Congress Defunds Ban on Incandescent Light Bulbs but Doesn’t Quite Save Them
Email
Incandescent light bulbs are back.
A last-minute rider attached to the omnibus government spending bill defanged the 2007 energy standards for light bulbs that would have rendered the good ol’ incandescent all but obsolete, starting Jan. 1, by stripping funding for enforcing the ban.
Beginning next year, the federal government had planned to start banning cheap, energy-guzzling light bulbs and instead requiring more energy-efficient bulbs be manufactured and sold.
It was a bipartisan idea, but conservatives have come to hate it. It wasn’t just that the new bulbs are uglier, dimmer and more expensive, but that the federal government was dictating what kind of light bulb consumers could buy.
“The American people want less government intrusion into their lives, not more, and that includes staying out of their personal light bulb choices,” said GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, who, as a member of the House, introduced a bill to roll back the incandescent ban.
So today Congress took the teeth out of the incandescent ban by eliminating the funds the Department of Energy would need to enforce it.
But what many Republicans are celebrating as a win for individuals’ light-bulb-choosing freedom will probably not save the energy-guzzling bulbs from disappearing off store shelves.
“The industry has moved on,” said Larry Lauck, a spokesman for the American Lighting Association.
Lauck said U.S. light bulb manufacturers have already “retooled” their production lines to build more efficient bulbs, he said.
Joseph Higbee, a spokesman for the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, which represents 95 percent of U.S. light bulb manufacturers, said even if the Department of Energy does not have the funding to enforce the energy efficiency standards, manufacturers are not going to retro-fit their assembly lines to produce the traditional, less-efficient bulbs.
“The manufacturers have invested millions into the transitions and a delay in enforcement undermines those investments and creates regulatory uncertainty,” Higbee said. “Without [federal] enforcement, it does allow bad actors to sell noncompliant products without fear of enforcement and that creates a competitive disadvantage for law-abiding companies.”
Republicans Duke it Out in Arizona 
Rick Santorum Defends Earmarks
Sure beat all of those potential Mercury bombs – aka CFLs. If enviro terrorists were serious about their cause, LED light bulbs would be di rigor, as they are a bazillion more energy efficient and last 10,000 times as long as a CFL. That being said, I use CFL’s that I have been given; and I have no children to be effected by the Mercury from a broken bulb.
Posted by: deanbob | December 16, 2011, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
Good Job Republicans…..again you are fighting for some crap no one cares about. Most people have adapted to the idea of paying a little more for a light bulb and making that up and then some on our energy bills! Also, the media should do a follow up story by going around to all those who opposed the law homes to see what kind of bulbs they are using. I guarantee they are using the one’s that save both time and money!!
Posted by: focusonjobs1 | December 16, 2011, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
Says the obvious democrat. Before you use such a blanket of nobody cares, I’ll have you know that I care. And this is just one little corner of the country. I am willing to bet that there is more that care too.
Posted by: trish | December 16, 2011, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
How many jobs were lost because GE closed their incandescent light bulb plant? Oh well, what are a few thousand jobs here and a few thousand jobs there, right Mr Obama? Oh, there are estimates from 5000 (thank you Sea Rambler) to over 100, 000 direct and indirect jobs that will be created by the Keystone pipleline that the president was for it before he was against it (aka political football).
Posted by: deanbob | December 16, 2011, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm
Different types of lightbulbs out now, utilizing solar cells. Sorry but other nations are heavily spending in alternative energy research while these guys keep telling us how great it is to frack our environment to death because it creates jobs by destroying the environment. While the rest of the world is creating alternatives and jobs that don’t hack the nature to death.
Posted by: emerald_sparks | December 16, 2011, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
Wow, when the Republican Propaganda Machine can get people afraid of changing a light bulb, we’re in big trouble. Oh wait, these are the same people who made up the whole “death panels” thing. FDR said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Now we have to fear those who would use fear to twist people’s minds.
Posted by: mike | December 16, 2011, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm
I hate the glow these new bulbs give off. I suppose I could eventually get use to it, but it’ll probably just be another subconscious memory of how much more depressing our lot in the U.S. is becoming. Like 1 gallon toilets that you have to flush 3 times…saveing all that water.
Posted by: newcountryman | December 16, 2011, 7:05 pm 7:05 pm
I happen to like the new light bulbs. They may cost a little more but they last a whole lot longer and they save me money. I will continue to buy them so who cares about the incandescent light bulb.
Posted by: howdymo1 | December 16, 2011, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm
The question I want to ask is who thinks that CFL bulbs are dimmer and more expensive. They are not dimmer and they save money on energy in the long run. On the newscast for the story, there was a guy saying he is hoarding incandescent bulbs because he cannot see with the CFL’s. Nobody has commented on that, which I think is odd. Although I do not think they are as environmentally friendly as they want us to believe (bc the mercury), they use a mere fraction of the energy that incandescent bulbs use. We need to care about our energy. Government regulates our water, our oil, our schools, what is the issue with them regulating lightbulbs to save energy. The speed limit on highways was set to lower fuel consumption by cars. It should be obvious to consumers at this point in time that when left unregulated, companies will act in accordance to whatever profits their business the best, not in accordance with what is good for the environment. I am not happy about how the republicans spun this story.
Posted by: jody | December 16, 2011, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
LED bulbs are really great. However, they are at this point in time too expensive to use in the way a consumer would use a lightbulb. Regardless, whether or not LED lights are better than CFL lights adds nothing to the argument. CFL bulbs use massively less energy than incandescent. They are a small step towards saving energy.
Posted by: jody | December 16, 2011, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
I’m glad they decided to keep them because these fluorescent lights cause seizures in many people. I hope the manufacturers will retool their equipment and go back to the OLD way. I started stocking up on the old bulbs too because I can’t stand the fluorescent. They give me a headache and cause me to seize. I hate having to sit under them in office buildings, schools, churches, go into stores, and other public buildings. I also hate those headlights that are on some of the newer cars. Get rid of those too. They blind you at night!
Posted by: Laura | December 16, 2011, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Did you do ANY research on this article?
The new law required more energy efficiency and did not ban any type of bulb.
Posted by: Tom Byrne | December 16, 2011, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm
Stupid, stupid, stupid Republicans. Wonder how much the electric companies paid them to kill this? These jerks are so stunningly transparent in their blatant sucking up to Big Business, it’s sickening……
Posted by: Searambler | December 16, 2011, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
G.E. will produce the new energy efficient bulbs in….you guessed it….Mexico. Unless they can determine China can do it cheaper.
Posted by: newcountryman | December 16, 2011, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
While Ohio is traditionally thought of once being a center of auto manufacturing, there was such a strong tradition of light-bulb production in the state that the world’s largest maker of light bulbs, General Electric, located the headquarters of its light bulb division in Cleveland. The jobs provided by light-bulb manufacturing allowed people to buy homes, send their kids to college, and fuel a vibrant economy in Ohio for decades.
But in the last decade, GE has closed over fifteen factories in Ohio and downsized numerous others. Since 1980, employment in GE Lighting has dropped by 68 percent.
A large chunk of that manufacturing has gone to China, and now GE plans to send even more to China in the wake of new clean energy policies. By 2014, Americans will only be able to purchase more energy efficient CFL light bulbs. However, GE has located all of its facilities for high-efficiency light bulbs to China and has told the union representing the workers that they have no intention to locate compact fluorescent facilities in the United States.
Posted by: newcountryman | December 16, 2011, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
The light bulb standards were bi-partisan in nature, supported by the industry and meant to reduce our energy consumption, saving people money and reducing pollution. It was never a ban. Now the industry is producing more efficient versions of the bulb and LEDs are coming down. The latest Rocky Mountain Institute work, “Reinventing Fire”, states that we can grow our economy 150% by 2050 and almost eliminate out use of oil while making trillions in profits, all through efficiency and advanced sources ot energy. What’s not to like?
The ultimate goal is to displace fossil fuels, which are warming the planet (can you say Texas drought) and acidifying the oceans (can you say, undisputed in the scientific literature). The Republicans are almost completely sociopathic in their approach to all this. It’s insane.
Posted by: TKPGH | December 16, 2011, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
LED bulbs are really great. However, they are at this point in time too expensive to use in the way
a consumer would use a lightbulb. Regardless, whether or not LED lights are better than CFL
lights adds nothing to the argument. CFL bulbs use massively less energy than incandescent.
They are a small step towards saving energy.POSTED BY: JODY *********Like everything else,
initial startup cost for any new product has to be absorbed in the initial sales. The incandescent
bulbs are a waste of energy, producing 3% light and 97% heat. The LED has made great strides
in manufacturing and development, which is far from what we can say about the incandescent.
And to say that jobs were lost in the US when we stopped making the incandescent bulbs is
BS! GE, Sylvania, Phillips and the rest of the bulb manufactures are based overseas or mexico.
Posted by: michael | December 16, 2011, 11:08 pm 11:08 pm
CFL are good and bad: good for using less energy then there is the bad part – the mercury. So no benefit Yes, more expensive then conventional light bulbs but the old adage is turn the light off when you leave the room. I just purchased two LED. Yes, they are expensive but they are the way of the future. Less energy, no mercury, lasts a very long time and doesn’t put out the heat like CFL or conventional light bulbs. Make them in the USA.
Posted by: Alicia | December 16, 2011, 11:10 pm 11:10 pm
“GE, Sylvania, Phillips and the rest of the bulb manufactures are based overseas or mexico.” They are now.
Posted by: newcountryman | December 16, 2011, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm
GE, like everyone else, gave in to the pressures of their stockholders.
Sadly, it was done for their best interest, not the employees.
Posted by: michael | December 16, 2011, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
CFL are good and bad: good for using less energy then there is the bad part – the mercury. So no
benefit POSTED BY: ALICIA ******** They are a energy benefit. Properly disposing these bulbs in a
CFL recycle program is required. This is the same program that unusable batteries for your laptop
go, or are you one of those who throw these hazardous lithium batteries in the landfill. hmmmm
Posted by: michael | December 16, 2011, 11:42 pm 11:42 pm
“The American people want less government intrusion into their lives, not more, and that includes staying out of their personal light bulb choices”
But we want Medicare in it’s current form. Tweek it but don’t convert it into another give away to business. Keep your hands off our Medicare.
Posted by: Hal | December 16, 2011, 11:49 pm 11:49 pm
I use CFL’s almost everywhere at home (except in dimmable fixtures) but I use 100w lightbulbs as winter engine pre-heaters for my airplane! A 100w bulb in a shop lamp under the oil sump works as well as expensive heating systems. CFL’s won’t work because they don’t get HOT! There are other uses of these bulbs other than just light.
Posted by: Bob Z | December 16, 2011, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm
This is a done deal – just like the end of alkaline batteries, and CRT TV’s (maybe still made in China, but who cares?) … as far as what people “choose” to light their homes … they could use oil lamps for all anyone gives a hoot … More do-nothing posturing from the right wing …
Posted by: yeah.i.said.it | December 17, 2011, 12:04 am 12:04 am
Funny. Conservatives were originally big time in on that previous legislation to kill them. So now we do bills and then undo them?
Posted by: lexingtonlady | December 17, 2011, 12:05 am 12:05 am
The first wave of energy efficient bulbs were junk, IMO. They were dim and expensive. However, they’ve gotten their act together and now I have them all over the apartment. They definitely run cooler, which was a problem with the incandescent bulbs in the bathroom and walk-in closet.
Posted by: Ed | December 17, 2011, 1:23 am 1:23 am
Been using CFL’s for years now but I support the right to choose what is best for each person. Its the American way, after all! The government should not be force feeding us about what kind of light bulbs to use!
Posted by: BIG JIMMY | December 17, 2011, 2:52 am 2:52 am
By far the biggest problem I have with new bulbs (both CFL and LED) is the fact they give off far more blue-light (not the color, the wavelength) than their incandescent predecessors. This most closely approximates sunlight, and prolonged exposure at night can slowly reset the body’s circadian rhythm and throw off sleep patterns.
This biological phenomenon is finally starting to get the attention it warrants, but now still gets lost in all of the vitriol about how certain backwards political parties just hate efficiency and want to destroy the environment etc by not embracing this change. Some of us actually have legitimate concerns.
Posted by: jesuguru | December 17, 2011, 3:54 am 3:54 am
There are places for both types of light bulb.
-
The problem with CFL Is the FACT that they start out dim , then take time to get bright.. They are cheaper to operate over LONG periods of time, But should one break, they DO have the the mercury issue ! While CFL bulbs may be (power) EFFICIENT …. they are NOT Totally Environmentally friendly or safe.. (as Marketed.) CFL bulbs are Not great for an area where lights are turned on momentarily, or for a short time , then turned off. Most if any, cannot be used with a dimmer switch,
-
Incandescent bulbs allow FULL LIGHT POWER ( BRIGHTNESS) INSTANTLY. CAN BE used ON DIMMER SWITCHES! Do create some warmth where desired, and are better for quick on and off operation, i.e. closets, sheds, or ?.
-
If they break, incandescent bulbs are NOT a Hazard cleanup issue.
-
CFL light color not always as desirable as an incandescent bulb can be..
-
-
I have noticed a decline in the apparent quality, durability, and life expectancy of todays incandescent bulbs, as compared to the bulbs of years past. Older bulbs lasted many years Not just months.
-
We are probably still screwed in the long run getting good ( or any ) incandescent bulbs, because of tooling shifting to cfl manufacturing, So it is a shallow victory for choice.
-
As for LED ……they might solve the instant (full) light, dimming and mercury issues;
BUT THEY ARE TOO EXPENSIVE to be a rational consideration.
-
It’s like cars and trucks. A mini truck like a chevy S 10 might be economical to operate and great for light hauling duties, but it will not haul ( tow) a horse, car, or RV trailer as safely or effectively
as a FULL -sized truck suited to the task.
Posted by: light me up | December 17, 2011, 6:27 am 6:27 am
The choice is easy. Add an electric tax. Use that money to reduce the cost of US made LED bulbs. That gives people a choice, will encourage people to invest in renewable energy (so they won’t have to buy it and pay the tax), reduces the cost of LED bulbs, and creates American jobs.
Posted by: LED Today | December 17, 2011, 7:31 am 7:31 am
There has never been a ban on incandescents, only a requirement to make them 30% more efficient, with a cost effective quartz halogen envelope which you can see inside the efficient clear incndescent pictured in the story. I’ve seen them for sale for $1.25 instead of 25 cents for a cheap Chinese bulb, but they save about $3.00 of 10 cent/kWh electricity over their lifetime.
Posted by: Bob Maginnis | December 17, 2011, 8:38 am 8:38 am
iTS ABOUT TIME SOME SENSE COMES BACK TO OUR SOCIETY. THIS WAS SOME ENVIRONMENTALIST WACKO’S IDEA OF SAVE THE PLANET NONSENSE. ALL IT WAS WAS SOMEONES SCEME TO RETOOL SOME INDUSTRY TO GAIN POWER AND MONEY AND DUMB DOWN OUR ECCONOMY. THESE REFIT BULBS DON’T LIGHT UP ANYTIHING AND THE LIGHT IS ANNOYING. GOVT NEEDS TO BE ABOUT OUT NATIONAL DEFENSE AND OTHER ISSUES AND STAY OUT OF OUR PERSONAL PRIVATE LIVES. ALL YOU PUPPETS NEED TO GET OOF THE SUGAR TIT AND EMPLOY YOUR OWN INNOVATION AND GETAMERICA BACK TO ITS WONDERFUL ROOTS OF INGENUITY. WE DON’T NEED A NANNY STATE TO DO THAT.
Posted by: R.L. | December 17, 2011, 9:03 am 9:03 am
This whole Al Gore inspired scam was just about market control by the government! The liberal Democrats just love to try to control or tax everything they can, even the simple light bulb! But the worst part is most CFL and LED bulbs are made in China and have cost us good American jobs!
Posted by: BIG JIMMY | December 17, 2011, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Regardless of how the left tries to spin it, there is more mercuy in one CFL than this is in a thermometer. All those CFLs will wind up in a landfill and eventually into our water supply. Once again the misguided left is committing Democide against humanity. CFLs only benefit GE and China – period!
Posted by: Ana | December 17, 2011, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
If Curly Fry Lightbulbs (CFLs) were so slam-dunk better an allocation of resources there would be no need for an overweening bureaucracy to cram them down our throats; the marketplace would have sent Patent number 223898 to the same obscurity as the patents immediately before and after it.
In years to come, just as the light bulb is the universal symbol of a great and innovative idea, the CFL will be the symbol for a really stupid idea.
Posted by: St. Georges Cross | December 17, 2011, 7:05 pm 7:05 pm
Thank the Republicans and conservative Democrats for great victory for now.
Posted by: conservtive | December 18, 2011, 9:55 am 9:55 am
Just wish the government would get out of it and let consumers decide on there own what is best for them. I’m sick of few liberals telling the majority what’s best for us.
Posted by: Mike | January 4, 2012, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
This is one part of my life the government will no control. I have been stocking up for 2 years on every size bulb that I will ever use.Besides costing alot more money, I am sure people will be reading the 3 pages of regulations by the epa of what to do and not to do with disposal. I can see later down the road lawsuits from mercury poisoning,deaths,even people who work land fills and run over these bulbs will be affected or anyone who handles trash before then.
I will NEVER EVER use them and have warned everyone I know.
Posted by: Vancouver1941 | January 21, 2012, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
Good! I’m glad they decided to end the ban on incandecent light bulbs. The decision should be our own as to what kind of lights we want to buy – NOT the damn government!
Want cleaner air? Make a cleaner power plant.
Posted by: Bob | February 6, 2012, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm