as the article suggests.

See I do not see the disgust.  There is a small subsect that is probably spiteful but I suggest it is more to deal with crowding out the message with information that the consumer does not care about.  If I read the article right the study was based off of package information.  You only get a small window for someone to absorb the information.  If you add something of neutral recognition level to the packaging, people will look at it and shift informational awareness away from the more affective message.


FTA: "Gromet said she never expected the green message to motivate conservatives, but was surprised to find that it could in fact repel them from making a purchase even while they found other aspects, like saving cash on their power bills, attractive. The reason, she thinks, is that given the political polarization of the climate change debate, environmental activism is so frowned upon by those the right that they'll do anything to keep themselves distanced from it."
 
2013-04-30 09:23:09 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: cman: So no one can ever make any bad decisions in life and see the error in their ways and repent?

Eventually dropping a belief that any five-year-old could immediately see is ridiculous on its face doesn't shield you from all future criticism.  "I was very partisan" isn't an explanation.  What the Hell made you think that your lightbulb purchases gave "the left a bit of an edge".  What the fark does that even mean?


I was a young stupid man who believed everything that I was handfed without any independent thought.

I never said I was free from criticism. I criticize myself constantly. I know I am a dumbass. This I readily admit. However, douchebag dickery ridicule really pisses me off. There is a difference betwixt "You were wrong" and "wow you were such a farking moron why dont you hang yourself".

Just sayin...
 
2013-04-30 09:23:13 AM

THX 1138: This sounds eerily similar to that psych experiment where people were offered the choice of receiving $200 right now or $50 per week for 10 weeks.  And the incandescent crowd is reminiscent of the group that opts for the $200.


Except they do it even when the price is the same, the only benefit they are getting on buying inefficient bulbs is "sticking it to the libs", and then they spend the rest of their lives paying for it.
 
2013-04-30 09:23:26 AM

Saiga410: If I read the article right the study was based off of package information.


No, according to the article the packaging in each sample contained the same "hard data" about energy use. The only difference was the three words "Protect the environment" and that's what changed the conservatives' choices.

There's no way to spin this as "they're being rational". Conservatives have been brainwashed by large corporations into thinking that environmentalism is bad.
 
2013-04-30 09:23:52 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: cman: So no one can ever make any bad decisions in life and see the error in their ways and repent?

Eventually dropping a belief that any five-year-old could immediately see is ridiculous on its face doesn't shield you from all future criticism.  "I was very partisan" isn't an explanation.  What the Hell made you think that your lightbulb purchases gave "the left a bit of an edge".  What the fark does that even mean?


We were all younger and stupider.  In high school I didn't really believe in global warming and poo-pooed CFLs.  Unfortunately, belief is not a requirement for truth, and I quickly grew out of it once I got to college.
 
2013-04-30 09:24:21 AM

serial_crusher: You know, the ones that produce hardly any light until you've left them on for about 20 minutes?


Maybe I've just been lucky in my purchases, but have those even been manufactured in the last, like, 10 years?
 
2013-04-30 09:27:58 AM

THX 1138: serial_crusher: You know, the ones that produce hardly any light until you've left them on for about 20 minutes?

Maybe I've just been lucky in my purchases, but have those even been manufactured in the last, like, 10 years?


I've still got one in my garage that I bought about 3 years ago.  I just leave it on 24/7 because hey, it's efficient right?
 
2013-04-30 09:29:46 AM

Chummer45: Liberal folks may sometimes fit the stereotype that they are susceptible to "green" marketing and "organic" bullshiat, even when it ultimately does little to nothing to help the environment (and in some cases is worse).  But at least the intentions are to actually do something good - reduce their environmental impact and reduce the use of pesticides.


Yeah, it's all about intentions.  Screw actual results.
 
2013-04-30 09:30:02 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: And you're surprised to be ridiculed for believing these things?  I have to hand it to you, despite having been wrong about basically everything for as long as I've ever seen you here, you still manage to react with sincere shock when someone points it out.  I don't know what it takes to achieve that, but you've got loads of it.


but you don't get it maaaaan, he's changed, he's above the fray now

that is unless you read any of his posts ever
 
2013-04-30 09:30:07 AM

Slaves2Darkness: Honestly I understand why you would not recycle, use inefficient light bulbs, and pollute. The "energy efficient" light bulbs are expensive, an incandescent bulb are cheap. While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Those "energy efficient" bulbs are a rip off and no where need as effective as advertised.


I see you bought the cheap non-brand CFL bulbs they were selling in bulk at Walmart 5 years ago.

The technology has gotten much better.
The name brand bulbs work better.
New LED bulbs are also an option.
In some areas where you have power issues (lower than 100 volts when you should have 120 can cause problems, etc,etc), you may not be able to use CFL bulbs.
 
2013-04-30 09:31:43 AM

THX 1138: serial_crusher: You know, the ones that produce hardly any light until you've left them on for about 20 minutes?

Maybe I've just been lucky in my purchases, but have those even been manufactured in the last, like, 10 years?


I used to have a few of the REALLY crappy CFLs that the power company gave me for free, and they would be a little dim for the first 10 or 20 seconds. Of course any of the bulbs that I actually payed money for don't do this at all.
 
2013-04-30 09:31:53 AM
Is it kind of like how they like to troll for men in public bathrooms, so long as you don't tell them that's gay?
 
2013-04-30 09:32:32 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: cman: I also once believed that global warming did not exist

I was very partisan at that point. I felt that buying those types of green products gave the left a bit of an edge. This is the mindset that is plaguing America.

And you're surprised to be ridiculed for believing these things?  I have to hand it to you, despite having been wrong about basically everything for as long as I've ever seen you here, you still manage to react with sincere shock when someone points it out.  I don't know what it takes to achieve that, but you've got loads of it.


Dude, seriously - who pissed in your Corn Flakes this morning? I mean, I disagree with most of cmans politics, but here the guy comes out and admits that he used to think that way, and that he used to be  a  global warming denialist, but instead of saying something like "Good for you for changing your mind based on facts and rationality" you just keep riding his ass?

Take a pill, man. And consider the idea that you might owe him a wee bit of an apology here
 
2013-04-30 09:32:42 AM

Tomahawk513: Saiga410: Tomahawk513: Saiga410: It is all about the messaging.  If you harp on and on about the green aspects of a product I zone out/stop caring, I dont care. Wax poetically about efficiency gains and a payoff period and I am like an 8 year old that found the lingerie section of the Sears Catalog.

Different strokes for different folks.

There's a difference between apathy toward environmental friendliness, and outright disgust as the article suggests.

See I do not see the disgust.  There is a small subsect that is probably spiteful but I suggest it is more to deal with crowding out the message with information that the consumer does not care about.  If I read the article right the study was based off of package information.  You only get a small window for someone to absorb the information.  If you add something of neutral recognition level to the packaging, people will look at it and shift informational awareness away from the more affective message.

FTA: "Gromet said she never expected the green message to motivate conservatives, but was surprised to find that it could in fact repel them from making a purchase even while they found other aspects, like saving cash on their power bills, attractive. The reason, she thinks, is that given the political polarization of the climate change debate, environmental activism is so frowned upon by those the right that they'll do anything to keep themselves distanced from it."


But in the predictabilty vs political alignment graph the enviromental messaging cut sharply from being 1 "liberal" all the way to 0 neutral and then bend up slightly as you go more "conservative".  If you assume that the damage is being done by political disgust then it should have stayed more flat on the -1 side of the scale and then broke later.  Instead it dropped instantly.  Does this mean moderate liberals hate the environment?  Or that hypercons are just as much of an enviromentalist as moderates?
 
2013-04-30 09:33:57 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Eventually dropping a belief that any five-year-old could immediately see is ridiculous on its face doesn't shield you from all future criticism.



I gotta give cman credit -- he's actually taken a critical look at his own beliefs and ideas, compared them to reality, and changed them when they didn't make sense. Not everyone does that. He's not the derpy guy he was a year or two ago, I think we're wearing off on him ...


Chummer45: Also, it speaks volumes about how good our country has it that we have become so petty and utterly self-absorbed that a huge swath of the right wing views a governmental ban on inefficient light bulbs to be a "fundamental" threat to liberty.

Today, minor inconveniences = "help help, I'm being oppressed!"

/cue Louis C.K.



For a while now I've thought that this lightbulb thing says a lot about many conservatives' confusion about what a First Principle should be -- If using incandescent bulbs becomes one of a couple hundred First Principles, your philosophy's a big ungainly mess built on a foundation of emotion and spite and prejudice.
 
2013-04-30 09:35:21 AM

Chummer45: I think the moral here is that the right has just become a party of trolls.  Liberal folks may sometimes fit the stereotype that they are susceptible to "green" marketing and "organic" bullshiat, even when it ultimately does little to nothing to help the environment (and in some cases is worse).  But at least the intentions are to actually do something good - reduce their environmental impact and reduce the use of pesticides.

Conservatives, on the other hand, are in this reactionary psychology where they'd just as soon throw a newspaper in the garbage rather than recycle it (all things being equal), if for no other reason than recycling is "liberal bullshiat."   What is their underlying goal?  It's just childish spite.

So I'm kind of tired of the false equivalence of "liberals and conservatives are equally stupid."   That doesn't really work when one side is literally taking positions and doing things for no admirable or principled reason, and is simply doing it to troll the other side.  If you look at Washington, this is the big problem with the GOP - it is simply obstructionist and has no real goals other than to make the democrats look bad and oppose things (like background checks, efficiency standards) for no reason other than because it's something democrats like.


The GOP is a party of Captain Planet villains.
 
2013-04-30 09:36:59 AM
I'm a pretty libbing Lib and all but...
I work in the lighting industry, as a designer not an engineer, and I have always felt that the compact fluorescent revolution was a little squirrly. The self evident future of general consumer illumination is LEDs. That future is, by and large, already happening. We could have sensibly transitioned from incandescence to LED based products, but for some reason we inserted this other 10 year or so period of marketing CLF's as the "Green" option. CFL's are much more efficient then incandescence of course, LEDs much more so, and don't involve all that tasty mercury winding up in land fills.
Professional and hobbyist markets will always be served, Film, video. photography, various medical applications, etc, who have need of incandescent sources will be able to get them, but the overwhelming majority of light used by everybody else should have converted to LEDs years ago. Why this is a political issue, I don't understand.

/waits for engineer type to point out the horrors inherent in LED manufacture
/ducks
 
2013-04-30 09:38:07 AM

Slaves2Darkness: Honestly I understand why you would not recycle, use inefficient light bulbs, and pollute. The "energy efficient" light bulbs are expensive, an incandescent bulb are cheap. While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Those "energy efficient" bulbs are a rip off and no where need as effective as advertised.


My house has been primarily CFL for 4 years (20+). I have yet to have one fail. Meanwhile, in the handful of fixtures that CFLs do not work well in, I am constantly replacing standard bulbs and using 5x as much energy when they are on.
 
2013-04-30 09:45:36 AM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: LouDobbsAwaaaay: cman: I also once believed that global warming did not exist

I was very partisan at that point. I felt that buying those types of green products gave the left a bit of an edge. This is the mindset that is plaguing America.

And you're surprised to be ridiculed for believing these things?  I have to hand it to you, despite having been wrong about basically everything for as long as I've ever seen you here, you still manage to react with sincere shock when someone points it out.  I don't know what it takes to achieve that, but you've got loads of it.

Dude, seriously - who pissed in your Corn Flakes this morning? I mean, I disagree with most of cmans politics, but here the guy comes out and admits that he used to think that way, and that he used to be  a  global warming denialist, but instead of saying something like "Good for you for changing your mind based on facts and rationality" you just keep riding his ass?

Take a pill, man. And consider the idea that you might owe him a wee bit of an apology here


He doesnt owe me any sort of apology.

I like the motherfarker. Hell, I have sponsored him for TF twice. As an expert in the field of unintentional perceptions I aint really mad at him.
 
2013-04-30 09:48:05 AM

Arkanaut: Saying "conservatives are racists" is like saying "Muslims are terrorists".


No, it's not.

Racism and "small government" talking points have been joined at the hip since this country was founded.
 
2013-04-30 09:48:23 AM

cman: LouDobbsAwaaaay: cman: So no one can ever make any bad decisions in life and see the error in their ways and repent?

Eventually dropping a belief that any five-year-old could immediately see is ridiculous on its face doesn't shield you from all future criticism.  "I was very partisan" isn't an explanation.  What the Hell made you think that your lightbulb purchases gave "the left a bit of an edge".  What the fark does that even mean?

I was a young stupid man who believed everything that I was handfed without any independent thought.

I never said I was free from criticism. I criticize myself constantly. I know I am a dumbass. This I readily admit. However, douchebag dickery ridicule really pisses me off. There is a difference betwixt "You were wrong" and "wow you were such a farking moron why dont you hang yourself".

Just sayin...


Admitting that you don't wash doesn't make you clean. Actions, actions...
 
2013-04-30 09:58:54 AM
I'm not replacing all my bulbs at once, but I'm slowly overtime planning to replace all my rooms with the new Cree LED's.

The first room I did was my bedroom which used three 60watt bulbs with three of the 40watt quality Cree ones (see link), they each use 6watts of power and with three of them the room is just as bright (and temperature wise, much cooler). I went from using 180watts in that room to 18watts.

Granted, they cost me after tax about $32, but they're warranted for 10 years and they say they last 28.8 years. So it is a long term investment, but the cost savings alone should pay for itself within a few years.

I suspect as time goes on they price will come down even more too.

/yea, I know I sound like I'm selling it, but fark if I'm not a true believer now in these guys!
 
2013-04-30 09:58:55 AM
I have nothing but CFLs in my house and almost all of them are around 13+ years old.  If your bulbs aren't lasting very long one thing to look at is the fixture they are in.  I had a bunch of glass globes and discovered that if the bulb touches the globe they burn out in 6 months to a year.  I guessed it was the heat buildup and replaced the globes with larger ones and haven't had any issues since.  So if your going through them quick it might be something to look at.
 
2013-04-30 10:01:57 AM

KellyX: I'm not replacing all my bulbs at once, but I'm slowly overtime planning to replace all my rooms with the new Cree LED's.

The first room I did was my bedroom which used three 60watt bulbs with three of the 40watt quality Cree ones (see link), they each use 6watts of power and with three of them the room is just as bright (and temperature wise, much cooler). I went from using 180watts in that room to 18watts.

Granted, they cost me after tax about $32, but they're warranted for 10 years and they say they last 28.8 years. So it is a long term investment, but the cost savings alone should pay for itself within a few years.

I suspect as time goes on they price will come down even more too.

/yea, I know I sound like I'm selling it, but fark if I'm not a true believer now in these guys!



This is pretty much what I'm doing, I have 1 LED bulb in the closet and as soon as a CFL burns out I'm just replacing them with LEDs.
 
2013-04-30 10:03:31 AM

Fiatlux: I'm a pretty libbing Lib and all but...
I work in the lighting industry, as a designer not an engineer, and I have always felt that the compact fluorescent revolution was a little squirrly. The self evident future of general consumer illumination is LEDs. That future is, by and large, already happening. We could have sensibly transitioned from incandescence to LED based products, but for some reason we inserted this other 10 year or so period of marketing CLF's as the "Green" option. CFL's are much more efficient then incandescence of course, LEDs much more so, and don't involve all that tasty mercury winding up in land fills.
Professional and hobbyist markets will always be served, Film, video. photography, various medical applications, etc, who have need of incandescent sources will be able to get them, but the overwhelming majority of light used by everybody else should have converted to LEDs years ago. Why this is a political issue, I don't understand.

/waits for engineer type to point out the horrors inherent in LED manufacture
/ducks


The only horror is cost.  Most people won't spend $50, or even $20 for a light bulb, no matter how long its designed to last.
 
2013-04-30 10:05:20 AM

TFerWannaBe: Slaves2Darkness: Honestly I understand why you would not recycle, use inefficient light bulbs, and pollute. The "energy efficient" light bulbs are expensive, an incandescent bulb are cheap. While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Those "energy efficient" bulbs are a rip off and no where need as effective as advertised.

I have a few energy efficient bulbs in my apartment that are over four years old now, so I'm getting a kick . . .



My first compact flourescent lasted, I kid you not, 15 years. I used it as the main light in my bedroom, and then in my bedlamp after I moved, so it got a good bit of use.

It was also weighed about a pound and took a few minutes to get to full brightness
I assume the designers forgot to include planned obsolesence when they made it.
 
2013-04-30 10:07:11 AM

Tomahawk513: It's a really slippery slope.  One day you're in the hardware store picking out an energy efficient bulb, and a week later you're composting, growing organic vegetables and herbs, recycling meticulously, and driving a hybrid.


I am transitioning to LEDs in the house, because it'll make my light bill cheaper. And we compost... grow organic vegetables and herbs... recycle everything we can... own a Prius... give to NPR and PBS... My God, I'm That Guy.
 
2013-04-30 10:10:02 AM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Dude, seriously - who pissed in your Corn Flakes this morning? I mean, I disagree with most of cmans politics, but here the guy comes out and admits that he used to think that way, and that he used to be a global warming denialist, but instead of saying something like "Good for you for changing your mind based on facts and rationality" you just keep riding his ass?

Take a pill, man. And consider the idea that you might owe him a wee bit of an apology here


I'm curious to know how absolutely pathetic someone has to be in order to consider their lightbulb purchases to be an act of aggression against the left.  I'm not going to congratulate someone for managing to eventually accomplish the bare minimum for being considered a person capable of rational thought.  And I'm certainly not going to apologize for asking.

I'll believe he's a reformed dumbass when I see a single post where he doesn't make himself out to be a dumbass.  I'll withhold the head-patting and 'atta boys' until then.
 
2013-04-30 10:16:15 AM

Chummer45: I think the moral here is that the right has just become a party of trolls.


Does troll now mean an asshole who would cut off his nose to spite his own face?
 
2013-04-30 10:17:32 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Ah, whatever happened to the bulbists? Those brave conservative heroes that still worshiped the old gods. When faced with news that American companies were moving on from the old model regardless of any legislation, they valiantly decided to declare they'd only buy Chinese from now on, while blaming their enemies for sending "jobs" overseas.


They stocked up, and never saw incandescents leave the shelves. Of course, that is also Obama's fault.
 
2013-04-30 10:18:00 AM

THX 1138: Slaves2Darkness: While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Is there a reason you wouldn't take the manufacturer up on their guarantee then?  Because if what you say is accurate, you could get free bulbs in perpetuity.

But hey, why do that when you could keep buying and replacing incandescents, right?


Yeah, there is I didn't keep the receipt. No receipt no replacement.
Yes I will keep buying and replacing incandescents, because the cost over the life of the bulb is an order of magnitude cheaper, despite what the propaganda says.
 
2013-04-30 10:18:46 AM

Fiatlux: I'm a pretty libbing Lib and all but...
I work in the lighting industry, as a designer not an engineer, and I have always felt that the compact fluorescent revolution was a little squirrly. The self evident future of general consumer illumination is LEDs. That future is, by and large, already happening. We could have sensibly transitioned from incandescence to LED based products, but for some reason we inserted this other 10 year or so period of marketing CLF's as the "Green" option. CFL's are much more efficient then incandescence of course, LEDs much more so, and don't involve all that tasty mercury winding up in land fills.
Professional and hobbyist markets will always be served, Film, video. photography, various medical applications, etc, who have need of incandescent sources will be able to get them, but the overwhelming majority of light used by everybody else should have converted to LEDs years ago. Why this is a political issue, I don't understand.

/waits for engineer type to point out the horrors inherent in LED manufacture
/ducks


Yeah, but LEDs still usually cost $20 a bulb.  CLFs are $2 a bulb.  And five years ago they basically weren't available at all commercially, while CFLs were.

That is, they aren't quite ready for prime time.  They are getting there, and probably will be by the time a CLF bought today burns out.
 
2013-04-30 10:20:47 AM

Slaves2Darkness: THX 1138: Slaves2Darkness: While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Is there a reason you wouldn't take the manufacturer up on their guarantee then?  Because if what you say is accurate, you could get free bulbs in perpetuity.

But hey, why do that when you could keep buying and replacing incandescents, right?

Yeah, there is I didn't keep the receipt. No receipt no replacement.
Yes I will keep buying and replacing incandescents, because the cost over the life of the bulb is an order of magnitude cheaper, despite what the propaganda says.


Are you factoring in the 90% more power that they use?  And I don't know what planet you live on, but in my experience CFLs do tend to last three to five years of frequent use, with minimal to no dimming.
 
2013-04-30 10:21:48 AM

Slaves2Darkness: THX 1138: Slaves2Darkness: While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Is there a reason you wouldn't take the manufacturer up on their guarantee then?  Because if what you say is accurate, you could get free bulbs in perpetuity.

But hey, why do that when you could keep buying and replacing incandescents, right?

Yeah, there is I didn't keep the receipt. No receipt no replacement.
Yes I will keep buying and replacing incandescents, because the cost over the life of the bulb is an order of magnitude cheaper, despite what the propaganda says.


Really? You've studied it out and everything?
 
2013-04-30 10:22:39 AM

Geotpf: Fiatlux: I'm a pretty libbing Lib and all but...
I work in the lighting industry, as a designer not an engineer, and I have always felt that the compact fluorescent revolution was a little squirrly. The self evident future of general consumer illumination is LEDs. That future is, by and large, already happening. We could have sensibly transitioned from incandescence to LED based products, but for some reason we inserted this other 10 year or so period of marketing CLF's as the "Green" option. CFL's are much more efficient then incandescence of course, LEDs much more so, and don't involve all that tasty mercury winding up in land fills.
Professional and hobbyist markets will always be served, Film, video. photography, various medical applications, etc, who have need of incandescent sources will be able to get them, but the overwhelming majority of light used by everybody else should have converted to LEDs years ago. Why this is a political issue, I don't understand.

/waits for engineer type to point out the horrors inherent in LED manufacture
/ducks

Yeah, but LEDs still usually cost $20 a bulb.  CLFs are $2 a bulb.  And five years ago they basically weren't available at all commercially, while CFLs were.

That is, they aren't quite ready for prime time.  They are getting there, and probably will be by the time a CLF bought today burns out.


Cree 40 Watt quality bulbs are $10, and their 60 Watt quality are $12-13 each.
 
2013-04-30 10:25:56 AM

MindStalker: Slaves2Darkness: Honestly I understand why you would not recycle, use inefficient light bulbs, and pollute. The "energy efficient" light bulbs are expensive, an incandescent bulb are cheap. While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Those "energy efficient" bulbs are a rip off and no where need as effective as advertised.

I see you bought the cheap non-brand CFL bulbs they were selling in bulk at Walmart 5 years ago.

The technology has gotten much better.
The name brand bulbs work better.
New LED bulbs are also an option.
In some areas where you have power issues (lower than 100 volts when you should have 120 can cause problems, etc,etc), you may not be able to use CFL bulbs.


I'd give LED a try if I could find one for less then $15 dollars a bulb. As for the CFL's the new rules on disposal are another strike against them as we are no longer supposed to throw them away, because of the mercury inside them. Also if you break one you are supposed bring in a clean up expert that will charge you anywhere from $5-25 thousand dollars. Yeah tell me again how this benefits me.

Green technology will only be adopted when it provides a greater cost/benefit ratio then other technology with the same convenience. I don't switch to green tech for the same reason I don't recycle, it inconveniences and cost me money. Recycling in my town means your waste disposal bill increase by $10 a month and you have to use a special container. Screw that build a single stream recycling plant and just increase my the bill.

Yeah I know a lot of you will consider my attitude appalling, but the reality is you are still in the minority. Although with the crap science and recycling religious non-sense they teach in public schools that probably won't be the case for much longer.
 
2013-04-30 10:28:55 AM

Slaves2Darkness: I'd give LED a try if I could find one for less then $15 dollars a bulb. As for the CFL's the new rules on disposal are another strike against them as we are no longer supposed to throw them away, because of the mercury inside them. Also if you break one you are supposed bring in a clean up expert that will charge you anywhere from $5-25 thousand dollars. Yeah tell me again how this benefits me.

Green technology will only be adopted when it provides a greater cost/benefit ratio then other technology with the same convenience. I don't switch to green tech for the same reason I don't recycle, it inconveniences and cost me money. Recycling in my town means your waste disposal bill increase by $10 a month and you have to use a special container. Screw that build a single stream recycling plant and just increase my the bill.

Yeah I know a lot of you will consider my attitude appalling, but the reality is you are still in the minority. Although with the crap science and recycling religious non-sense they teach in public schools that probably won't be the case for much longer.


HERE YOU GO
 
2013-04-30 10:31:32 AM
I never liked CFLs because of the mercury content. If you break one, you are supposed to leave the room/building and call hazmat to cut out the carpet/flooring in the area of the break and decontaminate the area. You are not supposed to throw them in the trash when they stop working due to the deplorably high mercury content. I'm sure most Americans are thoroughly educated on the subject and follow this protocol just fine on their own.

/LED ftw
 
2013-04-30 10:32:58 AM

Tomahawk513: Saiga410: Tomahawk513: Saiga410: It is all about the messaging.  If you harp on and on about the green aspects of a product I zone out/stop caring, I dont care. Wax poetically about efficiency gains and a payoff period and I am like an 8 year old that found the lingerie section of the Sears Catalog.

Different strokes for different folks.

There's a difference between apathy toward environmental friendliness, and outright disgust as the article suggests.

See I do not see the disgust.  There is a small subsect that is probably spiteful but I suggest it is more to deal with crowding out the message with information that the consumer does not care about.  If I read the article right the study was based off of package information.  You only get a small window for someone to absorb the information.  If you add something of neutral recognition level to the packaging, people will look at it and shift informational awareness away from the more affective message.

FTA: "Gromet said she never expected the green message to motivate conservatives, but was surprised to find that it could in fact repel them from making a purchase even while they found other aspects, like saving cash on their power bills, attractive. The reason, she thinks, is that given the political polarization of the climate change debate, environmental activism is so frowned upon by those the right that they'll do anything to keep themselves distanced from it."


I'm guessing some of you weren't around during the Carter administration when environmentalism was a topic of endless discussion everywhere. You couldn't get through a day without hearing how environmental disaster was imminent if we didn't cut back on our energy usage. But nobody ever saw the environmental disaster come, and then Reagan was elected, and a lot of people who were coming of age then simply got sick of all the moralization. I'm pretty certain that the endless hammering on environmental concerns then did real damage to the cause in the mainstream.
 
2013-04-30 10:34:42 AM
It's sometimes hard to tell who is trolling, who is astroturfing and who genuinely believes what they're saying.
 
2013-04-30 10:34:45 AM

Fallout Zone: Slaves2Darkness: Honestly I understand why you would not recycle, use inefficient light bulbs, and pollute. The "energy efficient" light bulbs are expensive, an incandescent bulb are cheap. While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Those "energy efficient" bulbs are a rip off and no where need as effective as advertised.

My house has been primarily CFL for 4 years (20+). I have yet to have one fail. Meanwhile, in the handful of fixtures that CFLs do not work well in, I am constantly replacing standard bulbs and using 5x as much energy when they are on.


Geotpf: Slaves2Darkness: THX 1138: Slaves2Darkness: While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Is there a reason you wouldn't take the manufacturer up on their guarantee then?  Because if what you say is accurate, you could get free bulbs in perpetuity.

But hey, why do that when you could keep buying and replacing incandescents, right?

Yeah, there is I didn't keep the receipt. No receipt no replacement.
Yes I will keep buying and replacing incandescents, because the cost over the life of the bulb is an order of magnitude cheaper, despite what the propaganda says.

Are you factoring in the 90% more power that they use?  And I don't know what planet you live on, but in my experience CFLs do tend to last three to five years of frequent use, with minimal to no dimming.


I don't know what planet you live on either, but electricity is cheap. Even with incandescent bulbs my house still gets rated as in the best category for energy use, if those informational usage fliers I get from the power company can be believed. You might have an argument if my power bill was high, but even in the warmest or coldest months it is not ridiculous.

As for CFLS lasting three to five years, maybe in a cool open environment, but in an overhead enclosed light fixture, or hell even in a bell fixture they overheat and burn out. So, the "solution" is either remove the light fixture coverings and just have those CFL bulbs hanging out, which is ugly, or use a different cheaper bulb.
 
2013-04-30 10:35:49 AM

Serious Black: Slaves2Darkness: THX 1138: Slaves2Darkness: While an "energy efficient" bulb costs four or five dollars, dims after two years and burns out in three even though it is "guaranteed" for five.

Is there a reason you wouldn't take the manufacturer up on their guarantee then?  Because if what you say is accurate, you could get free bulbs in perpetuity.

But hey, why do that when you could keep buying and replacing incandescents, right?

Yeah, there is I didn't keep the receipt. No receipt no replacement.
Yes I will keep buying and replacing incandescents, because the cost over the life of the bulb is an order of magnitude cheaper, despite what the propaganda says.

Really? You've studied it out and everything?


Have you? or are you just repeating information that you read or heard about, assuming that it is the gospel truth.
 
2013-04-30 10:39:13 AM

Slaves2Darkness: I'd give LED a try if I could find one for less then $15 dollars a bulb. As for the CFL's the new rules on disposal are another strike against them as we are no longer supposed to throw them away, because of the mercury inside them. Also if you break one you are supposed bring in a clean up expert that will charge you anywhere from $5-25 thousand dollars. Yeah tell me again how this benefits me.

Green technology will only be adopted when it provides a greater cost/benefit ratio then other technology with the same convenience. I don't switch to green tech for the same reason I don't recycle, it inconveniences and cost me money. Recycling in my town means your waste disposal bill increase by $10 a month and you have to use a special container. Screw that build a single stream recycling plant and just increase my the bill.

Yeah I know a lot of you will consider my attitude appalling, but the reality is you are still in the minority. Although with the crap science and recycling religious non-sense they teach in public schools that probably won't be the case for much longer.


Honestly, I completely know where you are coming from, but I'd still suggest you give the newer CFLs a try as they last way longer than the incandescent bulbs. Also screw the mercury rules. Mercury is only dangerous in gas form really, and yes some of your broken bulb will be a gas, but at that point you're already screwed. Step away from the area to let the gas clear, come back and wipe up the liquid mercury pool. Unless you have serious cuts, its not going to hurt you.
 
Displayed 50 of 180 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report