“Republicans failed to grant Americans the freedom to buy inefficient light bulbs”

Interesting bunch of comments, but one thing seems to go unnoticed. This is NOT a mandate to buy CFLs.
LEDs also meet the standards and have no Hg inside them (though some Hg MAY be used in the more regulated process of manufacturing them). Within the next couple of years they will be cost competetive with CFLs.
I don't put much stock in the argument that CFLs hurt US manufacturing. No hard numbers at hand, but I have not seen an incandescent lamp marked 'Made in the USA' in decades.
And then there is the idea that anything that prohibits free choice is bad. Sadly, experience didtates that there are some people and companies who will do stuff that hurts others if they are allowed to exercise their 'free choice'. YOUR RIGHT TO FREE CHOICE ENDS WHEN SOMEONE ELSE HAS TO PAY HE PRICE FOR YOUR CHOICE. In the case of light bulbs the 'free market' might provide the necessary regulation - once the price of energy reaches sufficiently painful levels that folks notice the difference in operating costs. But as of now that point has, thankfully, not been reached.
Thanks Margery for starting another provocative discussion. This kind of rational exposition of differing views is the only thing that can save our democratic form of government and was exactly what the founding fathers counted on when they created a form of government where an educated population retains the power to govern themselves.

To Andy T : You explained a current situation perfectly. Yesterday I saw on TV that 75% of people did not want remove incandescent light.One of the "smart ones" from Congress said:"well , we still have to go with approved plan".ssolini.I always thought that government , congress and senat are "For the people and by the people".They just REPRESENT us.I love your final quote by Mussolini.NOTHING to add.Most should understand.As far as socialist countries almost a whole Europe is and some of them like Swefden and Switherland are quite well doing.Most of people follow media and are convinced that socialism=communism.

Igorance abounds among the "educated". Socialist does not equate to communist. Fascist does not equate to conservative. Despite what daddy told you or voted for because the rules have changed to corrupt, non-partisan, corporatism. US voters spoke twice, recently, against this, and it's still business as usual in DC. The only reason to have a government at all is for social benefit and order, for a COLLECTVE good - otherwise can do without a government at all. "Without" means no roads, no bridges, no schools, no plowed snow, no cops, no firefighters, poop in your water (actually no water as well), mercury and lead in the air, you being eleectrocuted while using your electric shaver at the bathroom sink, and buildings falling on you in a "mere" 5.0 earthquake. Regulation and sharing is a fundamental tenet of society, something fascists, and socially impaired Asperger engineers (most engineers are to a degree - before you deny or don't believe me, look at the symptoms and behaviors as well as page 2 here: www.webmd.com/brain/autism/tc/aspergers-syndrome-symptoms), can't grasp. The happiest countries in the world ( www.forbes.com/2010/07/14/world-happiest-countries-lifestyle-realestate-gallup-table.html ) have socialist policies and strict regulation, and a bit less in their wallets for a "good life"; the worst are fascist, autocratic, or communist, and it's a free-for-all with zero empathy for others, and a wallet stuffed full of cash which the desperate and hungry must commit murder and steal from just to get a meal. We are heading for the latter direction in the USA because having money (you fantasize it's you, but it's only 2% (not you), and corporations, that get that benefit) is a greater aspiration than happiness, health, and enlightenment (light bulb pun intended).
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Why should the government be able to tell me I cant have lead in my gasoline and why I cant carry my gun? Damn socialists.

Republicans failed to override some bad legislation and the press (Margery Conner, or her editor) failed to represent the truth.

I won't buy any CFLs as the only units I find in the retail stores are made in Communist China. I will not buy anything made in China. I'll do without first. If they want to sell it here, make it here. We need the jobs and until the democrates get out of bed with the communists, this country will go down hill.

I replaced all the canned incandescent floodlamps in our kitchen with CFLs, and tossed the old bulbs, thinking I'd never need them again. In less than a year two CFLs had burned out, and the rest smelled burnt. So I had to buy incandescents again. Some of the CFLs don't fit the fixtures designed for incandescents. And I have to turn off my bedside CFL lamp while the AM radio is on next to it because the CFL generates so much RFI. I'm all for energy efficiency, but forcing me to use CFLs that don't last, don't fit, and cause other problems is crazy.

I have worked with lighting sources for 20 years in my current position and here's the facts. The old CFL's that cost $10-$15 were great and would last the 10000 hours stated in their literature. Most were made by the major suplliers like GE and Phillips. The new CFL's are crap and if you get over 2500 hours out of them you are lucky even though they are now available up to 25000 hours. The new ones are mostly Chinese and do not meet our standards but nobody is doing anything about them. Every see a compact fluorescent stop working. Unless you put it in over 10 years ago you got hosed. The $15 ones in my house have all started tio finally die. Put them in around 1996. The new ones I replace all the time. The new color corrected HID sources are the way to go for now. One last itme incandescent lamps provide heating to your house in the Winter so if you live up north they still make sense for about 5 months per year.

How about we just start the lawsuits now ? We never learn do we. CFL's contain mercury and in 2 - 3 years we'll find that all this mercury is going to start contaminating all the groundwater because people are just going to throw them in the trash when they die, and yes they do die. The CFL's I've bought cost 5 times more than incandesent and still only lasted me a year before I had to replace them. We let the california govt do the same thing to us with MTBE in our gasoline and they didn't listen to us and 3 years later we had MTBE contaminating all of our ground water. If China shipped us products laced with mercury we'd be outraged but here we are doing it to ourselves. Wake up and start learning from our past mistakes. If I want to waste electricity and pay for it shouldn't I be able to spend my money any way I want to.

My last comment was not posted. I guess that I used incorect word "idiot". All I tried to say is that a lot of technical decisions made in Congress are made by Lawyers ,who have (most of the time) no idea about technical world.This is why they vote against trains , but support CFLs.Envoronmental impact of CFLs can be devastating.There is also a catastrophic scenerio or tornado or big storm. All those things will blow on overvoltage and most of them will explode , or creck releasing all toxic material contain within into an environment.CFLs are tragic on brownouts and like most of comments state don't last and are overprices, altough most of them are made below any limits of quality. There is also another aspect.Color of lights of Cfls and LEDs. Blue light is very dangerous to human eye and if you ask any eye doctor he/she will tell you that we should not EVER look at the blue or infrared or ultraviolet.Incandescent lights are closer in spectrum to Sun.There is even a company called SunLamp that makes fantastic lightbulbs immitating spectrum of sunlight.
Money ,lobbying and corporations should not influence our life and dictate what we can use.If they REALLY want to do that , why don't they check medicines better , so we have no recalls and thousands of people dying.Let people use the lights that they want and.....adding red and yellow LEDs to lamps does not move their light spectrum , it only fools us to think that the light is softer.It is a shame how little engineers know about light....and I thought that we sould know it all.

One of those rare occasion when House Republicans had it right.

Better yet, why don't you pick one, Incandescent, CFL, or LED, and shut up about it. Stop trying to ram YOUR vision of what we should want or buy down everyone else's throat...as I am sure you don't want the same being done to you. How blind can you be? Wait until you end up on the other side of a similar issue. I have all three bulbs in my home...it was my choice. I don't care if everyone buys CFL's and all incandescent manufacturers go out of business. I do, however, care that my government is supposing they have the right to tell me to buy one over the other, force me even. For you to feel that it is OK for government or you (or me) to do that is INSANE. You can't see the forest for the trees...WAKE UP! How complicated is this? How easily we all accept the trickle of tyranny...

If this was a Right to Die or a personnal issue it would be one thing. but this is about killing off the heat lamp. honestly the CFL and the LEDs are perfect sources of light. I use CFLs on construction sites, for fire safety reasons. like lead free gasoline, CFLs and LEDs are a huge thing for the environment and they last forever. I have had a 13 watt bulb on my sailboat now for 12 years. on all night every night. never a problem and super efficient.
we still have choice, CFL or LED. pick one. and shut up about it

Let's just keep standing by while government usurps every right we have. Let's listen to Wayne who so eloquently stated, "...and forget about the political debate on taking away someone's choice."
Yup. What's the big deal about taking away someone's choice?? So silly, people worrying about being able to make their own decisions, what rubbish! We definitely need to stop worrying about people being able to choose...just as long as we agree with Wayne's choices. Right Wayne? Because you would be just fine with us taking away your right to choose when the tide was pulling out the other way from your personal belief system. Right comrade?
What's this constitution mumbo jumbo? Negative rights horse hockey...its a living, breathing document that needs to change with the times...just as long as it changes to match Wayne's belief system...ain't that right sunshine?
Yeah, Wayne, I thank God (uh-oh, the G-word...hope I didn't offend to many of you) that I have you here to make my decisions for me...or at least to advise me how silly I am to worry about being allowed to make my own decisions. Gosh, I feel down right silly now that you explained to me how silly I am worrying about a minor little thing like personal choice. Kind of like abortion, right? A woman's right to choose? Oh wait, what's this choose business? Shouldn't the government be making these decisions for us? I mean c'mon, who knows better what type of bulb to screw in or when to pull the cake out of the oven after getting screwed...not like you can trust silly old people to make these decisions themselves...geez, calm down people...Wayne got ya' covered...just as long as you side with him on all decisions. If you don't, well, consider it your chance to be enlightened you silly little goose!
Want to make your own decisions and have the right to do so...so silly...so so silly...

"Incand waste 95% of consumed watts." That's only if you call heat "waste". Incandescent bulbs are only inefficient if you aren't in an environment where you are heating your building. In other words: winter, or all year in some areas.

What?!? CFLs have Mercury in them? Where is Jenny McCarthy when we need her most?

What does "Republican" have to do with this topic? Come on EDN lets keep things focused on technology and lets not go political. The inverse statement could be "Democrats insist on forcing citizens to use cancer causing lightbulbs". Politics is every where today lets keep it out of EDN!

It's not about you or Republicans or Democrats, you dim bulbs. It's about creating a churn in lighting to make windfall revenues in a stagnating market. Wall St wants mo' money and there's no better way than to be able to charge 3X (at least, for LED more like 20X) for a lightbulb. Look at the killing Philips is making in government building retrofits.
Sorry - nobody cares about you or you being poisoned - just for what little is left in your wallet.

This is ridiculous, folks! It's okay for the government to force us into an unnecessary war that's breaking our fiscal back and decimating our brave soldiers, or to limit our civil liberties under the scare of "terror", but wrong to motivate the laggard power consuming few to use more energy efficient bulbs? In what century are we living?

For a country who put people in jail for pro-communism we are sure heading in the wrong direction. We are forced to buy car and health insurance, strip-searched in airports, the first lady dictates what we should eat, politicians mandate what kind of light bulbs we should buy, in other words, Uncle Sam is managing our lives. People, this is communism! Believe me, I lived through it and ran away from it only to end up where I started, minus the advantages (like free education). Whether it comes from Republicans or Democrats, it's all the same to me, it's anti-democratic.

s539r
You don't have to be intelligent to be a senator or a representative, only popula! It is far easier to buy votes than to earn them with intelligent decisions. Those of us living in the cold north use 100% of the energy of incandescent bulbs ... just more as heat than as light.

Total bias rubbish. The headline is an embarrassment to thinking people. The time will soon come to make a change, but CFLs have there own problems. To rush this for political purposes is a disservice to the folks living with the consequences. The author is ridiculous!

Our universe is changing evey day folks, we can debate choice, government mandates, etc., all day lng, but we have LIMITED resources ob this planet and no technical means on the horizon to get more than what we have beneath our feet. Let's continue to move toward smarter ways to use our resources, and forget about the political debate on taking away someone's choice. Think about the planet with no rules or standards of any kind - i.e., "infinite personal choice". I doubt anyone would like it that way - no economies of scale, everything costs more, etc. Just something to think about in between emails to your reprentatives to voice your feelings. Welcome to the future.

I just read that people are still able to sell bulbs in Europe labeled as heatballs!

I think that someboby wrote about this before, but we all are missing an important caracteristic of cheap CFL´s (and the not so cheap ones of earlier design), and is that they have an extremely bad power factor, so somewhere in the line that has to be compensated by the power utility, but without receiving revenues unless they raise the cost of the kW/h. In my opinion, CFL´s are a fail, and their carbon footprint far worse than of an incandescent lamp.

There is so much that I would like to write , but a lot of comments contain my thoughts.I just want to straighten a few statements up.
Politics has a part of life and NO government should tell people what to use, eat,drink , how to illuminate houses , how to dress or any other stuff.We are supposed to live in a free country.Just think about Chinese lobby for those nightmare CFLs and you will understand.Their life time is completely unacceptable.YES! They contain more than mercury on the inside surface.They cause high and dangerous spikes in a grid and emit tons of EMF ,but no one writes about it.LED may be a way to go, but it does not last forever , just a few years and it needs TONS of improvements.All manufacturers are building in a lifespan in every product, so do not count on miracles like your parents Zenith TV , or VCR bought in seventies that still works.Incandescent has one great value - IT LIVES LONG.I have a few that are about 35 years old and we know that a few Edison bulbs have been burning for 80 years now.I absolutely agree with a statement that every bulb has it's place.As for some writing about progress while using bulbs in a refrigerator - try one in a microwave and first of all do not call yourself an engineer.
I am sorry for Margery....so many people attacked her.Guys...she is trying to make you think, but many of us have blinders.I will go to South Carolina , or Texas to buy them.All we are doing is opening a black market.NOBODY is telling me what to use in my house , surely not someone that wants to fill my house with mercury laced products , that also explode.

Needlessly biased headlines so turn my stomach... Good luck.
Cancelling

You said it with "political math". Three bulbs is 300 watts. One Chevy Volt is 12000 to 15000 watts to charge.

Let me first say I have been using CFL's since they came out. I live in central Florida and the power surges kill incandescents. We also saw about a 10 to 15 % drop in our power bill. That being said I do believe it should be up to the individual to choose what type of light they want.
I have used many different brands of cfl's and the cheap Chinese bulbs don't last as long as say a Phillips so I choose to replace the ones that burnt out with the more expensive brands.
I also use 2 of the large 68 watt I beleive which is equivalent to a 300 watt Incandescent. $16 dollars a bulb but a great amount of light.
And for those who say you can't use a cfl in a refrigerator I have two 12 watt cfl's in mine. The same bulbs for 3 years, small spiral, small base. They take about 10 seconds to come up to full brightness but the white light is very nice compared to a warm light.
Like I have said I do believe it should be the individuals choice and mine was to try the new technology. Isn't that why we became engineers, to invent and try new methods and technology.

Come, come, now. Where are we going to get the electricity to charge up hubby's and wife's Chevy Volts. We could all help if we only converted 3 light bulbs from incandescent to CFLs. It'a all in the political math!

The Green movement is as much about socialism government control as it is about saving the planet.
I agree with Dave that framing the debate as "Republicans failed" is biased. My bias is that Democrats have failed.
The outrageous overspending and no desire to stop whatsoever .. and to increase taxes to continue the spending.. shows absolute stupidity. So how can they possibly be trusted with saving the planet?

I don't know where the politicians got the right to stick their noses into this matter, but I do resent their interference! Those dim bulbs are busy practicing engineering, medicine, and all sorts of other professions that require a lot more than simply winning a popularity contest. Maybe it's sour grapes on my part, but I don't think engineering should be done by anyone who isn't trained to be an engineer, and medicine shouldn't be practiced by anyone who doesn't have that particular training. I chose engineering as a career, but I see those idiot politicians making a mess of it.

Yes, everyone has their own opinion and slant on this, but the real crime is in the headline. The mass media, and now the technical media seem hell bent on writing headlines that do not match their story. The text of the story indicates "97% of Democrats vote to defeat bill to grant Americans the freedom to buy inefficient light bulbs". If miz Conner had turned her article in as an assignment, I would have failed her because her title does not correlate with her text. Maybe she needs to work for the NY Times where journalists get rewarded for this nonsense.

If EDN is a setting itself to be a political forum I can read the "Rags".
Cancel my subscription

Get over it, oblivions. You forfeited your liberties generations ago with the poisonous influence of state favors, such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, etc.

Thanks for reminding why I don't like "green" democrats any more than tea party republicans. Mandating CFLs is just as misguided as subsidizing ethanol.

What a lot of horse feathers.
The Republicans also previously squashed your democratic right to burn leaded gasoline!
Something that gets missed: incandescent light bulbs, particularly the kind that are legal for sale in the US, contain quite a lot of hazardous componds uncluding lead, lead oxide, chrome, etc. If you add up the total in as many bulbs as it takes to replace one CFL, the total HAZMAT is higher. Then there's the extra mercury released by coal power needed to make up for the extra power consumed.
If you hate mercury, have it banned from all products - BTW: CFLs would still pass based on the American 'percentage by weight' hazardous waste control schema.
I have already replaced all of my high-use lighting with LED lamps. None of them cost anywhere near $50 quoted by some genius. ROI is between 1.8 and 7 years depending on location but then lifetime increases in proportion (7 year ROI == lamp lifetime > my lifetime).
Of course you are free to have your collective heinies handed to you by the Chinese who already have you in the rearview mirror in this area of economic activity.

I think the hazardous mercury filled bulbs are the ones that should be banned. I will not buy the florescent bulb replacements. I do like LEDs, except they are extremely expensive. Incandescent bulbs should not be banned by the government.

What a political HACK! You failed to mention that the DEMOCRATS passed the current CFL legislation, you failed to mention that the DEMOCRATS voted against the current change and have the AUDACITY to claim the republicans failed to pass the bill! SHAME ON YOU! You should be fired for such an outright distortion!

Where does the efficiency bar get set?
Maybe the govt. should mandate that we all drive Smart Cars, or cars with even better mileage? That means that even Priuses should be junked.
Our economic system is not free-market, it is "political capitalism". Those companies who can't compete in the free-market decide instead to pay in to the system (through lobbying) to get special laws that protect them from the competition.

I didn't know that EDN is a political forum now. Probably should cancel my subscription now.

Wonderful! Now is 20 years when all of the broken CFLs in the landfills have leached mercury into the water tables and aquifers we will spend trillions to clean it up. OH wait since these bulbs are imported from China, we won’t have the trillions to use to clean up the mess. Yet another one-size fits all solution with no common sense applied.

Most politicians are not scientists and do not understand basic physical principles. They seem to be interested only in getting votes for a currently popular topic - green. Do they know there is a huge stockkpile of unsold CFLs and LEDs, which are obsolescing rapidly? Their manufacture was based on the mistaken assumption that the public would immediately accept innovative, but not there yet products. Why don't they spend some of the advertising millions on incandescent research?

What's all this political stuff?
I thought EDN was about engineering? Did they get bought out by Soros? I read EDN magazine to get a break from politics. Too bad they have to ruin a good thing with all this political stuff.

How unusual to read so many comments from people who make it clear that they have no idea what the legislation was actually about.
There was no intent to ban incandescents at all - the plan was to increase efficiency of any kinds of lighting, so high efficiency incandescents would have been perfectly legal - in plain English stop manufacturing heaters which output a tiny amount of light, and replace them with lights which output a tiny amount of heat.
For those people who wish to waste their hard-earned money the option to install thousands of lights where one would do remains open, just as they have the option to buy high gas mileage vehicles and drive everywhere by roundabout routes.

The market will decide.
As the alternatives to the good old light bulb sell, the prices will drop. Awareness of the contents of the alternatives (mercury etc) may change in response to the buyers decisions. I don't like having to travel 5 miles to get rid of a 4 ounce burnt out hazardous waste bulb so I watch for safer alternatives. I also watch for light quality so don't expect me to buy a CFL just because it is not a good old light bulb.

Republicans don't grant freedom. I seem to remember reading something about freedom being given by a Creator? Oh yeah, in the Declaration of Independence... Hah hah. Silly childish fairy tales. Now put your yoke back on, plebe.

All I can say is you voted for them!

The internet loves to plagiarize, cite, copy without any investigation, just as some of you have here - the heatball continues to proliferate as if some kind of folk hero.
The "globe heater" got shot down - it's been banned as the household light bulb that it is. Google translation of an administrative opinion on the heatball can be had on the heatball website. AKA, "it's a lightbulb". The opinion further uses the phrase "harebrained regimentation." as far as the amateur positioning of an incandescent bulb as a work of art and a source of heat only, wryly noting the China source of manufacture. Seems the German government isn't that daft after all :-) Did you guys think otherwise?
Of course, the lawyers are more than happy to continue to collect fees and bask in the PR, so an appeal is being heard on July 26...good luck with that,idiots.

Hi Phil, all.
I think the guy/company/manufacturer you are speaking about is in Germany, not the good OLD USofA!
If our country is to get back on its feet in a sustainable way, we MUST become self-sufficient in everything!! Otherwise, there are no bootstraps with which one can improve his/her station in life.
Incandescent Light Bulb (ILB) manufacturing may not be exciting to some, but could be providing clean rewarding jobs for 1,000s of folks here at home.
GE has let US down. They shut down production here, and build off-shore. IMHO, GE should not be allowed to sell off the ILB assets since they, in collusion (IMHO) with the government, closed down the business. The assets should be passed free and clear to the folks that work the plant; that have a real stake in the ILB success.

LED bulbs (the Philips 12.5 watts) are only $20 in my state, due to .... drum roll.... a nice power company subsidy.
I'm gradually phasing out my CFLs with LEDs.
Karen

@Phil Crocker, some German guys already done that.
Just do the search for "German man imports banned light bulbs in as heaters"

@Phil Crocker: Already been done in EURO.
Just do the search for "German man imports banned light bulbs in as heaters".
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2608906/posts
www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/15/us-germany-heatballs-idUSTRE69E4EM20101015?feedType=RSS&feedName=oddlyEnoughNews&rpc=22&sp=true
On their official site (heatball.de/), the two describe the heatballs as “action art” and as “resistance against legislation which is implemented without recourse to democratic and parliamentary processes.”

I have heard about a guy that was planning on selling 60, 75 and 100 watt glass globe electric heaters and bypassing the incandescent lamp ban.

Mandate means you lose your freedom of choice. Your forefathers faught for that. They thought it was worth something.

I have a solution that will put the government in its place.
Rewire electrical fixtures that use two or more bulbs, in series. Yes the light output will be less, but the incandescent lamps will now last virtually forever. while adding warmth to the spectrum.
I use series connected incandescent bulbs as space heaters in the winter time to protect outdoor plumbing from freezing. Try doing that with CFLs! Hell, can't even get a FL of any configuration to start reliability in that environment.
If CFLs are it! Then we had better hope Gore is right about global warming or things could get mighty dark.
Finally, Why don't the CEOs of US Incandescent Bulb manufacturers just tell the government to go to hell on this issue? Do we not live in a free country?

@ChrisP."Wow - all these engineers who don't know that incandescents put MORE mercury into our air and poison our fish."
Can you provide us the source for this info?
I do use both CFL and Incandescent, so I want to have a choice. I also use 100w bulbs for dummy load, a lot cheaper tahn buying 100w resistors.

Interesting headline, I think the author may have some prejudice. Bush signed a Democrat bill but he did not champion it. If we allow a nanny state, we deserve one! Free market gets rid of things that don't work and keeps things that do. The nanny state cannot do this.

from here you could see that politic is politic, without reasoning and thinking, and the democrats are no exception!

Philips has introduced incandescent bulbs that meet the energy saving requirements. The law doesn't require a certain technology, but requires a certain energy savings. So you can still use incandescent bulbs under the current law.

@Sparky An answer to Sparyk's comment: "While you're at it, you might as well tell me what kind of condom I'm allow to use" I would recommend not using the one your Dad used. It failed!

Hey Ya'll!
I know, lets drop the CFL's and use LED bulbs. Let's see... just $40 to $50 each. Did our Leaders think of that? The thieves will stop taking copper and start stealing light bulbs. And can you see putting CFL's in the chandelier?
Those of us who own sensitive equipment (like my recording studio) will tell you that CFL's cause electrical pollution- they radiate RF. So can LED's, for that matter, with their PWM circuits. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the phosphor coating inside the flourescent lamp toxic? Guess I had better lay in a supply of candles. It would be nice if THEY used their brains before making rash decisions.

I'm not sure why the government is involved in this as lighting is only 9% of energy usage as stated at the following URL: 205.254.135.24/emeu/recs/recs2001/enduse2001/enduse2001.html
We have far more pressing problems than lighting-related electricity usage.

Congress is so disconnected from main street. They make laws, but they are exempt. They pass a health care plan, but they are exempt. Freedom is what made this country and these laws are undermining the ultimate sacrifice some have made. When figuring total bulb efficiency another factor is climate. I live in a northern state and 95% of the year I am OK with the heat given off from incandescent bulbs. During the cooler and winter months for the entire US incandescent bulbs are 100% efficient - producing both heat and light and your main heating runs less! That is heat for my home and something congress will never represent in this 'light'.

Jon Stewart was right to poke fun at this absurd debate (we're about to adjust credit rating on USA and shut down the government and we're debating a 4 year old bill that should be left alone). 90% of the rest of the world is going the other way fir the RIGHT reason and we continue this lack of forward progress in the name of free markets. The USA has proven a laggard on important environmental / energy issues- our petroleum and grid are proof positive that our free markets aren't driving the correct long-term thinking- lighting is no exception...

@Reagle: you do realize that your homeowner's policy is void if someone gets electrocuted or you have a fire as a result of that "not for wet (outdoor) use" LED bulb? You are using it outside UL approval conditions which makes it at your own risk.

You folks either need to read the law before you comment on it, or run for Congress with the qualifications. Refrigerators, ovens, dryers, mines and other "harsh" locations (Margery's EZ-bake oven?) are exempt from the incandescent ban.
Now, if we can fund a harmful impurity in Chinese glass and ban it, we're all set.

The sad thing is that no one has addressed here (nor in Congress, apparently) the fact that CFL's produce sharp lines rather than the wide-spectrum light of incandescents. For many people, this makes fluorescent lighting obnoxious at best, painful at worst. So let's see: fluorescents don't work in extreme environments (extreme like winter, refrigerators, stoves), break easily when you try to screw them into sockets, require special cleanups, are more expensive up-front, and unless built very well spew UV light into unsuspecting eyes, leading to cataracts and other medical problems, overheat, can't be disposed of without costing more money on the back end, and rob the US of jobs for US citizens, instead making Red China and certain politicians rich. Incandescents can be tuned to save power, don't have anything noxious in them, stand up to insertion and removal, cost less and can be disposed of without extra expense, produce light similar to the Sun, and are thus more comfortable on the eyes, and don't emit harmful UV. So of course, our do-gooder legislature wants to outlaw incandescents and force us to buy CFLs. The cure for this is not in forcing this congress or this senate to be less stupid and self-serving and greedy. It is to exercise the vote and remove these people, replacing them with conscientious, intelligent, knowledgeable people who aren't sold out to special interests.

Re: outdoor lamps. CFLs do indeed suck in outdoors fixtures, but a $18 Philips LED lamp from home depot works fine in all weather and has no warm up. But for things like ovens, we'd be still stuck with "specialty" incandescents that the bill IMHO is excluding anyways

I was an early adopter of CFLs, even the early magnetically ballasted versions. In some applications they are well suited. My experience however is that they don't live up to many of their claims. For one they lifetime of the bulbs is no where near the claimed lifetime, and in fact in many cases shorter than an incandescent. In my master bath it has 4 globe bulbs, one is an old standard garden variety incandescent the other 3 are Feit brand CFLs purchased from Costco. The incandescent has outlasted every CFL in the fixture. The CFLs also start painfully slowly and get worse with age. On the same fixture the differences are obvious when first turning on the fixture, and then after even several minutes the various bulbs are still getting to full brightness. CFL R30 replacements in our kitchen last about about 2 years, about the same or less than standard incandescents, and much much less than the "builder" 130V bulbs that last practically forever. Again, the lights don't reach full brightness for several minutes, and is really very annoying. I just took a bag full of failed bulbs to the hazardous material dump, I'm quite sure the average person just throws them in the trash without a thought. I also expect that energy used to manufacture the CFL and all the components in it must be higher than for an incandescent. All the semiconductors need to be fabricated at very high heat, then packaged, reflow soldered, all consuming large amounts of energy. Does anyone factor in the energy used to manufacturer the bulb and its components? Or because that happens in China it doesn't matter? It's ironic that after giving CFLs more than a fair chance over years, at the point I'm considering switching back to incandescent that I won't be able to due to big brother invading my light socket. I am an electrical engineer, and I can certainly do my own math for total cost of use over the life of the bulb. Give me the option to make my own, informed choice. I'll use CFLs where they make sense, LEDs as they become practical, and incandescents where they are the best solution. Interestingly, unlike other posts, I live in S. Florida, and CFLs are great in my outdoor coach lights. For that application the start up time isn't significant, and they have few start cycles as they are on a timer and start once per day. However in my bathroom or garage where the bulb may be cycled frequently reducing life and being tremendously annoying with slow starting, incandescent is likely a better choice. Bottom line, give the consumer the choice!

What idiots. I really hate saving money when buying electricity. And what will I do with all that extra time when I am not out buying replacement incandescent bulbs? I am appalled! I was planning on making a fortune buiding nuclear plants, and who cares about the extra coal burned to keep all those incandescent bulbs burning brightly?

The quantity of mercury in a CFL is far less than in a mercury fever thermometer. But even so, you should never feed your children broken florescent lamps, compact or otherwise. Now somebody needs to explain how to melt the snow and ice off from my outside light fixtures, which, even if they would work at zero, CFL devices don't produce enough heat to melt snow or ice. What we must remember is that all of our congressmen and senators are fairly wealthy, and never have to deal directly with the problem of not being able to afford something.

Wow - all these engineers who don't know that incandescents put MORE mercury into our air and poison our fish.
Yes people are too stupid to do the right thing. That's why libertarianism will never work. Most Americans still believe in a god and think the world has endless resources.

Why don't we just let government run and regulate every aspect of our lives? After all, they know what's best for us, right? I suppose the next move by government is to ban bacon...because, let's face it, saturated fats and excessive sodium is bad for you. (While you're at it, you might as well tell me what kind of condom I'm allow to use).

Send the CFL's and the power switches that ARC because of them to the Republicans.

Without a law, more efficient lights would win out over incandescents in the marketplace anyway, and we would still have incandescents for those few applications where they are better. This was just a feel-good law that made all the politicians look like they are doing something for the environment.

“Republicans failed to grant Americans the freedom .....
That should read Democrats, right?????? I'm detecting a pattern here.

Isn't there a debt ceiling we'are about to reach?

Years ago, I replaced ALL the light bulbs with cfl's. Our electric bill dropped about $15 every month.That's well over 1 kilobuck saved. The outdoor lamps are still old style, but they are only on for a minute or so. Now that inflation has raised the bill again, it's time for LEDs.Our new flashlight has a 5 watt LED at 200 lumens. Much better( and cheaper) than the old types.

I am sure there are exceptions to the bill. For example, you can't use CFL in your refrigerator. I tried using CFL bulbs in an outdoor fixture and in the winter they don't work. But aside from that it is silly to mandate this sort of thing. The market will sort it out without "Big Brother" telling us what to do. Next they will be requiring ethanol in our gasoline... no, even Congress wouldn't be that stupid!

The arguments for keeping incandescent bulbs are just like the bulbs themselves – generating more heat than illumination.

I always love these comments. You want the freedom to choose what light source you wish to use. You want the freedom to choose how much power your household consumes. The only thing you do not want is user pays pricing.
=
There are massive subsidies so that users do not pay the full cost of the power delivered. There is a push to upgrade aging distribution infrastructure yet nobody wants to have to pay for it. Many cities are short of power, yet nobody wants to pay for, or wait for new power stations.
=
So how many of those who have posted comments here would support the following bill:
=
Outlawing Corporate welfare, user pays the full cost of power.
No cross-subsidies, user pays for full cost of power.
No federal money, local/state users pay full cost of power.
=
If you want freedom of choice, you need to be prepared to pay the price.

Why blame Democrats! George Bush signed the 2007 legislation requiring high effeciency light bulbs.

passing a bad amendment to a bad law is still a bad idea. Yes there are many places where the "more efficient" CFL is actually less efficient [read: useless] (Oven, dryer, outside lights below 50F), hazardous environments (mines, play areas, etc), so the existing law really needs to be scrapped completely and written to make some sense. This amendement would have still allowed mandating LEDs, but both LEDs and CFLs will not work in my oven, dryer, or with the built-in lighting circuit dimmer switches in my house

Another point that people, including the politicians, miss is that CFLs are a dangerous fire hazard. All fluorescent lamps require a ballast to provide the high starting voltage and to limit current through the gas discharge tube. The ballast in a CFL is a circuit board about the size of a quarter that is located in the plastic base of the bulb. As the gas tube ages, the ballast draws more current and begins to run hotter than normal. When the bulb fails, the ballast may get hot enough to ignite the plastic base, starting a fire with flaming, dripping melted plastic. Want to use CFLs? Better make sure your fire insurance is paid up.
I used to love the USA when it was still a free country. May God damn our Congressmen and the lobbyists who control them!

Where are the jobs, none made in America...so the argument is they are not made here?? well then the the free market would dictate that someone start a business making them or LEDs here. Better yet spend some money on R&D and build an even better lighting product. what we need to do is stop trying to prop up antiquated industries for the sake of bandwagoning (it was Bush's bill anyway) and get on the innovation bandwagon. I'm sure the relaxation of EPA rules the republican congress wants to do will expose you to more toxic mercury and other chemicals than any light bulb...get real.

Another textbook example of how stupid the US congress is....

Hey Wayne, lay off my 8-Tracks. I happen to like to listen to Steppenwolf while cruising down the road with that ol' familiar, ker-chunk, ker-chunk.

Your choice of a title betrays your bias. Is there anything you do that is less efficient than it could be that you fear know-it-all politicians might ban some day? Your car? The path you drive to work or the store? Your eating habits? Your house temperature? Your kids' health care? Where do you draw the line? Are you close enough to the elite class that you are guaranteed an exemption that the rest of us might have to live by? What about king & queen Obama eating high saturated fat foods while lecturing the rest of us against it? The total amount of energy saved by mandating CLFs is miniscule if an honest assessment is done that includes the manufacturing and disposal issues. Stop with the ignorant jumping on the bandwagon just because it seems cool... to other ignoramuses. It makes you look, well, ignorant!

Yeah, but Congress didn't have to outlaw the 8-track player. Jeesh.

Wow, such brilliance from DC (not direct current!) The mercury is negligible but the applications are the real issue. Just turn on your porch light at midnight when its -10 outside and I hope you can see! Fluorescents have their place but so do incandescents.

Not only are the CFLs a mercury hazard if you should happen to break one, I can't even get my recycler to accept ones that have failed. I was told that it costs $$$ for the first level recycler to forward them to another recycler for mercury removal. So when asked what to do, he just shrugged - I'm in business to make money from trash, not have trash cost me money. I guess that means that CFLs go to the landfill.

Anybody who thinks this through will see the problems. Large numbers of the bulbs will be going straight into landfills. A small amount of mercury becomes a large amount when these bulbs start hitting the landfills. Just like plug in cars, small numbers of CFL's are managegable. But if everyone in the country had a plug in car, imagine the power plants needed to charge them all. The loss of efficiency becomes a disaster. You have to look at end-to-end efficiency, not just the consumer's "electric bill".

Next we'll be told to put CFL's in car headlights, to conserve fuel. The Feds are stupid enough it wouldn't surprise me.

In the recent past, we had a mercury scare in seafood, watch the mercury poisoning rise like the mesothelioma (asbestos) cases. I have a stockpile of lamps (is a CFL a lamp?) Till the LED technology catches up. As an old curse goes "may you live in interesting times" Later ALL

I too am concerned about the various areas CFLs cannot replace, but rest assured the lightbulb manufacturers will provide LED or some other substitute that not only works in ovens and other areas CFLs don;t work well in, but they will in many cases klast as long as the product they are in installed in. Electricity won't get any cheaper, and we WILL get suitable replacements, because there will be demand. Let's not get to crazy over this. I'm sure some people still miss 8-track tape players, too.

I'm disappointed that this ammendment did not pass. I prefer the instant response of an incandescent bulb and their low up-front cost. Also there are few disposal issues with an incandescent bulb. I've mixed incandescent with cfl bulbs in my home so that I have a balance between quick response when I throw a switch, and energy efficiency. It disturbs me that the government is compelled to dictate what the market place can accomplish. No one ever mandated that people stop using kerosene lamps or gas lamps,factors including safety and cost made it more advantageous to use electrified incandescent lamps. (To this day, some people still use kerosene and gas lighting - e.g. the Amish).

Are they going to outlaw electron tubes (valves) next and force guitarists and audiophiles to use solid-state circuitry in the name of energy efficiency?

The real issue is manufacturing jobs in the USA. CFL's are not made in the US. Incandescent bulbs are still made here. Another example of the Feds passing a law that ends up killing jobs.

Our lawmakers are totally ignorant about things they are pushing. What would you do for bulbs in ovens and other special applications? nevermind Mercury in a bulb. New bulbs have electronics which interfere with other devices like radio, pacemakers , hearing aids,etc. They dont last long as advertized, Electronics components fail. They have fillaments also which burn out. They flikker effecting vision. They can not stand heat. Electronic components (about 25 of them have to be manufactured) and energy used to make them exceeds energy saved by the bulb in operation. Bulbs are made in China, Bulbs run on high voltage by converting line AC to DC then again converting to high frequency- high voltage AC . Every conversion loses efficiency. New bulbs do not run on dc, meaning you can not run them off solar panels, while old incandescent ones can. Manufacturing cost of new bulbs is 10 times higher than for the old ones. You can not dim new bulbs in coventional way. Failure rate for new bulbs is many times of the old one. With the old bulb for every 5% decrease in driving voltage you double the life of the bulb, not so with new ones. New bulbs are basically glorified flourescent 4 foot long lights we had in offices and stores for years, except that they were more reliable and economic to run with passive transformers with 95% efficiency. Anything else you want to know about " magic new bulbs"? Politicians are insane ignoramuses.

Who would have believed that Congress was/is/always will be omniscient?

Looks like I stock up on the contrand bulbs before they are gone!!! Ooo, the shame of it all, I feel so dirty... like a drug dealer of ancient technology. Heck, we may even see boot leggers with 100 Watt bulbs stashed in various hiding places.

What they're saying is it's NOT OK to continue to waste energy. The problem is that CFLs contain mercury. The real impact will be when the price of LED luminaires come down enough to make them affordable. They have no lead, no mercury and last 'forever'.

Many years ago a well known Test & Measurement company used a bank of light bulbs as a test load. In the past year I recommended light bulbs as a cheap series "voltage regulator." I suppose they'll have to use toaster ovens now.

From Politico Comments:
Quoting Energy Secretary Steven Chu
“… the more-efficient bulbs required would save consumers money over the life of the product, even if the up-front price is higher.
“….We are TAKING AWAY A CHOICE that continues to let people waste their own money,”
_________________________________________________________________
Somehow I thought people had a "choice" in what they do and if they want to waste their OWN money.
Mr. Chu (and government in general) is a moral busybody and General Electric is making a mint off of China made new bulbs. Do people like having government "minders" like they have in communist countries?
Patrick Henry:
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

Read the EPA's procedure for cleaning up a broken CFL
www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
So are CFLs really going to help the environment? How many people are going to dispose of them "properly".

I heard some rumors that Fidel Castro prohibited incandescent lamps years ago. It means no chose. Similar pattern.

Waste of taxpayer $. Incand waste 95% of consumed watts. LED bulbs 9 times more efficient. Incand 60W vs LED only 8W

This was the wrong way to go about repealing that ill-thought out requirement. No doubt some political geniuses thought that it would stand a better chance of passage if they couched the repeal in pro-environmental terms such as eliminating mercury. The real problem is that incandescents are still far and away better than fluorescents and LEDs in some applications, while consumers and MRO people are already switching to high-efficiency bulbs in places where they make sense.
I'm particularly familiar with the underground mining industry, and here we have two problems with the spiral fluorescents. First of all, they don't last very long underground. Everything underground is wet. There's constant condensation on almost everything. The deeper mines can have ambient temperatures of up to 130 degrees as well as 100% RH (condensing). The electronics in the fluorescents are not potted, conformal coated, or otherwise built to withstand this kind of environment, so a lifetime of less than 6 months is typical.
The second big problem with them in a regulated industrial environment (OSHA or MSHA) is that if a bulb is broken, a full haz-mat cleanup response is mandated because of the mercury content. It doesn't take many haz-mat responses to eat up the ostensible 75% electricity savings. No doubt other industries have different, but equally expensive, issues.
Congress needs to simply revoke the light bulb mandate directly, without playing parliamentary games or trying to get at the issue in a back-handed way like it did here. If they don't, once the mandate hits they are going to hear an outcry very much like the one that got the 1099 vendor reporting requirement repealed last year. There are simply some applications where no "high-efficiency" bulb is anywhere near as good as an incandescent either in overall life-cycle cost or life-cycle carbon footprint.

Big brother is now a big bother. It boggles the mind why mercury is a mandated light source, didn't we outlaw mercury thermometers because of the dangers?!? To find out who REALLY wins because of this move follow the money.

Where are the jobs, none made in America. Another example of Democrat pro job growth thinking. Hundreds of US jobs remain to be cared for by this socialist thinking government.

It's a crying shame we don't have the CHOICE. I use mostly CFL's in my house, but there are places they don't work well. Our government in its infinite wisdom (?) has stripped away that choice. It's if they are saying we, the people are too stupid to be trusted in choosing appropriate light bulbs. Thanks Washington D.C. And you wonder why the Tea Party gathers so much traction with the rank and file.