Pete C. wrote:
WASHINGTON -- Aiming to keep the focus on climate change legislation,
President Barack Obama put a plug in for administration efforts to
make lamps and lighting equipment use less energy.

But the article doesn't say what the new standards ARE.

They are posted on the energystar.gov site, but I don't recall the
specifics.

Perhaps the president is merely going to say "Let there be light..."

They are going to make CFLs look more attractive, probably by
outlawing or taxing the hell out of incandescents

Non-compliant bubs will gradually become unavailable, starting with
100-Watt ones and then progressing to lower-wattage ones. Specialty
bulbs, including 3-ways and those for appliances will be exempt.

The regs. are "technology neutral." I.e., they do not specify any
particular kind of lighting.

I've been using pretty much all CFLs for several years, and they are
fine. The only time you will notice a difference is if you have more
than one type of light source in a single room, so just make sure that
in any given room it's all or nothing. Any yes, they do save a
noticeable amount of power, as well as having a much longer life span
than incandescents.

I've been using CFLs for years -- mostly Sylvania -- and they do not
last as long as is claimed, they take a noticeable time to achieve full
brightness, and some of them emit a distinct "fried electronics" smell
when they finally quit.

I've bought a few LED bulbs but of course haven't used them long enough
to comment on their longevity. 3.5 to 5 Watts consumption for the
equivalent of a 50-Watt bulb; i.e., considerably more efficient than
CFLs. The light is bluer than that of CFLs or incandescents -- closer to
daylight; some people don't like them, but they are fine for me.

Perce