Texas Becomes The Light Bulb State
Most of America will soon be lit like a mental institution (with those ugly CFL bulbs that require you to keep a flashlight in the room in case you need the light to come on right away).
But, Texas just told the Federal nannies it's lights out on pushing them around. From the Tenth Amendment Center:
That flickering light of freedom down in Texas emanates from an incandescent light bulb.Edison's brilliant invention will soon go dark in the U.S., essentially prohibited by federal law. Beginning next year, the feds will force Americans to begin abandoning the old standard light bulbs in favor of compact florescent bulbs filled with mercury, or other more expensive lighting.
But not in Texas.
Last week, Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill that will allow for the intrastate manufacture and sale of incandescent light bulbs in the Lone Star State.
HB 2501 rests on the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, affirming that the authority to regulate intrastate commerce remains with the states.
..."This is a victory for state sovereignty," Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey said. "The federal government has no authority to determine what type of light bulbs Texans choose to manufacture and sell within their borders. More states should follow Texas' lead, not just with lighting, but every product imaginable. It's high time the states and the people took back the decision making power they rightfully possess."
This will last until TSA comes down on Texas.
jerry at June 30, 2011 1:33 AM
Seriously, how sad is it that the federal government has extended its tentecles so far that a state law over the sale of lightbulbs is a constitutional 'victory'?
lujlp at June 30, 2011 6:23 AM
That won't work unless SCOTUS overrules Wickard v. Filburn.
With the most recent ruling by the Sixth Circuit on Obamacare that may happen. There are now conflicting decisions on Obamacare so it is definitely going to the SCOTUS to decide.
And you have got to read the torturous logic the Sixth used to justify the ruling. Invoking Warren Buffet -- the libtard of Omaha.
blogs.forbes.com/danielfisher/2011/06/29/obamacare-judge-asks-what-would-warren-buffett-do/
With that -- it will definitely brush by Wickard.
Jim P. at June 30, 2011 6:33 AM
I dont know JimP. Given the basis of the reasoning behind Wickard v Filburn I dont think incadecent lightbulbs qualify as an internatioanlly traded comodity that requires price stabalizing for the globl market, also the stated goal in replaceing them with flourecents is not economic in nature.
Even if the feds were to make the argument that flourecents using less electricity qualifys the ban of incadecente as economic in nature and legal under the commerce clause, any plantiff can make the argument that their manufacture, proper disposal, and failure rate(given most people dont leave their flo lights on for a minimum of 15 minuets every single time) more then outweigh any savings earned form the savings in using less power.
Figure in the costs of replacing all dimmer switches, and lighting outlets to match the requirements of the florecents and add that to the tally. Plus I'm sure some homes would need to be rewired for saftey sake.
Figure in medical costs from mercury contamination from broken bulbs and the real cost of florecents climbs even higher.
lujlp at June 30, 2011 8:08 AM
Government just trying to force you to get cataract surgery earlier.
Dave B at June 30, 2011 11:53 AM
Holy cats. It takes the likes of Governor Perry to stand up to this nonsense?!
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at June 30, 2011 3:07 PM
The federal law about phasing out incandescent light bulbs was passed during the administration of Pres. G.W. Bush.
I'm having great luck with the Sylvania brand CFLs I started using five years ago. The type I have screw into a socket just like conventional incadescents. Perhaps other brands aren't so good. They seems to last about as long as incandescents (the 1st one I put in did for 2 years.) I haven't done the math, but I'd be surprised if the total cost, bulb plus electricity, wasn't a better deal than incandescents over the bulbs' lifetimes, they are significantly better at efficiency. The Sylvania brand bulbs I use are quite durable, too, they don't break easily, so they can be taken to a safe disposal after burn out. Some object to the fact that CFLs take a while to reach rated luminosity and don't emit the same spectra of colors they like. That doesn't bother me; nor does the law Congress passed in the last decade.
Many people who post here don't believe in a link between global warming and increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. For those of you who don't (now I opened the gate), I say, folks, you don't know the relevant laws of physics and the evidence. Laws like the one mandating phase out of incandescents are intended to reduce power plant emissions; collectively, they make quite a difference. That Gov. Perry would promote this comes as no surprise to me. A NY Times article about 18 months ago found that % of Texans who associated global warming and more CO2 in the air lagged well behind U.S. citizens in general. Also the % who even believed Earth is warming.
mjh at June 30, 2011 6:27 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/06/30/texas_becomes_t.html#comment-2317942">comment from mjhSome object to the fact that CFLs take a while to reach rated luminosity and don't emit the same spectra of colors they like. That doesn't bother me;
Great! Then you can use them.
But what kind of vehicle do you drive? I drive a 2004 65 mpg Honda Insight hybrid (it gets 45 in slow traffic) -- a SULEV: Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle. How about we pass a law that you MUST drive the same car (and sorry that it's just a two-seater - you might have to leave the family home). Or, better yet, we'll legislate that you have to drive a horse and buggy!
I'm guessing that I save far more energy and pollute far less than you ever will with your mental institution-light lightbulbs by driving my tiny car, and with the way I drive it (I arranged my life so I barely drive anywhere, and when I do have to run an errand, I try to combine the trip with other errands/things to do in the area).
But, I live and write in a tiny house and I'm a very picky and sensitive person and I find the light from these bulbs ugly, depressing, and lacking in utility. When I turn the light on in my front room, it doesn't actually come on; it just starts flirting with the idea...glowing a little. I have a big flashlight in that room in case I need to see something right away.
This is the modern age?
Feel free to sheer sheep, spin wool, grow your own potatoes and do whatever else you think will be good for the planet. But, as I wrote before, you can tear my incandescent lightbulbs out of my cold, dead, beautifully lit hands.
Amy Alkon at June 30, 2011 6:34 PM
Many people . . . here don't believe in . . . global warming and increasing levels of CO2 . . . For those of you who don't . . . I say, folks, you don't know the relevant laws of physics and the evidence.
Posted by: mjh
mjh, I would like to point out that we are currently in an interglacial period of the current ICE AGE.
An ice age which has lasted more than 2.5 million yrs
And durring the last interglacial period the earth was warm enough for hippos to wallow in the rivers of Britian and millions of acres of forest to grow inside the artic circle, area currently under ice sheets and areas of permafrost where practically nothing grows due to the cold temperature.
So once it get warm enough for hippos to migrate to London I'll start to worry.
Until that happens being forced under government edict to buy lightbulbs which can cause mercury contamination if improperly: manufatured, stored, shipped, installed, used, or disposed of, not to mention the odd bulb which simply breaks for no reason or being dropped is a pisspoor way to 'save' the enviornment.
lujlp at June 30, 2011 9:22 PM
Re: "Feel free to sheer sheep, spin wool, grow your own potatoes and do whatever else you think will be good for the planet. But, as I wrote before, you can tear my incandescent lightbulbs out of my cold, dead, beautifully lit hands"
Cheer up, you'll always be able to buy incandescents on the black market for a damned long time.
mjh at July 1, 2011 7:40 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/06/30/texas_becomes_t.html#comment-2318953">comment from mjhCheer up, you'll always be able to buy incandescents on the black market for a damned long time.
I ordered 120 of them in December. Hoarding!
Amy Alkon at July 1, 2011 8:02 AM
Re: "mjh, I would like to point out that we are currently in an interglacial period of the current ICE AGE."
lujlp, I'd like to point out to you that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was about 280 ppm about 250 years ago, and it is now about 390 ppm and rising fast. And that researchers have found that atmospheric CO2 levels were comparatively stable for millenia prior to the last 250 years.
Also, that a scientific consensus was reached by the late 1890s that CO2 is a heat trapping gas. Not too long after, Max Planck's quantum theory provided an explanation for the phenomenon.
Researchers have found that CO2 is strongly absorbent of infrared radiation (IR) at about 4.2 microns and also in the range of 14-16 microns. Objects and bodies of water on earth continuously emit IR at these wavelengths, however, radiation emissions by the sun in these ranges are negligible.
Last I heard scientists had no clear explanation of why earth has ice ages. Variations in solar output are one suspect. But worldwide warming is an unsurprising consequence of a steady increase in atmospheric CO2 levels. There's good evidence that the warming is retarding agricultural output and every reason to think worse is in store. Global warming may not concern you, but rising sea levels are already making live more difficult for people in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia, for example. Expect many more adverse consequences in the future. The laws of nature rule every time.
mjh at July 1, 2011 8:12 AM
mjh, I'm not saying global warming isnt real, I think it is. I'm not aying global warming isnt a problem, I think it is.
What I am saying is that it is not such a huge, overwelming, "WE GOTTA DO SOMTHING NOW" problem that govenrment intervention down to the types of ligtbulbs people are legally allowed to by is neccesary.
Alot of people arent idiots and can see quite clearly that most politicains 'concern' for the global warming problem has more to do with who is finacing their reelection campaign than any humanitarian goals.
Its like those nut job neofeminists who claim nearly 300,000 children are sold in to sex slavery every year, therefore all prostitution and pornography should be made illegal. Aside from fellow ideolgical zealots everyone else can see that the numbers dont add up.
Until global warming advocates stop preaching the end of the world people just dont want to listen. Quite frankly I think the best thing that could happen is a couple of island nations get sunk below rising sea waters, people would finally pay attention.
Also global warming advocates need to start saying the planet will survive just fine no matter waht we do, how comfortable and survivable it becomes for the human species is what the question is.
But like I said, lightbulbs aint gonna fix it, plus we need to stay at out current tech level in order to evolve beyond it to find a real solution, not just apply a pressure dressing and hope the damage fixes itself over time
lujlp at July 1, 2011 9:16 PM
GW just another name for totalitarianism. First the light bulbs, then travel is controlled, ultimate weapon is always food. Stalin and Mao starved millions. Now Australia issues Carbon Credit cards to be redeemed for food.
Same methods, just a different justification.
dagny at July 2, 2011 10:01 AM
Re: "Also global warming advocates need to start saying the planet will survive just fine no matter waht we do, how comfortable and survivable it becomes for the human species is what the question is."
A lot of people who are probably inclined to dismiss global because it hasn't & probably never will cause a single disaster on the magnitude, say, of an asteroid strike. In fact, the most probable manifestation of global warming is likely to be a gradual but very real degradation in the quality of life on earth. It also seems counterintuitive to people that heavier snowfalls are a predictable consequence of global warming.
Just how fast it is progressing were evident to me from an article I read last fall. In Siberia, houses that once rested solidly on permafrost are now losing structural support due to melting of permafrost. In the same article, a Russian scientist demonstrated to the reporter leakage of methane (a flammable gas) from the Siberian earth by igniting it. Molecule for molecule, methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, so the leakage of methane once trapped in ice into the atmosphere is a matter of considerable concern.
I respectfully disagree with you, Amy and others about banning manufacture & sale of incandescents. Political action is usually very crude; in this case, I think crude political action is warranted.
mjh at July 2, 2011 11:23 AM
"Laws like the one mandating phase out of incandescents are intended to reduce power plant emissions; collectively, they make quite a difference"
Actually, no they don't, if you bothered to check the 'scientific facts' you claim to espouse, you'd find that the switchover will result in an adjustment to greenhouse gas emissions of less than 1%.
CFLs, on the other hand, are full of one of the most nastiest and problematic toxins facing mankind, namely Mercury, and will very certainly result in even higher amounts of this crap in our food supply and going into the mouths of our babies. And all you sacrificed for all this was liberty! Well done!
Lobster at July 2, 2011 11:19 PM
Re: "CFLs, on the other hand, are full of one of the most nastiest and problematic toxins facing mankind, namely Mercury, and will very certainly result in even higher amounts of this crap in our food supply and going into the mouths of our babies. And all you sacrificed for all this was liberty! Well done!"
I wonder, where's the data?
mjh at July 3, 2011 12:47 PM
Leave a comment