Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
> http://enews.penton.com/enews/powerquality/power_quality_news_beat/2007_march_16_march_16_2007/display
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2orhxz
>
>
> A recent article in the New York Times reports that a coalition of
> industrialists, environmentalists, and energy specialists is banding
> together to try to eliminate the incandescent light bulb in about 10
> years.
>
> In a recently announced agreement, the coalition members, including
> Philips Lighting, the largest manufacturer of incandescent light
> bulbs; the Natural Resources Defense Council; and two efficiency
> organizations, are pledging to press for efficiency standards at the
> local, state, and federal levels. The standards would phase out the
> ordinary screw-in bulb, technology that arose around the time of the
> telegraph and the steam locomotive, and replace it with compact
> fluorescents, light-emitting diodes, halogen devices, and other
> technologies that may emerge.
>
>
> The article goes on to say that the agreement is a compromise among
> the participants. Some favored an outright ban on incandescent bulbs,
> like the one Australia said last month it would seek by 2009 or 2010.
> Philips, a unit of Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands, has
> pledged with others doing business in Europe to seek a shift to more
> efficient lighting there, too.
>
>
> The announcement commits coalition members to seek "a market phaseout"
> by 2016. General Electric, the largest American manufacturer of
> lighting, has recently been campaigning against the elimination of
> incandescent bulbs, and promising instead to bring out a new model
> that is twice as efficient as its current bulbs. The company is not
> part of the new coalition, but has allied itself with the Natural
> Resources Defense Council in another group called the United States
> Carbon Action Program, which seeks to control emissions of greenhouse
> gases through energy conservation.
>
>
>
> xponent
>
> A Good Idea Maru
>
> rob
Yes, an absolutely wonderful idea that disregards the fact that a number
of people, including a significant number of autistic people, have
problems under fluorescents (even the compact ones) and LEDs.
If some exception is made for medical/neurological reasons, to where you
could still get the incandescents if you were unable to function under
any other sort of artificial lighting (and there are individuals with
this problem, who have tried everything and had to go back to the
incandescents), then I could get behind it -- but without that
exception, I cannot support it, no matter how much it will do for the
environment.
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
