backtop


Print 116 comment(s) - last by linuxisbest.. on Mar 26 at 10:49 PM


n:vision 23W (100W equivalent) compact fluorescent
New bill would mandate that light bulbs produce 120 lumens per watt by 2020

It looks as though energy efficiency is still a big priority for municipalities and countries across the globe. We've already detailed energy-efficient LED lighting efforts put forth by Raleigh, NC. We've also discussed how Australia and the European Union (EU) plan to get rid of incandescent light bulbs by 2009. The United States is also moving towards ushering out inefficient lighting with H.R. 1547, which was published on March 15, 2007.

The bill (PDF), which was submitted by California representative Jane Harman, indicates that light bulbs which have an overall luminous efficacy of 60 lumens per watt (lm/W) will be prohibited by January 1, 2012. The energy requirements get progressively steeper every four years. On January 1, 2016, the requirement will grow to 90 lm/W and will reach 120 lm/W by 2020.

A traditional 100W tungsten incandescent light has an overall luminous efficacy of 17.5 lm/W. A 23W compact fluorescent (100W equivalent) has an overall luminous efficacy of 60 lm/W.

Exemptions could be made by the Secretary of Energy for certain applications where it wouldn't be feasible to use energy-efficient lighting. These include applications related to military, medical or matters of public safety.

If an exception is made by the Secretary of Energy, that still doesn't give entitle the recipient to a free pass to continue using outdated technology. The exemption will only be in effect for two years after which the current enacted requirement will have to be adhered to.

The bill also notes that consumers and businesses will be given incentives to encourage the use of energy efficient light bulbs.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Dimmable
By Christopher1 on 3/22/2007 5:11:04 PM , Rating: 0
Why? Why does it matter if a light is 'dimable' or not? I have lights in my home, and not ONE has a dimmer control on it, except for my stand light, and that isn't a built-in light fixture.

There is no reason in most homes for people ot have dimmable lights. It's just a waste of money, waste of parts, and waste of time.


RE: Dimmable
By robertgu on 3/22/2007 6:23:42 PM , Rating: 3
Why do you feel just because you do not have something that everybody should not have it or make do without it?

Sorry if I'm blunt, but it sounds a little childish and resentful to me.

I don't have dimmers and I have CFLs on every light source in my house. But that's MY choice. What right do you have in knocking someone else's choices? It's their lives, it's their money, and it’s their choices.

All this "you have to chose what we want" or "we'll regulate you into what we want you to do" is my main problem with extreme leftist and rightist. Leftist because they force us to social programs by taxes and regulations to fit their agendas. Rightists by their constant pushing of religious agendas. What ever happen to respecting individual freedoms and choices?

If you want to increase electrical efficiency; take a page out of the oil price hikes, when oil shot up, people that were using ultra-large vehicles for frivolous uses have started trading down in vehicles, with many picking up hybrids. The people that have uses for the large vehicles stuck to them. The hybrids grew into popularity not by regulations but by economics (higher oil prices) and individual choices. The same should happen with electrical efficiency.

Stop with the forcing tight-fitting regulations down people’s throats already!


RE: Dimmable
By dever on 3/23/2007 3:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
Mostly agree, but I know many who call themselves right-winged, and have no desire to force religion on anyone. Aren't libertarians considered far right-winged? (ie believe government's function is to stop the coercion of individuals by other individuals or governments, define property rights and do little else.)


"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki