"light Bulb Gets Flick In Australia"

[mojoman 0]

I got to conduct a presentation about the ban of light bulbs in Australia. Untill 2010 the government wants to forbid them to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions:

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ :

The Australian government on Tuesday announced plans to phase out incandescent light bulbs and replace them with more energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs across the country.
Legislation to gradually restrict the sale of the old-style bulbs could reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions by 4 million tons by 2012 and cut household power bills by up to 66%, said Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

For my presentation I would like to have some opinions about this issue. What do you think about the effect of this ban? Is it just political dazzlement or does it really help and is a step into slowing down the progressing climate change?

[t3jem 0]

I think that's the government trying to restrict too much on what the people do; however, I think it is still a good thing because it will help reduce the consumption of power; therefor, reducing greenhouse gases to help preserve the atmosphere. If the U.S. did something like this then we could save billions on energy bills, so I think ultimately it is a great law.

[Crypto 0]

I think it is retarded.I think they are just trying to lower bills by saying that.If they wanted to lower green house gases there are many other things that could be done like going to flourescent light bulbs instead.

[pop 0]

in my place they changed old street lightning to new ecology friendly lightning. now they save 100 000? a year with this new lightning, that spends much less electrycity. they need to do that in every city because we need to save today for the future!

[rvalkass 5]

There are two ways to look at this (always good for a debate ). Firstly there is the energy saving aspect, which is all well and good, as long as this is enforced on businesses as well. Its pointless doing it only in houses if businesses are going to have millions of normal bulbs wasting energy. Secondly, they should save you money. Great, but if you work it out, they will actually save you very little, if anything, over their lifetime.

Is it just political dazzlement or does it really help and is a step into slowing down the progressing climate change?

Both. Its political spin because it is something which can be done pretty easily and quickly, and affects everyone. It sends out a signal that they are committed to solving global warming. It will help to slow down climate change, but probably not by much. If they were really committed they would announce they were phasing out petrol and diesel as fuels and seriously funding alternative fuels.

[FLaKes 0]

I think this is excellent, these type of restrictions are the ones I do like not like the ban of the Grand Theft Auto game, which I thought was a ridiculous law passed by the Australian government. This is really good for ecology, and I definitely support it.

[csp4.0 1]

I actually support the banning of GTA games, but anyhoo back on topic.This is a good idea in one way and a bad way in another.Changing every light bulb to the florescent light bulbs will definitely help reduce greenhouse gasses, but what about people who have dimmers (like me) florescent light bulbs are not compatible with dimmer switches.And those florescent light bulbs have mercury vapor in them, which makes them a mild HAZCHEM risk.Certain states i.e. VIC, AUS should use more efficient types of coal or other types electricity generation.The environment is very important, and for those people that do not appriciate it, SHAME ON YOU! I do support this, but there is a very important thing that has to be bypassed and that is the mercury vapour used in those light bulbs, if they are broken the person may suffer from mild-moderate mercury poisoning.

[mojoman 0]

And those florescent light bulbs have mercury vapor in them, which makes them a mild HAZCHEM risk.Certain states i.e. VIC, AUS should use more efficient types of coal or other types electricity generation.
The environment is very important, and for those people that do not appriciate it, SHAME ON YOU! I do support this, but there is a very important thing that has to be bypassed and that is the mercury vapour used in those light bulbs, if they are broken the person may suffer from mild-moderate mercury poisoning.

Oh, I did not know that they are using mercury. Thats pretty useless of course if you save the climate but destroy the environment...

---

Australia is one of the countries with the highest carbon dioxide ejection from what I know. If they eject billions of tons every year (I dont know how much exactly) and save just a few tons by using fluorescent bulbs, does it really matter? Shouldnt the government rather force the industry to eject less carbon dioxid and force them to produce products that needs less current?

Mhmm - I do not think its senseless of course. But imho the government should not sit at their fat asses (sorry for that language ) and think they're fine because they forbade light bulbs. They should act more, be more active in protecting the climate...
Well, this is still a good start...

[arnz 0]

I dont mind this proposal, but provided that this is also enforced on Businesses and organisations down here, the better. Considering the politicians down here do have a bit of a reputation for rolling out promises and so forth before an election campaign, only for the majority of them to dispose of many of them not too long after.

[inverse_bloom 0]

Its been about two or three months since incandescent light bulbs were banned in South Australia (I'm not sure about the rest of the states). Personally I don't think there's been much of a fuss due to it, at least not for the household i live in. It would have been nice if we began getting warmer temperature fluorescent globes for our place as we have been getting the cheaper bright blue ones, maybe later.

Edited May 20, 2009 by inverse_bloom (see edit history)

[jayzeed 0]

I think this is a very good idea, with no immediate or any foreseeable consequences, that will help in multiple ways.

1) Household bills from incandescent lighbulbs will be reduced by up to 75% by the proper energy-compact lightbulb

An ENERGY STAR qualified compact fluorescent light bulb (CFL) will save about $30 over its lifetime and pay for itself in about 6 months. It uses 75 percent less energy and lasts about 10 times longer than an incandescent bulb

2) the enviromental effect would be extremely large. have you seen the wal-mart commercials that talk about the 1 light bulb- per costomer removing like 500000 cars? imagine 34 for 6 BILLION ( thats the average) thats 204BILLION light bulbs which is like, removing all the cars X 2!!!!

Notice from truefusion:

All copied material must be placed within QUOTE bbcode.