|
It's kind of like the Corporate Average Fuel Economy of lighting. I am for CAFE as it drives efficiency which we all know is good yet unfettered market forces don't reward efficiency until it's too late, yet I'm opposed to the lighting standards.
The main difference between this and CAFE is that with CAFE you still have all the choices available to you.
"CALF" (Communist Authoritarian Lighting Fail) fails to recognize that there are other efficiencies than lumens per watt. I have applications for lights where the heat is a desired "byproduct" in fact so much so that the heat is the product and the light is the byproduct.
And the price of the traditional bulb is but a fraction of the new junk.
Yes I say junk- as noted earlier, we are paying more for less. Flip a CFL on outside or even in a room as cold as those in my house and chances are you will be ready to go back into a different room by the time the damned thing warms up enough to work. In fact in rooms that I tend to be "in-n-out" of quickly, I've gone back to incandescent. And the "dimmable" CFLs are a joke. Those were even more expensive than the regular CFLs and they're such a fail that I don't use the dimmer any more.
So the point of CALF is to reduce electricity use, huh. There are about 1,000,000 better ways to get people to reduce electricity use. First off would be real progressive rate structures, that reward the small user... quite the opposite of the retarded regressive Midwestern model where the small EFFICIENT users subsidize the SLOBS by paying far more per kwH.
And of course the government could stop paying people to reproduce. A billion less consumers should alleviate the pressure on resources of all sorts.
|