Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

As the Army says:

If it walks shoot it.
If it talks, salute it.
If it doesn't move, paint it green.

As congress says:

If it works, outlaw it.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. Not in the
Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a
scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as
we know it. As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of
light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that
general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved,
incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

On Nov 14, 1:05*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. *Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. *As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and
will hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and
enforce the rules. At that point I will finally be willing to invite
them to wipe my ass for me but until then get your damn regulations
off my back and out of my house.

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:05:01 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/



No time to read it. I have to run to the store to pick up something.
Maybe a dozen somethings.

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:44 -0800, BobR wrote:
So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

Depressing, isn't it?

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and will
hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and enforce
the rules.

It'll be Made-in-China electronic toilet paper, too - the equivalent of
wiping your ass on a Kindle...

On Nov 14, 6:13*pm, Jules Richardson
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:44 -0800, BobR wrote:
So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

Depressing, isn't it?

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and will
hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and enforce
the rules.

It'll be Made-in-China electronic toilet paper, too - the equivalent of
wiping your ass on a Kindle...

Other then in a cold room what is the problem it is only a light bulb

On Nov 14, 6:13*pm, Jules Richardson
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:44 -0800, BobR wrote:
So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

Depressing, isn't it?

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and will
hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and enforce
the rules.

It'll be Made-in-China electronic toilet paper, too - the equivalent of
wiping your ass on a Kindle...

So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?


Yes thats what you get when Wallmart led the charge over seas to get
you cheaper products .

On Nov 14, 3:05*pm, BobR wrote:
On Nov 14, 1:05*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. *Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. *As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and
will hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and
enforce the rules.

***The bidet people are behind this, mark my words!

HB

[...]

On Nov 14, 7:21*pm, jim wrote:
On Nov 14, 6:13*pm, Jules Richardson

wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:44 -0800, BobR wrote:
So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can
transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

Depressing, isn't it?

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and will
hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and enforce
the rules.

It'll be Made-in-China electronic toilet paper, too - the equivalent of
wiping your ass on a Kindle...

*So what is next on the governments list of let's end this so we can

transfer all the production to China, India, or someplace else?

Yes thats what you get when Wallmart led the charge over seas to get
you cheaper products .

Walmart simply gave the majority of people exactly what they wanted,
cheap products at a cheap price. Most people don't care where its
produced, rather its of quality or not so long as it's CHEAP.

First they came for the light bulbs, and I didn't speak up
because I had CFL.
Then, they came for the gasoline, turning it to gasohol. I
didn't speak up, because I could still drive.
Then, they came for the R-12 freon, and I didn't speak up
because I had R-134a.
Then, they came for the assault weapons, and I didn't speak
up because I'm a hunter.
Then, they came to microchip my dog, and I didn't speak up
because I'm not a dog.
Then, they came for me. I was sitting in the dark, my car
wouldn't start, I had warm beer, I was out of ammo, and what
the heck, I needed a microchip in my right hand to buy more
beer.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"jim" wrote in message
...


It'll be Made-in-China electronic toilet paper, too - the
equivalent of
wiping your ass on a Kindle...

Other then in a cold room what is the problem it is only a
light bulb

On Nov 14, 7:05*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. *Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. *As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

Long gone in Europe. The 60W is the current one going here.
I haven'thad an incandescent lamp for years. I still have some of the
first CFLs to come out.
How is Americans have to be hauled kicking and whinging into the
present?

harry wrote:

Long gone in Europe. The 60W is the current one going here.
I haven'thad an incandescent lamp for years. I still have some of the
first CFLs to come out.
How is Americans have to be hauled kicking and whinging into the
present?

It's the silliness of government trying to solve the wrong problem, which,
if they stayed completely out of it, wouldn't be a problem at all.

In the instant case, the difficulty is not too many incandescent bulbs; the
problem is too few power plants.

"But," you may say, "CFLs reduce our demand for electricity!" Yes, and
computers, electric cars, and a mania for toasted strawberry pop-tarts
continues to drive demand up. More power generation will be needed next week
or next year. At best, limiting consumer choices by mandating CFLs or
prune-flavored poptarts merely delays the real solution.

And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...

It's the silliness of government trying to solve the wrong
problem, which,
if they stayed completely out of it, wouldn't be a problem
at all.

In the instant case, the difficulty is not too many
incandescent bulbs; the
problem is too few power plants.

"But," you may say, "CFLs reduce our demand for
electricity!" Yes, and
computers, electric cars, and a mania for toasted strawberry
pop-tarts
continues to drive demand up. More power generation will be
needed next week
or next year. At best, limiting consumer choices by
mandating CFLs or
prune-flavored poptarts merely delays the real solution.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:43:29 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

First they came for the light bulbs, and I didn't speak up
because I had CFL.
Then, they came for the gasoline, turning it to gasohol. I
didn't speak up, because I could still drive.
Then, they came for the R-12 freon, and I didn't speak up
because I had R-134a.
Then, they came for the assault weapons, and I didn't speak
up because I'm a hunter.
Then, they came to microchip my dog, and I didn't speak up
because I'm not a dog.
Then, they came for me. I was sitting in the dark, my car
wouldn't start, I had warm beer, I was out of ammo, and what
the heck, I needed a microchip in my right hand to buy more
beer.

Excellent!

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 07:17:44 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

Don't forget that little pipeline from Canuckistan.

On Nov 15, 12:17*pm, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"HeyBub" wrote in message

m...

It's the silliness of government trying to solve the wrong
problem, which,
if they stayed completely out of it, wouldn't be a problem
at all.

In the instant case, the difficulty is not too many
incandescent bulbs; the
problem is too few power plants.

"But," you may say, "CFLs reduce our demand for
electricity!" Yes, and
computers, electric cars, and a mania for toasted strawberry
pop-tarts
continues to drive demand up. More power generation will be
needed next week
or next year. At best, limiting consumer choices by
mandating CFLs or
prune-flavored poptarts merely delays the real solution.

Which is?

On Nov 15, 3:43*am, harry wrote:
On Nov 14, 7:05*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. *Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it. *As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

Long gone in Europe. The 60W is the current one going here.
I haven'thad an incandescent lamp for years. I still have some of *the
first CFLs to come out.
How is Americans have to be hauled kicking and whinging into the
present?

Actually, Americans are more than willing to accept the new technology
when it truely represents something better but totally resent having
those decisions dictated to them. When a new technology reaches the
point that it becomes the most viable solution, people will naturally
accept it without having the government shove it up their ass. Until
that point is reached, it should not be the position of government to
force the issue when in many cases they are doing a great deal of harm
rather than good.

On Nov 15, 9:11*am, harry wrote:
On Nov 15, 12:17*pm, "Stormin Mormon"





wrote:
And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"HeyBub" wrote in message

om...

It's the silliness of government trying to solve the wrong
problem, which,
if they stayed completely out of it, wouldn't be a problem
at all.

In the instant case, the difficulty is not too many
incandescent bulbs; the
problem is too few power plants.

"But," you may say, "CFLs reduce our demand for
electricity!" Yes, and
computers, electric cars, and a mania for toasted strawberry
pop-tarts
continues to drive demand up. More power generation will be
needed next week
or next year. At best, limiting consumer choices by
mandating CFLs or
prune-flavored poptarts merely delays the real solution.

Which is?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Getting the idiots who run a totally disfunctional government out of
the business of micromanaging every aspect of our lives.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. Not in the Biblical sense, but
in the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant
eight weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know
it. As of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light
bulb choice snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that
general-purpose bulbs be 25% more energy-efficient than the current,
justly-beloved, incandescent bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

Seems to me to be a fuss about very little. They might be a little harder
to find and who knows about the price, but even standard 100 watt bulbs are
not going to disappear from the market -- at least for the next couple of
years -- since Canada has pushed back its phase-out date. Just order what
you want on line or arrange to buy some in Canada.

And, if you look, you can find virtually any type of electric light bulb
that's ever been made including replicas of Edison's carbon filament lamps.
It's always been true in lighting that no new light source has ever
completely replaced any of the older sources. Whale oil is a bit hard to
find these days, but candles are cheap and plentiful as are gas and kerosene
lanterns. Just buy what you want.

But, who wants to use 100 watt bulbs that burn out frequently, fail when
jiggled, are hot enough to burn skin and suck energy? I changed to CFLs 7
years ago for table and floor lamps. They work fine and there have been no
failures and no problems -- even with the CFL 3-way in the reading light. I
use some reflector halogen and a couple of rough-service incandescents in
the garage door openers and there is no planned or even proposed legislation
to get rid of those.

So, go ahead, argue the politics although why you do that on alt.home.repair
is beyond me. But, from a home repair/lighting standpoint, I don't see that
much will change come 2012.

Tomsic

On Nov 15, 10:46*am, BobR wrote:
On Nov 15, 3:43*am, harry wrote:



On Nov 14, 7:05*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Opinion piece on the demise of the 100-watt bulb.

"Because the end of days is drawing nigh. *Not in the Biblical sense, but in
the Environmental Protection Agency sense: there were only a scant eight
weeks (now only seven) before the end of the light bulb as we know it.. *As
of January 1, 2012, Americans will have their freedom of light bulb choice
snuffed out by an omnibus 2007 law requiring that general-purpose bulbs be
25% more energy-efficient than the current, justly-beloved, incandescent
bulb."

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-end-of-t...-as-we-knowit/

Long gone in Europe. The 60W is the current one going here.
I haven'thad an incandescent lamp for years. I still have some of *the
first CFLs to come out.
How is Americans have to be hauled kicking and whinging into the
present?

Actually, Americans are more than willing to accept the new technology
when it truely represents something better but totally resent having
those decisions dictated to them. *When a new technology reaches the
point that it becomes the most viable solution, people will naturally
accept it without having the government shove it up their ass. *Until
that point is reached, it should not be the position of government to
force the issue when in many cases they are doing a great deal of harm
rather than good.

A-lamps may consume more energy but they are not toxic to the
environment when they burn out and get thrown away... CFL's are
not the answer...

Perhaps one day when LED based lamps come down in price...

As far as the "new technology" argumentation -- people don't mind
adopting new technologies, the problem is whey greedy oil barons
buy up patents on new alternative energy systems and strangle
the development of energy technologies which diverge away from
using oil...

Ford could start production anytime (they have had this technology
since the late 1990's and have even tested it on large private fleets
so it does work just as well as gasoline) on vehicles which need only
5 parts under the hood different from current production models
for the current ICE based power plant to burn hydrogen gas...

Hybrid cars are wonderful, but they pollute -- producing the battery
causes pollution, then if/when the battery fails because of the
usage pattern of the vehicle or adverse environmental conditions,
the cost of replacing the battery is so much that most people
will trash the car...

So why has this not happened yet ? Patents and contracts,
fueling station operators are prohibited by contract from selling
any other fuels than the ones provided to them through their
supply chain...

Good new ideas exist for paths into the future -- no one in
Congress, business or the scientific community is powerful
enough to go up against the oil companies...

~~ Evan

Thanks. I have great respect for Pastor Martin Niemoller.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:43:29 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

First they came for the light bulbs, and I didn't speak up
because I had CFL.
Then, they came for the gasoline, turning it to gasohol. I
didn't speak up, because I could still drive.
Then, they came for the R-12 freon, and I didn't speak up
because I had R-134a.
Then, they came for the assault weapons, and I didn't speak
up because I'm a hunter.
Then, they came to microchip my dog, and I didn't speak up
because I'm not a dog.
Then, they came for me. I was sitting in the dark, my car
wouldn't start, I had warm beer, I was out of ammo, and
what
the heck, I needed a microchip in my right hand to buy more
beer.

Excellent!

I doubt the pipeline would be needed, if we had our own
drilling and refineries. And the Alaska pipline put into
full service.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 07:17:44 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

Don't forget that little pipeline from Canuckistan.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

Less than 1% of the oil consumed in the U.S. is used for electric power
generation.

Hear, hear!

Written like a true free market conservative.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"BobR"
wrote in message
...

When a new technology reaches the point that
it becomes the most viable solution, people will
naturally accept it without having the government
shove it up their ass.

harry wrote:
On Nov 15, 12:17 pm, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"HeyBub" wrote in message

m...

It's the silliness of government trying to solve the wrong
problem, which,
if they stayed completely out of it, wouldn't be a problem
at all.

In the instant case, the difficulty is not too many
incandescent bulbs; the
problem is too few power plants.

"But," you may say, "CFLs reduce our demand for
electricity!" Yes, and
computers, electric cars, and a mania for toasted strawberry
pop-tarts
continues to drive demand up. More power generation will be
needed next week
or next year. At best, limiting consumer choices by
mandating CFLs or
prune-flavored poptarts merely delays the real solution.

Which is?

Duh! Build more power plants (and I don't mean wind, geothermal, or trying
to run this country off of sunbeams).

I'm all for that. Sadly, government never willingly
relinquishes power.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"BobR"
wrote in message
...

Getting the idiots who run a totally disfunctional
government out of the business of micromanaging
every aspect of our lives.

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:57:09 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and
will hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and
enforce the rules.

***The bidet people are behind this, mark my words!

HB

_Sheryl Crow’s solution to deforestation: Wipe with one square of TP_

On 11/15/2011 10:46 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:
And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

Less than 1% of the oil consumed in the U.S. is used for electric power
generation.


Not to mention that the US actually exports more oil than it imports.

Wonder why gas is 3.55 in western NY?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
On 11/15/2011 10:46 AM, HeyBub wrote:


Less than 1% of the oil consumed in the U.S. is used for
electric power
generation.


Not to mention that the US actually exports more oil than it
imports.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:45:44 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

I doubt the pipeline would be needed, if we had our own
drilling and refineries. And the Alaska pipline put into
full service.

Use it *all*. Whatever's cheapest, first.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:29:15 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

Wonder why gas is 3.55 in western NY?

Because it's NY. It was $3.11 yesterday, here in AL. Your taxes are, all
around, 2-3x what they need to be. That's why I left the NE.

I bought a case of 100 100-Watt bulbs this summer. Those should last several years.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
Wonder why gas is 3.55 in western NY?



You could drive over to Canada where gas is $109.80 (or thereabouts) per
gallon or drive to Texas where it's $3.05.

The difference is taxes.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:44:21 -0800 (PST), Pavel314
wrote:

I bought a case of 100 100-Watt bulbs this summer. Those should last
several years.

100 light bulbs would last me the rest of my life. Lighting is not a
significant part of my energy usage. We have task lighting where we
need it and motion detected lighting when we are walking around. Most
of the time the house is pretty dark.

Lighting is about 12% of a home's energy use, so it doesn't stand out on the
electric bill. But, as we've seen, energy prices are rising and that's not
likely to change anytime soon. So, those stocks of 100 watt bulbs get
increasingly expensive to operate every time one is put into a socket.
Already, in most places, it's cheaper to toss them than to use them.

Tomsic

On Nov 15, 3:41*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Wonder why gas is 3.55 in western NY?

You could drive over to Canada where gas is $109.80 (or thereabouts) per
gallon or drive to Texas where it's $3.05.

The difference is taxes.

Taxes account for much of it but not all. A large contribution is the
cost of transportation to those parts of the country who want the
cheap gas but don't want anything to do with refining in their own
back yards.

On Nov 15, 11:04*am, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:57:09 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:
I expect any day now they will set a new rule in place that you are
limited to a single sheet of toilet paper when you take a crap and
will hire thousands of watchdog government employees to watch you and
enforce the rules.

***The bidet people are behind this, mark my words!

HB

_Sheryl Crow’s solution to deforestation: Wipe with one square of TP_

I would bet a years pay that what she says and what she does are two
very different things.

On Nov 15, 10:45*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I doubt the pipeline would be needed, if we had our own
drilling and refineries. And the Alaska pipline put into
full service.


Very true. Now consider how differently things might be if the
government had just stayed the hell out of trying to manage the oil
industry in the first place. Just wonder what might have developed
differently if the government hadn't imposed a cap on oil prices until
we were totally dependent on foreign oil. Every time the government
gets involved with anything in an attempt to control it they either
drive it out of the country or drive the prices through the roof.


--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

wrote in message

...
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 07:17:44 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
And, the need for more petroleum refineries. And drilling
and pumping oil from the US areas, including off shore.

Don't forget that little pipeline from Canuckistan.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:47:20 -0500, "Tomsic" wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:44:21 -0800 (PST), Pavel314
wrote:

I bought a case of 100 100-Watt bulbs this summer. Those should last
several years.

100 light bulbs would last me the rest of my life. Lighting is not a
significant part of my energy usage. We have task lighting where we
need it and motion detected lighting when we are walking around. Most
of the time the house is pretty dark.

Lighting is about 12% of a home's energy use, so it doesn't stand out on the
electric bill. But, as we've seen, energy prices are rising and that's not
likely to change anytime soon. So, those stocks of 100 watt bulbs get
increasingly expensive to operate every time one is put into a socket.
Already, in most places, it's cheaper to toss them than to use them.

Since the ones thrown away use no electricity, you're right, even if
tautological. For those of us who actually like to see, we'll just keep
screwing them in, thanks. Reminder to self: Order another 100 100W bulbs
from 1000bulbs.com.

BobR wrote:
On Nov 15, 3:41 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Wonder why gas is 3.55 in western NY?

You could drive over to Canada where gas is $109.80 (or thereabouts)
per gallon or drive to Texas where it's $3.05.

The difference is taxes.

Taxes account for much of it but not all. A large contribution is the
cost of transportation to those parts of the country who want the
cheap gas but don't want anything to do with refining in their own
back yards.

Gas Taxes per gallon:
Canada - $0.61 - $1.15
New York - $0.32
Texas - $0.20
(Georgia has the lowest tax of all the states, less than eight cents per
gallon)

And now they want to strangle hold on health care. I'm not
encouraged.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"BobR" wrote in message
...
On Nov 15, 10:45 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I doubt the pipeline would be needed, if we had our own
drilling and refineries. And the Alaska pipline put into
full service.


Very true. Now consider how differently things might be if
the
government had just stayed the hell out of trying to manage
the oil
industry in the first place. Just wonder what might have
developed
differently if the government hadn't imposed a cap on oil
prices until
we were totally dependent on foreign oil. Every time the
government
gets involved with anything in an attempt to control it they
either
drive it out of the country or drive the prices through the
roof.