Thursday, 8 January 2009

More Econazism: Incandescent Light Bulbs

As many of you may know, the EU had previously slapped an import tariff on CFLs (Compact Fluorescent Lightbulbs). Anti dumping? Well, protecting German manufacturer Osram, more like.

So, they, the EU, are now banning the manufacture and sale of incandescent, i.e. "trad" lightbulbs at or above 100W, they say because of "green issues".

This is wrong on so many levels.

1) Alternatives are far from mature. 

take time to come on (when I turn a light on...I want it ON)
flicker, causing headaches
give off an ugly light
are often just not powerful enough.
they contain highly toxic mercury, so MUST be recycled. 

Apart from the above, if one shatters or breaks, you have to reach for your NBC suit...

The Government advice is:

• Vacate the room and ventilate it for at least 15 minutes.
• Do not use a vacuum cleaner.
• Clean up using rubber gloves and aim to avoid breathing in any dust.
• Sweep up all glass fragments and place in a plastic bag.
• Wipe the area with a damp cloth, add that to the bag and seal it.
• Don't put the bag in the bin. Take it a council amenity site or recycling centre where it can be handled as hazardous waste.

Nice. Just what I want around my home. 

Very expensive
Not powerful enough
Not dimmable in normal conditions*

2) The "replacement" is subject to protectionism, which means we, the consumer, have to pay more than the market rate to keep Osram execs in Mercedes Benz.

3) Traditional light bulbs give off heat. This is only a "waste" when outdoors and in summertime. Considering the ratio of lightbulb use in summer vs winter and the fact that most traditional bulbs are in domestic, interior settings, the "waste heat" is far less than people would initially deduce from a direct bulb-to-bulb comparisons.

4) The issue over CO2 is rapidly becoming a canard.

Damn them and damn the EU for forcing me to buy such hazardous products. Note the concept of force here. I am not being advised or encouraged via lower purchase prices and lower running costs - quite the reverse as the high up-front price of Corporate Welfare - but forced due to "legislation" (again, I will not tarnish the term "law" by using it here). The term "enviro-mental" rings ever more true.

I do believe that LEDs are the way, so it is half-cocked to go off banning the only viable alternative for human beings (unless your brain runs so slowly the 50Hz flicker is ok for you) until they are bright and cheap enough to take over.

This is another example of Authoritarianism, protectionism, Corporate Welfare and Eco Fascism from the EU.

It is not a case of "can we leave yet". I've never joined, so how do I make it legal so they stop pestering me?

* unlike EU ministers, who seem to come pre-dimmed.


Charlotte Gore said...

Putting us on the back foot. I've seen it on another lib dem blog: "Justify why you need incandescent bulbs" as if the fact that there's no life or death reason why they're necessary is enough justification for banning them.

It's this mentality that's so freakin' dangerous, isn't it? Where does it stop?

Green is the new Red, and they won't be happy until we're all in communal living facilities with nothing but regulation overalls and a shared 14 inch portable television locked behind a screen that only shows the BBC.

Roger Thornhill said...

Indeed it does - and is pure priggish prod-nose Authoritarianism.

I have listed good reasons to want to avoid CFLs.

Where are these people, Charlotte? I do not tend to infest Lib dem blogs that much, but you are right, it is the almost, no, totally creepy mindset that is so infuriating. Why shoulld I have to justify or explain what I buy to ANYONE?