Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
  1. #61
    Well why doesn't the government just tell us which is the best product of everything and ban everything else?
    Seriously you guys are so blind.

    I've read about how they banned all other toilets but those with a certain water saving flusher.
    The end result was that people couldn't freaking get their shit down the toilet, but the manufacturers of those kind of idiotic flushers made good money thanks to the government. Those who made water-consuming flushers had to adapt and start producing shitty flushers to stay in business.
    Last edited by Diurdi; 2011-05-18 at 10:45 AM.

  2. #62
    In this case they are right to do this, because the old light bulbs are really, really inefficient. There is so much that can be done with this energy instead.
    The only problem with this is that the some of the new light bulbs might have unexpected effects on human health because of a number of things, and the least dangerous of them is insomnia. They are relatively safe in short periods of time, but we have no idea what they can do to someone that is exposed to them every day for decades. Though, if you live in a big city, you're exposed to much dangerous things for your health every day.
    Last edited by haxartus; 2011-05-18 at 12:35 PM.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by shockpally View Post
    As far as light bulbs go I dont want to spend $30 for a 2 pack of CFL's (walmart) when i can get a 4 pack of regular bulbs for $3.50.
    I guess if you want to over pay, then yeah.

    http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-...atalogId=10053

    ^$8 for 4 60W equivalent CFL bulbs. Way cheaper than what you're proposing. I also picked up 20 of them when they were on sale for $5 a 4 pack. Replaced most of the bulbs in my place, and save lots of money on electric.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by haxartus View Post
    In this case they are right to do this, because the old light bulbs are really, really inefficient. There is so much that can be done with this energy instead.
    The only problem with this is that the some of the new light bulbs might have unexpected effects on human health because of a number of things, and the least dangerous of them is insomnia. They are relatively safe in short periods of time, but we have no idea what they can do to someone who is exposed to them every day for decades. Though, if you live in a big city, you're exposed to much dangerous things for your health every day.
    So when people get sick because of the lightbulbs, do they sue the manufacturer or the government?

  5. #65
    Manufacturer. It's their responsibility to make a safe product, not the governments.

    Either way, far to many people are stupid, so it is indeed necessary to force them to act intelligently.
    Common sense is anything but common.

  6. #66
    Epic! Tokru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The end of the rainbow
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by haxartus View Post
    In this case they are right to do this, because the old light bulbs are really, really inefficient. There is so much that can be done with this energy instead.
    The only problem with this is that the some of the new light bulbs might have unexpected effects on human health because of a number of things, and the least dangerous of them is insomnia. They are relatively safe in short periods of time, but we have no idea what they can do to someone that is exposed to them every day for decades. Though, if you live in a big city, you're exposed to much dangerous things for your health every day.
    And?

    Did we ever had any idea of the long term effects when a new product was invented/released?

    Did they test the old light bulbs first, or did they sell them?

    Why does everybody buy an iPad? We have no idea what it can do do to someone that is using it every day for decades.

  7. #67
    Pandaren Monk Willeonge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Greyt Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    1,997
    "Laws should be made of iron, not of pudding."

    “A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward.”

    - King Stannis Baratheon

  8. #68
    The Patient Rennix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    313
    I'm all about saving money on my electricity bill and helping out the environment, but the smoke burning from a hole in my wallet will probably override that.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by zakayron View Post
    Use flourescent (sp?) and get more natural light while saving money on AC and electric bills.
    Natural light, huh? Flickering in CFL is extremely tiring for the eyes, it's just unpleasant to be in a room lit by fluorescent lights.
    Life is short Glory is eternal

  10. #70
    How many 100w bulbs do you have? I have 0 in my house, all of my light fixtures say 60w max or less..... I use CLF's in some areas, and incandescents in other areas.

    CFL's use so little mercury it would take busting several bulbs in your face while locked in a closet to inhale any measurable amount.

    While I am not all for CFL's, I do believe the government has a responsibility to curtail unsustainable, damaging, or overly costly use of natural resources within the country. I feel forcing manufactures to either meet efficiency standard or not produce the product is along those lines given the amount of energy saved.

    The biggest question in my mind in defense of incandescent bulbs is over the resource cost covering the life of the product. This includes the amount of energy used for production and disposal. I do believe the offset is worth it, but I have not done enough research to be sure.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    Manufacturer. It's their responsibility to make a safe product, not the governments.

    Either way, far to many people are stupid, so it is indeed necessary to force them to act intelligently.
    Common sense is anything but common.
    How come people ever switched from oil lamps to electric lamps in the first place?
    Oh that's right, because the eventually saw the superiority of the superior product.

    And why are we allowed to purchase other inferior products? Why lightbulbs?
    Especially as the old lightbulb has different charasteristics than the new one, namely lower initial cost but higher operating cost.
    What if someone needs a shitload of lightbulbs but don't plan to use them much. Now he's gonna have to pay alot more than if he had just got the cheaper old ones.

    It's an infringement upon people's freedom. Some people are actually capable to take care of themselves, and do not need a government to do that for them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •