House votes, again, to delay enforcement of traditional light bulb ban

posted at 12:41 pm on June 6, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Last night, the House approved of two amendments that will further stay the enforcement of the infamously intrusive incandescent light-bulb ban.

In a voice vote, the House approved an amendment to the Energy and Water spending bill for 2013 that would prevent the Department of Energy from spending money to enforce a 2007 law that sets bulb efficiency standards. The law bans the sale of 100 watt incandescent bulbs and will ban the sale of 75 watt traditional bulbs in July 2013.

This year, like last year, the amendment was sponsored by Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas), who said the federal government should not be in the business of requiring certain light bulbs to be used.

“We shouldn’t be making these decisions for the American people,” Burgess said on the House floor. Burgess added that his amendment was approved last year and signed into law by President Obama, after which the House quickly passed his amendment again.

I like that the House Republicans are sticking with the regulatory travesty that is the incandescent light bulb ban, the only problem being that just delaying enforcement of the ban, instead of actually repealing it, only creates more uncertainty for businesses. It’s the best they can do with the state of the legislative branch being what it is at the moment, but manufacturers have already started battening down the hatches in preparation of the ban and moving away from production of normal light bulbs. A mere short-term guarantee just isn’t going to do much for them. Bloomberg has more:

Even if the House language approved last night survives in the Democratic-led Senate, the impact for consumers probably will be limited because manufacturers such as Royal Philips Electronics NV (PHIA) and General Electric Co. (GE) (GE) have revamped manufacturing to comply with the law, making bulbs that use less electricity to generate the same amount of light. …

“The law couldn’t be enforced,” Burgess said of his amendment in an interview. “‘We don’t need no stinkin’ badges. We’re the energy police.’”

Blocking the Energy Department from enforcement might let unscrupulous foreign manufacturers push non-compliant products, including to bulk buyers such as builders. Those sales are difficult to track.

“Some in Congress are willing to put U.S. jobs at risk for political positioning,” said Joseph Higbee, a spokesman for the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, a Rosslyn, Virginia-based group. “This is an example of a few politicizing light bulbs at the risk of American workers and the economy.”

Democrats are trying to spin this as if Republicans are ignoring the effect on American jobs. They contend that the delay will allow Americans to purchase traditional light bulbs from foreign manufacturers instead of the American manufacturers who make the new energy efficient light bulbs, but let’s just knock that notion on the head right now.

Buying American, just for the sake of buying American, does not help to create jobs — free trade and buying goods from wherever they are produced most cheaply and efficiently leads to good-for-all economic growth that creates actual, productive jobs. If Democrats really cared for American jobs and the health of the overall economy, maybe they should stop sticking up for a law that forces people to buy certain goods that they wouldn’t be choosing to buy in the free market. (Really, now — “unscrupulous” foreign manufacturers? They’re just meeting an existing demand, for crying out loud.)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Give me a break, why don’t they just rescind the original bill.

Dasher on June 6, 2012 at 12:43 PM

You can’t find 100W light bulbs anywhere.

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Almost all of the CFL bulbs are already made in China now. So it’s a false argument. And LEDs will end up ther as well.

More illusionary “green jobs” used by the left to push socialism and Big Brotherism.

contrarian on June 6, 2012 at 12:46 PM

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

They were the first to go.

Go to a farm store and ask for an incandescent electric heater, 100 watt size.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

They USED to be produced in USA, the last (GE) closed in 2011 due to the bill. Again, government (usually Demorats) create the problem, then wail against what they produced.

baseballguy on June 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

I bought a bunch o’ 100s before the ban, just in case. Enough to last me ’til I leave this mortal coil, at least. Maybe enough to be part of my estate, the most valuable part of which would be those light bulbs. :)

But yeah, repeal the whole thing, for a lot of reasons.

Bob's Kid on June 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Dirty little secret….

It doesn’t matter what happens because nearly all CFL bulb factories have been closed.

GE doesn’t make them anymore – they are going to LED.

This bill is a waste of time

LordMaximus on June 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I purchased a case (read 96) 1100 watt bulbs late last year.
at my age, will outlast me and I can pass them on to my children – I wonder if the estate tax covers light bulbs?

baseballguy on June 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

…they have ba11s about the bulbs?
NEXT!

KOOLAID2 on June 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM

First, they came for my light bulbs…

OmahaConservative on June 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM

This year, like last year, the amendment was sponsored by Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas), who said the federal government should not be in the business of requiring certain light bulbs to be used.

Just like the federal government should not be deciding what kind of toilet I can flush.

Bitter Clinger on June 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM

that would prevent the Department of Energy from spending money to enforce a 2007 law that sets bulb efficiency standards.

 

Considering that corporatism is about consolidating resources amongst a small set of elite corporations/plutocrats. Then no, I don’t think corporatism can employ socialism.
 
libfreeordie on June 6, 2012 at 11:48 AM

rogerb on June 6, 2012 at 12:51 PM

No businessman is going to bet his company’s future on these clowns continuing to pass these temporary half-measures. Congress has already killed off this industry and sent it overseas. All they’re voting on now is whether or not to cover their own political behinds.

Socratease on June 6, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Dirty little secret….

It doesn’t matter what happens because nearly all CFL bulb factories have been closed.

GE doesn’t make them anymore – they are going to LED.

This bill is a waste of time

LordMaximus on June 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

And the cost of the average LED bulb… Around $30.00. Cost of a 100 watt incandescent bulb, $1.75. You do the math and tell me who is getting screwed here.

SWalker on June 6, 2012 at 12:53 PM

pssst…hey buddy…I got some 75 watts over in my car…you wanna buy….

crosshugger on June 6, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Give me a break, why don’t they just rescind the original bill.

Dasher on June 6, 2012 at 12:43 PM

One word. Harry Reid. h/t Joe Biden

DanMan on June 6, 2012 at 12:57 PM

http://newcandescent.com

All the rough service 100 watt bulbs you want. Perfectly legal. (No, I don’t have anything to do with the company.)

vityas on June 6, 2012 at 1:00 PM

American light bulb manufacturers are a bunch of sheep. Especially GE who gleefully supports this President as if he is some type of king making royal dictates.

They want to just bend over and not fight ridiculous government fiats not in the interest of consumers and based on hokey governmental notions? Suck it.

This is the one time I will buy a product from another FRIENDLY nation.

Marcus Traianus on June 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM

First, there were American jobs in incandescent manufacturing that were lost because of the original ban.

Which was passed by weak-kneed Republicans and Democratic overregulators alike in the “heat” of the global warming moment, don’t forget.

Those jobs are lost and gone. And they aren’t coming back because no one is going to re-open or operate a plant under this kind of regulatory uncertainty.

Second, there aren’t going to be many American jobs manufacturing the CFL alternatives either, foreign plants already have economy of scale edges there too.

So there is a jobs story, but it was written 5 years ago by Dems and Repubs alike, and the outcome sucked.

Stop the regulation insanity, and allow innovation on true next gen energy efficient bulbs – NOT CFL trash – to flourish here, and maybe we will get a next gen set of jobs, R&D and manufacturing, going again here.

But only if we ease the regulatory burden and uncertainty, corporate tax disparity, and increase the focus on the real mistakes of the past and real solutions going forward.

Hoping it happens, but good luck with that between the Dems and the weenie House Repubs focused on the symbol of mistake – but no understanding of what the heck they did wrong to begin with.

PrincetonAl on June 6, 2012 at 1:06 PM

November 6, 2012……….and Inauguration Day 2013.

The two dates that will slam the brakes on this *crap.

*followed up by keeping pressure on the Big Spending gop.

PappyD61 on June 6, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Dem bulbs fight for dim bulbs.

Rancher on June 6, 2012 at 1:10 PM

I bought a few CFLs and never will again after I found out that the clean up claims were not exaggerated. I have enough incandescents to last a while and plan on keeping an eye out for some good LEDs as they drop in price.

And, yes, CFLs are a mercury contamination risk. Just take it from ask the Utah Poison Control Center (pdf).

batter on June 6, 2012 at 1:10 PM

I’ve not bought a GE product in many years…..they aren’t worth the garbage I put on the curb.

skeeterbite on June 6, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Yes, the whole damn thing should be repealed.

Buying American, just for the sake of buying American, does not help to create jobs — free trade and buying goods from wherever they are produced most cheaply and efficiently leads to good-for-all economic growth that creates actual, productive jobs.

Eh, not really. First, this ban has cost American jobs as plants had to shut down. But unlike many jobs which move overseas because it’s more cost effective for the manufacturer (and which provides a benefit to consumers by enabling them to purchase cheaper goods), that was not the case here. This was a totally unnecessary shutdown of private enterprises purely by government regulatory fiat. People voluntarily bought their U.S. made light bulbs not “for the sake of buying American” but because they were available and in demand.

Second, GE’s investors may benefit from from this government fiat and cronyism, but it doesn’t directly impact jobs in a positive way (except to the extent that a prosperous economy provides more job opportunities, and to the extent GE is prosperous one could only very weakly argue it’s a job stimulator).

Note too that medical device manufacturers are being forced out of business and many will close their American operations and move overseas. This again is an artificially created situation (brought on by punitive ObamaCare taxes), not one sought out by these companies as a way to increase profits. There is no way one can argue this benefits American jobs.

Buy Danish on June 6, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Last night, the House approved of two amendments that will further stay the enforcement of the infamously intrusive incandescent light-bulb ban.

…they fear for their JOBS after Walker win last night. People are tired of being TOLD what to DO by GOVERNMENT officials!

TX-96 on June 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

batter on June 6, 2012 at 1:10 PM

This, again?

Facepalm…

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

You can’t find 100W light bulbs anywhere.

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

You CAN get them on-line. I stocked up last year, and even saved an average of $1 per bulb over local store prices. Yes, you have to buy them by the case, but it’s worth it…I figure I’ll have a full payback in 3 years (including ALL costs…including shipping), with positive returns continuing for an additional 7 years (I bought a 10-year supply). There are many applications which will continue to demand incandescent bulbs. LED’s are close to solving the spectrum and chemical safety problems which CFL’s have, but they present new fire dangers in many applications: fixtures are NOT designed to properly dissipate heat from LED’s. Initial cost remains a HUGE problem with all alternatives to incandescents.

Posting policy forbids me from mentioning specific sources I used in FL and MA, but you might try the keyword “bulb” in a search engine…you’ll get plenty of choices.

The light bulb ban will go down in history as one of the most idiotic, anti-consumer, anti-American acts ever!!! The Chinese and other offshore sources now have all the jobs associated with the lighting industry, and consumers get to pay 8-10 times more for each light bulb.

Energy savings??? ONLY ON PAPER: you get “savings” over incandescent only by ignoring some of the costs…and believing the unproven and downright false claims for “alternative lighting lifetimes”. Check the consumer comments before you buy.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

baseballguy on June 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Yep. Too late. They don’t make the bulbs here anymore, ano no one is importing them, as far as I know.

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

You might still find some on the shelf somewhere, more likely in some smaller out of the way store. I did stock up myself, so I could profit in the black market wouldn’t run out.

novaculus on June 6, 2012 at 1:15 PM

You can’t find 100W light bulbs anywhere.

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Yes you can, there’s more than a lifetime supply in one of my barns. I plan to use the excess to buy food and/or necessities when the dollar completely crashes.

TXUS on June 6, 2012 at 1:20 PM

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Don’t believe me fine – click the link or go look at the EPA’s website. They say the same thing a bunch of clean up step etc etc. I think I have the right to decide what enters my property what ever you or government think of it.

If you love CFLs, go for it load up all you want. I’m not going to ban it or tell you what to plug into your sockets. Wish I could get the same respect in return.

batter on June 6, 2012 at 1:20 PM

This, again?

Facepalm…

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Huh? What’s “facepalm” about it? He’s absolutely right, but leaves out that beyond the safety issues, these CFLs create horrible lighting ambiance. I was stuck in a hotel recently where every bulb was a CFL and it was unbearably jarring.

Buy Danish on June 6, 2012 at 1:25 PM

batter on June 6, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Go ahead and be “chicken little” all you want. There isn’t any more mercury in CFL’s than the fluorescent tubes that have hung over your head for decades.

I don’t care what anyone thinks of CFL’s, or if they refuse to use them. But to keep plugging the CFL’s are the most dangerous thing since alar is silly.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Buy Danish on June 6, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Then you just stick with that.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:27 PM

By the way, did anyone primary Fred Upton, RINO nitwit from MI?

Jaibones on June 6, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Wrong analysis. The notion that you BAN something, to force people to buy something else is unnessisary and a huge over-reach of federal regulation. Theres nothing wrong with incandescent bulbs, they are NOT defective products and people are tired of being TOLD what to do by government, period.

Go ahead and be “chicken little” all you want. There isn’t any more mercury in CFL’s than the fluorescent tubes that have hung over your head for decades.

I don’t care what anyone thinks of CFL’s, or if they refuse to use them. But to keep plugging the CFL’s are the most dangerous thing since alar is silly.

cozmo

TX-96 on June 6, 2012 at 1:30 PM

the only problem being that just delaying enforcement of the ban, instead of actually repealing it, only creates more uncertainty for businesses.

Have not a clue how you think this is a valid statement. They use flourenents already. They can screw CFL’s or LED’s into existing fixtures but most likely already have they do save money well the LED’s not quite yet.

I do not agree with bans Period. Repeal this. We are supposed to be a free people. This is communism.

But I never use these energy money wasting bulbs (except when decorative or dimming). You really need to complete the math equation. A 29 watt CFL gives better light Daylight and saves the difference in cost in a hurry at about $2.00 per bulb. Plus I hardly ever need to change one. They mostly last for years.

LED’s are just starting to get more efficient than CFL’s but they have a few advantages they actually dim properly they also have no toxic materials when you break one and are very hard to break. I will probably not buy any for another couple of years when the price gets down to $5.00 or so but they will be about double the efficiency of CFL’s by then most likely. That $50 bulb we made so much fun of is part of the way to the new efficiency but still not there.

Part of the complaining about CFL’s is very valid. For example for about six months millions of bulbs were out there that are totally defective. They can take three minutes to actually get bright. These were sold in all brands or most all. Then they came out with new packaging touting they got bright instantly. Well prior to these faulty bulbs they did that and the packages these bulbs were in claimed they did as well (falsely). The bulbs ten years ago were mostly garbage as well.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM

They were the first to go.

Go to a farm store and ask for an incandescent electric heater, 100 watt size.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

I was amused, and Googled that. First link: “Selling Incandescent Bulbs as Heaters: Loophole or Art?” Second, from ThinkProgress (lol): “Please don’t use incandescent bulbs for heating”

I hate bureaucrats! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM

cozmo: That is not an argument for CFLs not being dangerous and much more an argument against using fluorescent tubes.

If fluorescent tubes have the same levels and state of mercury as CFLs, then the same standard should apply to them. Do they? Is it?

Scott H on June 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Wrong analysis. The notion that you BAN something, to force people to buy something else is unnessisary and a huge over-reach of federal regulation.
TX-96 on June 6, 2012 at 1:30 PM

What was wrong about it?

I already stated that I don’t care what people think of them, or if they want to use them.

I also provided an easy way to get around the ban.

The only problem I have is with ignorant people repeating false myths about CFL’s.

I think it was Popular Mechanics that busted the CFL myths about the same time they busted the 9-11 myths.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:36 PM

I don’t care what anyone thinks of CFL’s, or if they refuse to use them. But to keep plugging the CFL’s are the most dangerous thing since alar is silly.

cozmo

TX-96 on June 6, 2012 at 1:30 PM

We point this out because the same idiots forcing these bulbs are also supposedly for the environment. Well this proves that a lie. They only care about environment when it politically works for them. Same with saving energy only for others and only when it politically works for their greater causes.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Ah…yes. August 7th primary. Of course, Boner is supporting Upton the RINO who voted for stem cell research on aborted babies, TARP, light bulb bans, against the Iraq surge, etc.

Jaibones on June 6, 2012 at 1:38 PM

You can’t find 100W light bulbs anywhere.

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Yes you can, and they’re made in the USA and they’re perfectly legal.

Oldnuke on June 6, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Energy savings??? ONLY ON PAPER: you get “savings” over incandescent only by ignoring some of the costs…and believing the unproven and downright false claims for “alternative lighting lifetimes”. Check the consumer comments before you buy.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

You are entitled to you own opinion but not your own facts.

Fact: I changed every light bulb in my house to CFL. My power bill went down by $20 a month. Meaning I paid for all the bulbs in three months. They did not start burning out for about 2-3 years. Now I got them on clearance. But these days power cost far more and the bulbs retail for the old clearance price.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM

So many farmers use them to heat chicken coops that they are still allowed for sale and use. But you aren’t supposed to use them for lighting.

If fluorescent tubes have the same levels and state of mercury as CFLs, then the same standard should apply to them. Do they? Is it?

Scott H on June 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Gee, ya’ think? Why don’t they regulate the tubes if they are so dangerous. All that danger hanging over the head of every school kid and office worker. Or, maybe it is “chicken little” types that only are afraid of the funny looking CFL’s.

You better get rid of that old style (non-electronic)thermostat in your house. It has more mercury than 100 CFL’s. Did the A/C replace your last one? Or did the EPA send out a hazmat team?

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM

We were told a pack of lies about those stupid curly bulbs.

The one by my basement steps just died after only 3 and a half years. I know how long it was (rather, how short it was) because I write the date of installation on each of those stupid bulbs.

It was only about a year ago that our local utility announced, by newsletter, that we should drive our burned-out curly bulbs across town to a recycling/disposal center when they expire.

How come no one mentioned back at the beginning that you aren’t supposed to throw them out in the trash, like regular bulbs?

And I don’t like the buzzing sound they make. Feh.

KyMouse on June 6, 2012 at 1:44 PM

If you love CFLs, go for it load up all you want. I’m not going to ban it or tell you what to plug into your sockets. Wish I could get the same respect in return.

batter on June 6, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I happen to like (good) CFLs a lot, and I also agree with you 100%.

Huh? What’s “facepalm” about it? He’s absolutely right, but leaves out that beyond the safety issues, these CFLs create horrible lighting ambiance. I was stuck in a hotel recently where every bulb was a CFL and it was unbearably jarring.

Buy Danish on June 6, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Not all CFLs are created equal! Some are way worse than others…

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I bought a bunch o’ 100s before the ban, just in case. Enough to last me ’til I leave this mortal coil, at least. Maybe enough to be part of my estate, the most valuable part of which would be those light bulbs. :)

But yeah, repeal the whole thing, for a lot of reasons.

Bob’s Kid on June 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I can see it now….in your will…I bequeath my valuable stash of 100 watt light bulbs. Now that is a treasure worth inhierting.

logicman_1998 on June 6, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Jack Hoogendyk is Upton’s opponent. Go Jack!

Jaibones on June 6, 2012 at 1:50 PM

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Yer wastin’ yer time, I’ve tried time and again to no avail. Somebody slapped a warning on something so it’s gospel. I really would like for someone to break a couple of CFL bulbs on the floor of the Senate and the House though. I’d pay to watch that.

Oldnuke on June 6, 2012 at 1:52 PM

The one by my basement steps just died after only 3 and a half years. I know how long it was (rather, how short it was) because I write the date of installation on each of those stupid bulbs.

And I don’t like the buzzing sound they make. Feh.

KyMouse on June 6, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Some of the bulbs are defective and burn out quicker than they should I have had a couple not last a day. But this is rare. Few live up to the stated lifetime though but they last many times longer than regular bulbs. When in years it is generally based on only using the bulb for a couple of hours a day. By the way turn them off, when not using, this is more efficient unless for less than 15 seconds or so.

The new bulbs for the most part do not buzz. But some do. The screw in ones are less likely to. LED’s do not buzz. Some also buzz when they are about to stop working.

Now there are probably still some of those defective cfl’s out there for sale that take minutes to warm up. Most do not do that. If you get one that does take it back and complain.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Hilarious video on FOX news earlier as Issa grilled Obama Labor Dept Chief over green jobs.

Issa gets him to admit the following are counted as green jobs by the Obama administration:

Someone who sweeps the floor at a soar panel facility.
Drivers of hybrid buses.
A college professor teaching about environmental studies.
Any school bus driver.
The guy who puts gas in the school bus.
Employees at a bicycle shop.

jazzmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Oldnuke on June 6, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I know. That is the reason for the face palm. You and I tried to educate folks here last time, when the first ban went into effect.

IIRC, some of these folks are the same one’s who couldn’t figure it out then.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:57 PM

jazzmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Too funny.

But would have been better getting him to admit the electric buses produce more pollution because of the power being generated by coal.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Yay for Texas!

Texas Incandescent Light Bulb Bill Becomes Law

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-incandescent-light-bulb-bill-becomes-law-185800535.html

From my cold, dead hands…

kakypat on June 6, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I know. That is the reason for the face palm. You and I tried to educate folks here last time, when the first ban went into effect.

IIRC, some of these folks are the same one’s who couldn’t figure it out then.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Many people read but never post.

They might have similar concerns.

They might decide to try the CFL’s and save some money.

I am looking forward to the LED’s. Those will be really great. But they are not ready yet unless you have a bulb that you never want to replace. That 14 Watt 1450 lumpen bulb is impressive.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Bulbs are available that produce light in different spectrums. I find the lower spectrum bulbs are a lot less annoying.

novaculus on June 6, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Those LED bulbs are almost to the point of being cost effective.

The only place I have used them to this point is for a lady I know who has a 20′ vaulted ceiling in her living room.

I use CFL’s where I don’t want the heat, in the garage door opener (an incandescent wouldn’t last a week there) and my wife wants them at her makeup counter.

I use all kinds of lights and wouldn’t deny anybody their choice.

Its the myths that won’t die that gets to me.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Some of the bulbs are defective and burn out quicker than they should I have had a couple not last a day. But this is rare. Few live up to the stated lifetime though but they last many times longer than regular bulbs. When in years it is generally based on only using the bulb for a couple of hours a day. By the way turn them off, when not using, this is more efficient unless for less than 15 seconds or so.

The new bulbs for the most part do not buzz. But some do. The screw in ones are less likely to. LED’s do not buzz. Some also buzz when they are about to stop working.

Now there are probably still some of those defective cfl’s out there for sale that take minutes to warm up. Most do not do that. If you get one that does take it back and complain.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM

I used to do some caretaking for an apartment that had problems with fluctuating electricity, and fast got tired of replacing its frequently-dying incandescent bulbs. I first tried CFLs there in 2001, and haven’t looked back – like you, I found that the CFLs would tend to last for years instead of months, as well as being far more energy efficient.

I did do my research first, however, and fortunately I’ve been completely unsaddled with any crappily manufactured brands – I feel for people who were soured on CFLs by originally purchasing junky ones, and have ended up missing out on how much better the experience could be for themselves.

For a long time, I got 3 good bulbs/$4 at IKEA, which was the best local deal I knew of when I was doing that, but now you can easily get good ones for around 50 cents/bulb.

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM

It doesn’t matter. Companies have already been making the switch due to the legislation. Good luck going into a store and buying a 100-wt incandescent bulb.

The damage has already been done.

Dante on June 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM

You can’t find 100W light bulbs anywhere.

wildcat72 on June 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Yep. And at the start of the new year you won’t be able to get 70/75 watt incandescents.

Dante on June 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Bulbs are available that produce light in different spectrums. I find the lower spectrum bulbs are a lot less annoying.

novaculus on June 6, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Exactly.

CFLs are no different than old-fashioned tubular fluorescent lights that way – not all of them buzz, or produce unpleasant lighting effects!

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Iran is about to nuke Israel. The dollar and world currencies are on the edge of collapse. Our military is strained while China has gained maybe twice our strength.

And what is our Congress doing? Voting on whether or not to allow the American people to choose their on light bulbs or not.

We’ve gone from being the greatest country in the world to being a laughingstock that is very endangered.

Axion on June 6, 2012 at 2:44 PM

I used to do some caretaking for an apartment that had problems with fluctuating electricity,

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM

I’m curious, define fluctuating electricity. I’m guessing that you mean voltage wasn’t steady.

Oldnuke on June 6, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Nice for the rest of you. Here in the People’s Republic, 60W incandescents are gone, and 100W disappeared a while back. Our unemployment rate is still higher than everyone else’s, however, and our debt towering. Can’t nobody emit nothin, and still all the tiny fish in our streams and lakes are dying, and the mean, nasty, gluttonous humans are still fat, toxic, and living in houses way too big, driving in way too many cars, and breathing way too hard.

So, basically, the bulb ban hasn’t fixed anything.

J.E. Dyer on June 6, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Dante on June 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Dante on June 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Since the article, and comments, didn’t mention anything about native, or natural, born, you just skipped over all that (Your birtherdar is tuned too tightly). If you had read any of it, you would have educated yourself about the status of the ban, and that there may be other reasons big users are switching.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Sorry, but CFL’s are NOT equal to straight fluorescents!!!

Any bent-tube, mercury-vapor bulb will necessarily have a shorter lifetime than a straight fluorescent (assuming that the straight fluorescent is mounted horizontally). Mercury vapor bulbs also do not do well in unusual orientations or in installations where there is vibration.

I could present engineering detail, but you can easily learn the facts by just googling and reading user reviews. Fact is that neither CFL’s nor LED’s are anywhere close to meeting their hyped lifetimes. In contrast, the incandescent bulb industry, with close to 100 years of actual data, reliably meets their published lifetimes: they know exactly how to trade off cost/reliability, and they have extensive knowledge of the factors and failure mechanisms which influence lifetime.

But if the CFLs make you feel good, go for it! Everyone should have the freedom to buy what makes them happy.

Personally, I’ll never buy a CFL. I used straight fluorescents where they make sense, and incandescents for anywhere I have to read. I may buy LED in 10-15 years when they solve the fixturing and heat dissipation problems, and when the cost comes down to a competitive level.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 3:19 PM

I don’t hyperventilate if they break; I remember playing with mercury from a broken thermometer, pushing it around with my finger. I’m still here, and (reasonably) sane. But I do think it interesting that we have to save the environment by risking even worse pollution.

I just really, really, hate being told that I have to change something that ain’t broke with something that isn’t any better, and which in the short run isn’t saving me any time or money. Especially when a significant portion of the CFLs on the market make my and my daughter’s migraines worse, from both the sound and the type of light.

Now can we just get states to get rid of the low flow toilet mandate? If you consider how often one must flush twice, and how much more frequently they clog (at this point I’m becoming a moderately competent plumber) are we really saving water?

Or the removal of phospherous from the dish detergent, which I could still get if I was a commercial establishment. As it is, I have to wash everything by hand first, since my dishwasher doesn’t get it clean otherwise. That’s really saving the environment and my money! Twice the water and twice the detergent. I’ve been meaning to buy some TSP at the local hardware store to see if it helps.

LibraryGryffon on June 6, 2012 at 3:21 PM

I stocked up on 60 and 100 watt incandescent lightbulbs long ago at home depot. Hey cost $0.24 each and I have enough to last through my children’s lifetime.

I won’t have to deal with pathetic light, long start times, cold weather problem, mercury poisoning, or my house burning down like Stevies when the curly bulb explodes when burning out.

I proudly pay a few buck more in my electric bill and sleep well knowing my house is free of poisonous house fire starting cfl bulbs from china.

Robert Jensen on June 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Personally, I’ll never buy a CFL. I used straight fluorescents where they make sense, and incandescents for anywhere I have to read. I may buy LED in 10-15 years when they solve the fixturing and heat dissipation problems, and when the cost comes down to a competitive level.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 3:19 PM

I proudly pay a few buck more in my electric bill and sleep well knowing my house is free of poisonous house fire starting cfl bulbs from china.

Robert Jensen on June 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

You really should try the newer CFL’s I like the Daylight especially for reading.

So far as LED’s 3 years at max they should be ready for all uses. Even not for that difficult to change light they make a lot of sense.

Regular bulbs especially 100 Watt or more are a far bigger fire hazard. I have never had a CFL actually catch fire though a couple have smoked when they died. Do not think that could actually happen. But would be as likely as your Surround Sound system or TV catching fire because the electronics malfunctioned.

Steveangell on June 6, 2012 at 3:56 PM

“Democrats are trying to spin this as if Republicans are ignoring the effect on American jobs. They contend that the delay will allow Americans to purchase traditional light bulbs from foreign manufacturers instead of the American manufacturers who make the new energy efficient light bulbs”

Excuse me, but the CFL I just purchased, because the store no longer offers incandesant light bulbs, says “Made in China”. WTF are Democrats talking about??????

The problem we have in the US is not incondesenat bulbs. It’s labor costs. At the low end is the minimum wage. At the high end is union contracts.

At the lowest end is China and companies here are not allowed to offer jobs at a market price. The government has decided artifically that the market price is 7.50 an hour when there are tens of thousands willing to work for less.

Many small businesses cannot afford to pay $7.50 to $10 an hour. This is wny we have the highest unemployment rate among teens in history. They can’t get and entry level job any more because the government has priced them out of the market.

Remember that in November.

BMF on June 6, 2012 at 5:02 PM

It was so easy to pass the legislation but almost impossible to repeal.

This is what we get when big government Republicans like Fred Upton R-MI walk across the aisle to help the Democrats.

RJL on June 6, 2012 at 5:03 PM

I’m curious, define fluctuating electricity. I’m guessing that you mean voltage wasn’t steady.

Oldnuke on June 6, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Yeah, exactly – lots of little brownouts.

The apartment (well, it was a house divided up into 4 units) was built in the 1880s, and had some issues! For example, I had to get a battery backup unit with AVR there in order to keep my computer from unexpectedly restarting every so often!

Until I used CFLs, one of the light fixtures in one of the hallways required a replacement incandescent bulb more often than every other month (I probably should mention that that was the case when the light was on all of the time.) After the switchover to CFLs, with that fixture always on, I had to replace only 2 bulbs over a 6 year period. Some of the fixtures, which weren’t on all the time, never needed replacement bulbs after I put CFLs in their sockets.

Sorry, but CFL’s are NOT equal to straight fluorescents!!!

Any bent-tube, mercury-vapor bulb will necessarily have a shorter lifetime than a straight fluorescent (assuming that the straight fluorescent is mounted horizontally). Mercury vapor bulbs also do not do well in unusual orientations or in installations where there is vibration.

I could present engineering detail, but you can easily learn the facts by just googling and reading user reviews. Fact is that neither CFL’s nor LED’s are anywhere close to meeting their hyped lifetimes.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 3:19 PM

What you are saying about CFLs has not been my experience.

I cannot emphasize enough the difference in the quality of the CFL bulbs out there! I’ve never had any of my CFLs die quickly or smoke/catch on fire, but I certainly am aware of such occurrences!

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Buying American, just for the sake of buying American, does not help to create jobs — free trade and buying goods from wherever they are produced most cheaply and efficiently leads to good-for-all economic growth that creates actual, productive jobs. If Democrats really cared for American jobs and the health of the overall economy, maybe they should stop sticking up for a law that forces people to buy certain goods that they wouldn’t be choosing to buy in the free market. (Really, now — “unscrupulous” foreign manufacturers? They’re just meeting an existing demand, for crying out loud.)

Erika Johnsen

I don’t know about CFLs but someone has been drinking the free trade kool-aid. One more time, free trade does not exist because of regulation and cheating. We handicap ourselves with min-wage, work place safety, and environment regulations, while our biggest competitor China manipulates their currency to cheat their people out of their due prosperity and to ensure that their imports are ALWAYS cheap against American products. We handicap ourselves while they cheat, so does that sound anything like free?

DFCtomm on June 6, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Apparently you never had a statistics class or studied the difference between “anecdotal evidence” and proof.

You cite ONE experience: your own. And your ENTIRE experience covers barely 2/3 of the hyped “9 year lifetime” for CFL bulbs. You would need many, many more experiments over 27 years or so to prove this kind of claim: possibly more, depending upon how many CFL failures out of the entire population being tested happened early in the experiment.

Me, I’ll take the 100 years worth of actual, provable, failure data from the incandescent industry every time. The CFL data is not yet credible (too many early failures and little long-term data of any kind), and the LED industry has not even agreed on how to count a “failure” (LED’s usually don’t just quit…they fade away).

Anecdotal evidence is mildly interesting, and may suggest topics for further study; but is not a good basis for making real decisions. And lots of counter-anecdotes exist for each of your claims.

And each of the “new” bulbs has its own fixture compatibility problems and known and unknown safety problems. It is possible that NONE of these “new” items can succeed until new fixtures are created specifically for them. And the light fixture industry (lamps, chandeliers, etc.) has, for the most part, ignored the new technologies…this indicates that most of them are not yet sold on the idea that the “new” bulbs are here to stay.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM

And the light fixture industry (lamps, chandeliers, etc.) has, for the most part, ignored the new technologies…this indicates that most of them are not yet sold on the idea that the “new” bulbs are here to stay.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Do you still swear by your buggywhip as well?

Anecdotes add up to data. You hype on one facet of the CFL. The CFL’s available today are not the early bulbs with old style starters and ballasts. Work with CFL’s has improved tube fluorescent fixtures over just the last few years. I still have some CFL’s working, and being used, more than a decade after being installed. One of them in a vibrating garage door opener. Just like incandescent’s, CFL’s can be purchased with many different types of light

New fixtures have been on the market for years to take advantage of CFL’s. While the fixtures still retain the ability to use incandescents. Hey! whaddaya’ know, that was the whole idea behind CFL’s. And LED bulbs.

cozmo on June 6, 2012 at 6:47 PM

The newcandescent company is an alternative but the cost of them plus shipping is more that 5 times what I used to pay for 100 watt light bulbs. I stocked up on 100 watt light bulbs last year even though my husband thinks I’m crazy.

The way I see it is that all the light bulb companies are making lots of extra money while we, the consumers, get screwed. All of our choices are now way more expensive than what we used to pay.

sherrimae on June 6, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Apparently you never had a statistics class or studied the difference between “anecdotal evidence” and proof.

You cite ONE experience: your own. And your ENTIRE experience covers barely 2/3 of the hyped “9 year lifetime” for CFL bulbs. You would need many, many more experiments over 27 years or so to prove this kind of claim: possibly more, depending upon how many CFL failures out of the entire population being tested happened early in the experiment.

Me, I’ll take the 100 years worth of actual, provable, failure data from the incandescent industry every time. The CFL data is not yet credible (too many early failures and little long-term data of any kind), and the LED industry has not even agreed on how to count a “failure” (LED’s usually don’t just quit…they fade away).

Anecdotal evidence is mildly interesting, and may suggest topics for further study; but is not a good basis for making real decisions. And lots of counter-anecdotes exist for each of your claims.

And each of the “new” bulbs has its own fixture compatibility problems and known and unknown safety problems. It is possible that NONE of these “new” items can succeed until new fixtures are created specifically for them. And the light fixture industry (lamps, chandeliers, etc.) has, for the most part, ignored the new technologies…this indicates that most of them are not yet sold on the idea that the “new” bulbs are here to stay.

landlines on June 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Wow – you are a great communicator, aren’t you?

Did I ever make the claim that my personal experience with CFL bulbs was anything other than my personal experience? Was I wrong to say that it’s factual that some CFL bulbs are made more cheaply than others (which, btw, also applies to incandescent bulbs, doesn’t it? LOL! :) )

Do you think the research I did about CFLs before I bought one was a complete waste of my time, and had absolutely nothing to do with the success I‘ve had with them? Have you ever considered that it might benefit potential users of CFLs to read some reviews of others’ experiences with different brands of them before deciding which brand(s) to try out?

You should honestly ask yourself what you are looking for here; to me, it seems like you have a prejudice against CFLs, and have a problem that the evidence I’ve presented doesn’t fit into what you wish to hear!

Bizarro No. 1 on June 6, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Give me a break, why don’t they just rescind the original bill.

Dasher on June 6, 2012 at 12:43 PM

One word. Harry Reid. h/t Joe Biden

DanMan on June 6, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Understand… Wait until Jan 2, 2013 then when Reid will only be the minority leader.

Last fall I bought a few 16 packs of 100 W bulbs for $3.75 ea or 23.4 ¢ per bulb.

Dasher on June 6, 2012 at 11:51 PM