×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Activists Seek Repeal of Ban on Incandescent Bulbs

Hugh Pickens writes (1984118) writes | more than 3 years ago

Government 2

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Daniel Sayani reports in New American that Senator Mike Enzi has announced that he plans to introduce legislation to reverse the ban on incandescent light bulbs which is scheduled to go into effect January 1, 2014. "CFLs are more expensive, many contain mercury which can be harmful even in the smallest amounts, and most are manufactured overseas in places like China," says Enzi. "If left alone, the best bulb will win its rightful standing in the marketplace. Government doesn’t need to be in the business of telling people what light bulb they have to use." Faced with a phaseout some consumers are taking pre-emptive steps stockpiling incandescent bulbs, although according to a poll by USA Today, most Americans support the U.S. law that begins phasing out traditional light bulbs next year and, despite some consumer grumbling, say they're satisfied with more efficient alternatives. Nearly three of four US adults, or 71%, say they have replaced standard light bulbs in their home over the past few years with compact fluorescent lamps or LEDs and 84% say they are "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with CFL's and LED's,"

2 comments

Tax, not ban (1)

Spazmania (174582) | more than 3 years ago | (#35315572)

The ban was stupid. They should have simply put a 100% federal tax on sales of incandescent bulbs. Then folks could still use them the few places that a CFL doesn't make sense.

Re:Tax, not ban (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35316270)

With a 100% tax, they'd still work better, be more reliable, and _provide better value_ than a CFL.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...