Activists Seek Repeal of Ban On Incandescent Bulbs

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Daniel Sayani reports in New American that Senator Mike Enzi 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 stockpiling incandescent bulbs, although a poll by USA Today indicates most Americans support the US law that begins phasing out traditional light bulbs next year. Despite some consumer grumbling, they're satisfied with more efficient alternatives. 71% of US adults 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 CFLs and LEDs."

Re:Going the other way

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife is pregnant and pregnant women aren't supposed to be around mercury. So I'm actually replacing some CFLs in my house with incandescent bulbs.

You're increasing your wife's exposure to mercury ON PURPOSE by increasing the amount of coal burned? That seems a little petty, no matter what you think of her.

Re:CFLs are much good for heating

[purpledinoz]

Duh, use a CFL, it uses 80% less power. Which means you can get 40W of heat with only 8W!