Comments (30) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   Al S. said, 2 months ago

   After yesterday’s theme, it’s beginning to sound like a broken… digitally compressed audio file.
   .
   And so it goes….
2. 

   Michael wme said, 2 months ago

   I calculated yesterday that lighting amounts to 12% of electricity use, so energy-efficient bulbs, which save about 80% over incandescent bulbs, could save about 10% of our total electric use. This was a vast overestimate of the potential savings on my part, since most industrial lighting is already fluorescent, so there won’t be any savings there, only households where the residents detest and despise the light from energy-saving bulbs are being prodded to change, so the total savings in electricity usage is much less than 10%.

   
   Just another cosmetic effort which won’t make much real difference. Especially since there are ways for the determined to continue to use incandescent bulbs, while those of us who are misers switched years ago.
3. 

   PICTO said, 2 months ago

   I’m not sure if having cheaper ideas is the wisest course of action…
4. 

   Joadtom said, 2 months ago

   @Michael wme

   Actually, there are new fluorescents that are twice as bright. I sell them. Two of ours replce the four old type. Add a new ballast and we reduce electrical use for lighting by 70%. One big place I just did will save over $250,000 every five years. It cost $80,000. Gold and silver can’t touch iy as an investment, no risk of loss. A no-brainer.
5. 

   Overtaxed said, 2 months ago

   If socialist loser eco-terrorist ideas are so great, why must they be mandated by the big socialist government and violate the Constitution? If this was so much better, people would be trying to get as much as they can afford. A perfect example is Henry Ford’s Model T. Did big socialist government have to mandate everybody go out and get one? No. Ford sold them as fast as his very well paid non-union employees could build them and did it without the help of a loser government and the socialist losers. Today, he would probably either get locked up in prison or forced to move to China. Why? Doesn’t matter. The socialists will find a reason.
6. 

   jrgrizz57 said, 2 months ago

   @cfortunato

   So anything that results in less than 10K deaths per day should just be quietly accepted? “Government crackdown on dissidents in county X leaves 9999 dead”: no worries; less than 10K. “New disease killing 9999 per day”: why push for a cure when there are 10000 who will starve to death.

   10,000 people are going to starve to death tonight, but YOU had to read comments from people complaining about something unpopular.
   Poor baby.
7. 

   Stipple said, 2 months ago

   My house has a mix of HID, LED, and those hated CFLs.
   One room has incandescent bulbs on a rheostat for very low reddish light, a red LED would do the same almost, but the incandescent has a different ‘feel’ to the light and only averages about ten watts to use.
   .
   All the modern lights get 90 to 100 lumens per watt compared to under 20 lumens per watt for the bulbs using hot glowing metal for their light source.
   Add any shade of color preferred and the choice is easy and the government does not even enter into the picture.
   .
   I see this as similar to California banning bias ply tires in favor of radials, nanny state for the ignorant.
   Act like children and get treated like children.
8. 

   ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

   @Overtaxed

   Without Nanny State Government slaying the “Job creator” trusts, Ford would never have been able to produce his Model A.

   As to the well paid employees, what are you? some kind of commie?
9. 

   CCNJ's say the sky is falling said, 2 months ago

   @ReasonsVentriloquist

   Ford giveth, the unions taketh away.
10. 

    Larry said, 2 months ago

    On the lamps I have, the spiral goes the other way.
    (Witty cartoons, today and yesterday.)
11. 

    omQ Release the Desaparecidos said, 2 months ago

    @Al S.

    :-)
12. 

    Rad-ish said, 2 months ago

    @Gore Bane

    When are you going to change your ugly exploytative avatar?
13. 

    TheTrustedMechanic said, 2 months ago

    @CCNJ's say the sky is falling

    Ford paid “$5 a day” but only if you were the “right” kind of employee. If you were a woman, sorry you don’t get $5. If you were a minority or of the wrong religious belief, sorry you don’t get $5 either. If you were a white male of the “right” religious belief then congratulations, only you deserve $5 a day. Unions had nothing to do with Ford’s unequal and mistreatment of his employees. Truly someone for the CONservatives to admire.
    .
    But your screen-name is very apropos. You are proud to be a CON, as in con-man or CONservative, not that there is much difference really.
14. 

    TheTrustedMechanic said, 2 months ago

    The ban on incandescent light bulbs was part of the The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The act was signed into law by baby bush on December 19, 2007, in response to his “Twenty in Ten” challenge to reduce gasoline consumption by 20% in 10 years. So baby bush wanted it, he just wouldn’t accept the Democrats’ desire to eliminate the special subsidies going to the oil and gas industry. Because as a good bought and paid for republican he couldn’t/wouldn’t end wasteful and unnecessary special treatment of his pet industry. The CONservatives need to get over this feigned outrage, but of course until their thought control propaganda masters tell them to be outraged over something else, I guess this is the “thought/outrage du jour.”
15. 

    TheTrustedMechanic said, 2 months ago

    @Al S.

    Nice.
    Love the satire.
16. Load the rest of the comments (15).