13

Incandescent Light Bulb Ban Started On August 1; Gas Stove Ban Coming Next?

Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 9 months ago to Politics
41 comments | Share | Flag

Excerpt:
"Biden's Department of Energy plans to mete out "the maximum civil penalty" against manufacturers that "knowingly distribute" illicit light bulbs which violate their new efficiency standards.

From Politico, "While everyone was yelling about gas stoves, the incandescent light bulb went away":
It's lights out for the incandescent bulbs that people have known, changed and singed their hands on for 140 years.

The modern descendant of Thomas Edison's most famous legacy is set to formally meet its demise in the U.S. at the end of this month, despite years of efforts by Republicans to extend its lifespan. As of Aug. 1, the Energy Department will fully enforce new efficiency regulations that the old bulbs can't meet, effectively prohibiting their retail sale.
...
DOE completed the action last April, but full enforcement of the rule is set to begin Aug. 1. The transition away from the inefficient bulbs has been underway for more than a year, as the department provided flexibility for manufacturers and retailers to comply with the new standard.

That fight may be settled, but the larger fight over energy efficiency standards is still looming. Republican lawmakers in recent months have continually derided the Biden administration's efficiency actions on everything from more efficient stoves to laundry machines and dishwashers.

For example, the Energy Department is proposing new efficiency standards covering gas stoves as well as electric stoves and ovens. "
------------------------------------------------
Unconstitutional actions.
D.C. NIFO.

All Comments

  • Posted by $ Abaco 1 year, 9 months ago
    Makes me chuckle. I love to cook. I've worked very hard my entire life. One of my pipe dreams was to own a very high grade stove like the Viking I now own. No way in hell they're getting it. Nope. This is a form of class warfare as the gov has recently explained that what they really want are the "high-end" stoves. They give some bullshit reason for it. Of course it's incrementalism. Might as well say, "We'll only take them from white males." Frankly...I can't believe we're even dealing with this crap. The answer is "no". Let's move on to something based on reality, please...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Radio_Randy 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't recall this...but it could've happened that way.

    It sounds like sensible kind of thing President Trump would have done.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ gharkness 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I feel WAY more secure in my electric supply than I did when I lived in Texas. But: feelings are not facts, and I could for sure be wrong.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I wouldn't want to live there anyway, if the feds won't allow Lake Mead to be kept full anymore. I can just see the traffic jam the day both the water and power supplies from it stop. Large numbers would die.

    People in Las Vegas and parts of Los Angeles won't be happy then, either.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ gharkness 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I’ve been living there only six weeks and I’m here to tell ya it’s uninhabitable MOST of the time! Banning AC would cause an exodus
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Curtesy of who I like to call the MotherWEFers.
    Internet of things ,smart meters all to monitor and control the Quota of energy the villagers are allowed. FuQ them ,many will die on their feet before living on their knees. WWlll ,we are in it and our leader threatens them like no one ever has.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Oh, we see, Q Brother, and the people are PISSED!
    and it's just a warm up for . . .DIGITAL CURRENCY and NO CASH; knowing full well that the lights will go out and your wealth will also go out the door.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 9 months ago
    This is what is called Technocracy, it is tyrannical , fascist , planned genocidal
    , two tiered justice (Master/Slave) , where Unelected “experts” dictate Quota’s and mandates.
    I have posted this form of One World Government Technocracy for years , as Q said “Sometimes you can't TELL the public the truth.
    YOU MUST SHOW THEM.” “difficult truths”
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by rhfinle 1 year, 9 months ago
    One thing they don't tell you is the other uses of an incandescent bulb. First off, they will run on DC. a standard charged car battery gives about 13.8v. Eight of them in series (which you can charge individually, then install in the circuit) gives 110.4v, which will run an incandescent bulb. The bulb will last longer that it would on AC. You might want to use a knife switch, though, as a regular AC switch might arc a bit. Eight 600 watt hour car batteries will easily power a 60w bulb (about 203 ohms) for about 50 hours, 7 hours a night for a week.
    In addition, that light bulb can be used as a "dummy load" power sink for testing shortwave radios (If it's glowing at normal brightness you're pumping 60W RF into it) and probably most important in a SHTF situation, it can keep a chicken brooder warm. I tucked away a couple of hundred of them a dozen years ago, at 20 cents apiece. Sire beats a $15.00 LED unit when times get bad.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The only good thing about the LEDs is you can get 100Watts of light (Lumens) and only use 15 watts of energy and they do last a long time . . .not sure where the break even point is once you consider cost.

    Anyone here have an idea of which tech would survive a strong CME from the sun?
    I'm thinking both would be toast.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes. Both Thomas and Alito have questioned Chevron openly. Surprisingly, however, it may well be Kavanaugh and Coney-Barrett who side with the progressive justices to scupper it. Despite seemingly being "originalists" they seem to have the biggest appetite for the perpetuation of government...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mikeofallon 1 year, 9 months ago
    Any pushback / studies from DoE on LEDs being worse for your eyes??
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I might give them a pass if they reversed the mistakes of others, but they
    LOVE the power that such laws gave given them and they act to get even more.
    No, they don't get a pass. They get my utter disgust and they do NOT get my consent for ANYTHING they do.
    D.C. is the source of tyranny and the destruction of America. NIFO.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 1 year, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The Constitution was effectively neutered when the Supreme Court issued the Chevron case and established the standard of "Chevron deference."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 1 year, 9 months ago
    Reminds me of Orson Wells' The Time Machine with the Morlocks and the Eloi. Remember that the Morlocks fed upon the Eloi...

    I think that book was more prescient than even Wells knew.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo