2 Jun
2010
2 Jun
'10
4:01 p.m.
What gets me is that we're supposed to pay big money to dispose of
Florescent Lightbulbs. Our local garbage company now charges anywhere from
$0.75 to $1.25 per bulb!
This does remind me though, I should stock up on certain Incandescent
bulbs. They do serve purposes that make them far better than Florescent at
times.
My question is which is really less environmentally friendly? Incandescent
or Florescent?
Zane
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Ian King wrote:
Are you kidding? We can't fund enough people to
deal with important
things like education, health and public safety, and people really think
we are paying people to watch *lightbulb sales*? I think someone's
tinfoil hat is too tight.... -- Ian
________________________________________
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of
William Donzelli [wdonzelli at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 2:49 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Anyone off to VCF-UK
I cannot find the primary legislation, and I bet
if I could I'd
regret it :-)
Here's one retailer's opinion:
http://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/info/incandescent/
Here's another actually selling them:
http://www.lyco.co.uk/Light-Bulbs/Regular-Light-Bulbs/Rough-Service-Bulb
s/sc1340.aspx
What I have heard from all this lightbulb talk, as well as other
issues - in the US, everything you read is crap, unless you are
looking at the text of the law. There are many people with axes to
grind, and will even use lightbulbs to do it.
Apparently in the US the sales of alternatives
(like rough service
bulbs) are being
monitored and action may be taken if sales go up too much. or maybe not,
who knows.
Lightbulb cops?
No, there is no monitoring.
Same as the analgesics packaging rules: if you
make it inconvenient
to go around the rules, most people won't be bothered. Job done.
Pretty much like the various copy protection systems software has used
over the years.
--
Will