On 2006-08-24 11:28:32 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
said:

But very environmentally unfriendly.

In the context of all the other uses of energy, a drop in the bucket.

Very much not the case. A huge proportion of CO2 emissions are from
vanity lightbulbs.

Figures?


Then all those wastrels who insist on needless polluting the
environment just because they whine on about liking inefficient
lightbulbs can at least pay more than proportionally extra for the
priviledge of destroying the planet.

That's already done, by implication, via VAT on the electricity used,
if the energy use really is that significant.

No. That would be proportional. I'm all in favour of making the charge
disproportionate. This allows the measure to not affect those
(including less wealthy people) who choose to use efficient methods,
whilst providing a significant tax burden to those who wish to make a
display of environmental destruction beyond that which is reasonable.

Christian.

It might be if it were unreasonable use of electricity, but it isn't.
Other uses are far more significant.