Well, they’re at it again. The same clowns in Washington, D.C. that brought you the “two-flusher,” AKA the 1.6 gallon toilet, have banned the incandescent light bulb. Subsidies for candles are next. In case you missed it, Congress passed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, soon to be known as the Lights Out America Act, enacted in the closing hours of the last Congressional session.
Along with numerous other provisions that will not create one watt of energy, the new law mandates the elimination of the incandescent light bulb in favor of compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) beginning in 2012. Thomas Edison, where are you now that we need you?
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for progress and the conversation of energy. I even agree with Newton’s Law of the Conservation of Energy, which I studied in engineering school. I am a proud owner and operator of several CFLs. You know what I’ve found out about them? The light they produce is weak and of a funny color. They take a long time to come on. They don’t come on at all in cold weather, which we have a lot of here in Truckee. They don’t fit in many of my fixtures. They are useless for reading. They don’t work with dimmers.
I’ve been told that they contain mercury, a heavy metal which is highly toxic. So much so that the fine print on the CFL package, which I used a flashlight to read, warns against the dangers of breakage. The EPA has had to implement a four-step program for clean up after breakage, the first step of which is “Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more.” I am not kidding. I can imagine the Congress of 2025 passing a law prohibiting the breakage and/or disposal of the mercury-laden CFLs.
A few years back the town of Traer, Iowa, instituted a swap-out program in which over 50 percent of the citizens traded their incandescent bulbs for CFLs. Energy usage went up 8 percent. Apparently, when the cost of using electricity goes down, consumption goes up. Duh!
I have been a hobby meteorologist for over 20 years and studied meteorology a couple of years in college. I have been listening to all sides of the global warming debate, but it seems that only one side ever gets printed in papers. Headlines like Tuesday’s is an alarmist tactic and it doesn’t show readers all the facts. There are more and more scientists jumping off the human-induced global warming band-wagon.
The first-ever emergency hearing in Washington, D.C. on climate change was in the 1970s and it was on the fear of a coming Ice Age! In the 1930s articles in papers were being written about how the polar ice caps would be gone in 10 years. 70-plus years later they are still there. Ocean heights that were supposed to raise by feet are on track to only raise a few inches. I just wish people could read both sides of the story. The Southern Hemisphere just had one of its coldest winters in history.
The Alps are currently getting record snowfall and the North Pole is extremely cold.
I read the headlines this morning and decided to look up statistics on Truckee from this December and the past 10 Decembers. The average high in Truckee is 40 degrees or higher every day in December. This December, only four days were above 40. Twenty-seven of 31 days were below normal. Average high for the month is 41.2 and this Dec. was 35.7. We were -4.2 overall against average.
I looked up the past 10 Decembers and if you add the averages together for the month it equals 6.2 average. I was so intrigued I looked up the last 10 January and it was -10 average. So if we are going to warm up I think we have to stop cooling down first. Can you please print from both sides of the debate. Human Induced Global Warming is a theory not fact.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User