Re: CFL database

[RickH <passport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 3, 4:22=A0pm, "Lon" <Lon...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Robert L Bass" <RobertLB...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in messagenews:i8_ej.16169=
$DG4.259@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > "Dave Houston" wrote:
>
> >> Switching from incandescents to CFLs means a net increase in mercury.
>
> > That is patently untrue and I believe Dave knows it by now.
>
> Odd, that is not what the Gore groupies are saying around here.
>
> California effectively mandated CFLs and FLs in 2005 for new homes,
> mandating that screw type fixtures not be installed. =A0(Title 24). =A0 Th=
at
> will mean a net increase in mercury in landfills until there are provision=
s
> for separate disposal of dead FL and CFL bulbs.
>
> Good overview here: =A0http://www.ccidc.org/pdf/2005%20Res%20Lighting2.pdf=

>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

I guess we cant ask how many Polacks it takes to screw in a light bulb
anymore then either :)  (I'm Polish BTW).  This is the first I have
ever heard of someone mandating that the actual screw sockets be
eliminated to prevent usage of incandescent.  I guess they realize
that you cant make it "illegal" to make a light bulb, so they will
simply mandate different sockets from the home builders.  Can you
still buy a lamp in california?  This is simply getting ridiculous.
Funny how they are not mandating eliminating "wall warts" which run
365/24 drawing their 5 to 10 watts of continuously wasted energy
simply because manufacturers want easy UL approval by not putting the
power suppies in devices anymore with on/off switches.  Instead using
wall warts, how many actually bother to move a dresser to unplug their
chargers, toys, radios, etc wall warts, not many.