Finland may ban some light bulbs
Finland is thinking about banning the sale of incandescent light bulbs…
A bill presented before the Finnish parliament on Wednesday envisages a ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. [...]Under the terms of the bill, only energy-efficient lighting would be permitted after a three-year transition period ending in 2011.
Welfare Statists are always so quick ban things they don’t like. It’s a simple-minded solution to a complex issue that takes away our smallest freedoms without really educating the public about something as serious as the environment.
Here’s an interesting story (from “Made to Stick“) about how the authorities got companies and individuals off dangerous coconut oil without laws and bans… (mind you, US politicians are just as likely to throw a ban on something, and some local politicians recently have been successful at banning certain types of oils)
The CSPI (Center for Science in the Public Interest) sent bags of movie popcorn from a dozen theaters in three major cities to a lab for nutritional analysis. The results surprised everyone. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recommends that a normal diet contain no more than 20 grams of saturated fat each day. According to the lab results, the typical bag of popcorn had 37 grams.
The culprit was coconut oil, which theaters used to pop their popcorn. Coconut oil had some big advantages over other oils. It game the popcorn a nice, silky texture, and released a more pleasant and natural aroma than the alternative oils.
[...]CSPI called a press conference on September 27, 1992. Here’s the message it presented: “A medium-sized ‘butter’ popcorn at a typical neighborhood movie theater contains more artery-clogging fat than bacon-and-eggs breakfast, a Big Mac and fries for lunch, and a steak dinner with all the trimmings - combined!” The folks at CSPI didn’t neglect the visuals, they laid out the full buffet of greasy food for the television cameras. An entire day’s worth of unhealthy eating, displayed on the table. All that saturated fat - stuffed into a single bag of popcorn.
The story was an immediate sensation, featured on CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN. It made the front pages of USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post’s Style section.
Moviegoers, repulsed by these findings, avoided popcorn in droves. Sales plunged. The service staff at movie houses grew accustomed to fielding questions about whether the popcorn was popped in the “bad oil. Soon after , most of the nation’s biggest theater chains - including United Artists, AMBC, and Loews - announced that they would stop using coconut oil.
Hmm, is there a non-incandescent light bulb that I could use with a dimmer? I’ll be damned if the politicians ruin my mood lighted love nest!
Comment by Juho — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 11:11 am
Same issue - I’d actually replace all my lights with true daylight (full spectrum) lights IF they’d work with dimmer. I hate the yellows of incandescents and the greenish tint of CF lamps. Full daylight is nice - gives the effect of “sun shining in” :).
(www.adlux.fi has a nice collection of full spectrum bulbs for sale in Finland :))
Comment by Zarr — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 11:58 am
Australia and California are going to ban light bulbs. This is not a welfare state issue.
Comment by aet75 — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 12:23 pm
Welfare Statists are always so quick ban things they don’t like
???
How is this to do with the welfare state?
Comment by JG — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 12:28 pm
Banning seems like overreacting. An excise tax, like with gasoline, polluting cars, etc., would be a better measure.
Comment by sepisp — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
I have always been involved in energy conservation for many years,but not because of man made global warming bunk and hysteria,but to save an American buck or two..I always have driven small cars to conserve gas,and maybe lower pollution levels…and save greenbacks!
For many years I have only used energy efficient flourescent light bulbs,because they last longer and use less power…But all is not good now in American attempts to halt man made global warming(GRRRRRR!)
Rush Limbaugh,my favorite neocon hero,recently pointed out that flourescent bulbs pose an ecological problem,because they have small amounts of mercury,which becomes an environmental hazard when they break,or burn out,,so finland is jumping the gun on eliminating tungsten light bulbs,which are not the threat to environment that flourescent bulbs are….
Comment by infinndel — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Banning is a feel good idea.
End of the day result: Nada a thing, Nada an impact on Global Warming.
Gee, when do we stop this feel good stuff, and just get in our jets and fly somewhere.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
“I’ll be damned if the politicians ruin my mood lighted love nest! :)”
How about changing the love nest “theme” to imitate car backseat and use 12V interior lights with variable voltage source to same effect if needed.
There are special dimmers for fluorescent lights, but the effect is not quite the same as the light spectrum remains the same. There is just less of it when dimmed. Incandescent light goes more to the red end of the spectrum.
Comment by Antti rn — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
Yes, the Hummer has a huge back seat. And when the love nest is rockin, the Hummer will not move to give the scene away.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Returning to the US popcorn example: it is not at all clear that coconut oil is bad for human consumption. The molecule chains in coconut oil are medium length, which the human body is most suited to consume fully. Some studies have pointed out that Polynesians, who traditionally consume large quantities of coconut oil, stay healthy and slim if they stay on the traditional diet. It’s only when they switch to the diet of industrial countries that they start to have their arteries clogged, type II diabetes, and overweight problems. Even the nutrition liquide that is given to people in intensive care and anorexics contains coconut due to it’s easily digestable properties.
The “eliminating bad popcorn oil” story is just one story of what happened. There is another one: agricultural producers of US launced a mighty campaign against coconut oil in order to make room for their own products. Coconuts are harder to grow in US than soy, olives or sunflowers, and the polynesians had no way to counter the bad publicity.
I agree that people will change their consumption behavior based on the information they have of their choices. But the information should not not oversimplify to a fault. A lot of Finnish houses are heated by electricity. Both light and heat are needed in those houses, one just uses less electricity to power the radiators, and the heat from the bulb does not go waste.
The idea to ban traditional light bulbs comes from the politician’s wish to say she has done something “responsible”, like preventing somebody else to do the best possible choice that person can do. Finland has an over supply of morally righteous do-gooders whose main method to do good is to limit others’ consumption choices and other opportunities.
Comment by Mara — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
ban is quite strong action. extra taxes would be better. however it’s a good idea that they (government) do something about it because some people still uses these incandescent light bulbs for unknown reason. they haven’t say exactly why.
Comment by liz — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
Just one more thing to buy in Estonia.
Maybe the Government should ban it’s own use of incandescent bulbs first and see how that goes. That is much simpler and will have a much greater impact on total electricity consumption instead of getting a million households to make the switch.
Then again, how about banning all the exterior moodlighting in Helsinki and elsewhere during the winter. Just need to convince people to feel good that the city is dark.
Comment by Fred Fry — Sun, Sep 30th, 2007 @ 10:41 pm
Well, I use energy-saving lamps for the simple reason that you don’t have to be changing one every other week as is the case with incandescent bulbs. As we have central heating, this is also energy-efficient. Not to mention that especially after the Kokoomus energy tax hike, the electricity bill is smaller.
But from a treehugging point of view, I am not sure that fluorescent lights are so beneficial, considering all the mercury and other heavy metals they contain. Perhaps LEDs would be better? Does Antti know if their manufacturing process involves poisoning porpoises with cadmium?
winter:
Yes, the Hummer has a huge back seat. And when the love nest is rockin, the Hummer will not move to give the scene away.
The real hummer (H1) has two separate seats in the back. The fake version favoured by homosexuals and soccer moms might have a huge back seat. I wouldn’t know.
So, winnie, is it another sailor or a cheating housewife you have in the back there?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 12:02 am
“So, winnie, is it another sailor or a cheating housewife you have in the back there?”
naw, just came back for the Navy USAF Football game. Navy won. But darn if 30 000 drunkin Sailors brings back the memories.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 2:09 am
Why? Have you had as many as that in the back of your Hummer?
Comment by JG — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 2:43 am
Well burning coal is banned in cities. Everyone seems to think that is a good idea.
If there is something to grump about here is the redundancy, old lightbulbs are a dying technology anyway. Also anyone able to calculate can easily come to the conclusion that energy-saving light bulbs are cheaper and more durable when the cost is measured against the lifespan and decrease in electricity use.
But certainly there is nothing bad about banning old wasteful technology that nobody needs.
Comment by philtard — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 3:07 am
“nothing bad about banning old wasteful technology that nobody needs.”
ok, so what is next?
Your old car?
Then your smelly socks? Yes they do stop the world.
Then your stach of rum? After all that stuff is now needed to run my car.
Gee, lets let the Government loose.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 4:04 am
“Why? Have you had as many as that in the back of your Hummer?” - JG
No, that’s how many he has had in his mouth.
Comment by Dave the Revelator — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 8:44 am
I changed to energy saving lamps years and years ago and recently switched to full spectrum daylight bulbs. No need to look back. Of course, they don’t work with a dimmer, but I think it’s mostly a matter of clever light planning so you don’t even need one.
Comment by Reko — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 11:03 am
Banning incandescent bulbs in warm places like Australia and California is a really great idea and will surely reduce energy consumption in the regions. In Finland, however, where for at least 7 months of the year houses need to be heated the energy savings won’t be as notable.
With light bulbs no longer providing heat, radiators etc will need to use more energy… Of course this might save you some _money_ if your house isn’t warmed with electricity. But it won’t save any energy…
Still, during the summer, and in outdoor lighting, I highly recommend using compact fluorescent tubes (energiansäästölamppu) instead of incandescent light bulbs even in Finland. And remember to recycle those fluorescent tubes because they do contain mercury, not as much as they used to but enough…
Comment by hang 10 — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
#20 “Banning incandescent bulbs in warm places like Australia and California is a really great idea and will surely reduce energy consumption in the regions”
This is one of the common and classic misconceptions people here have. Unfortunately you fail to understand (or weren’t taught) that warm places like Australia rely heavily on electricity due to their warm climate. Ever heard of air conditioning? Strangely enough, energy consumption peaks in the summer months despite the longer days and outdoor lifestyle. Air conditioning is switched on in homes, offices, shops and industrial plants place a heavy demand for electricity.
During the cooler months when we rely on heating, this is primarily done by gas meaning a reduction on overall electricity use. Fluorescent lights have long been the way for lighting in Australia eaning this proposed ban is more about “PC” than anything meaningful. As to the overall use of electricity, it will mean little to nothing.
Comment by Punter — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
“Does Antti know if their manufacturing process involves poisoning porpoises with cadmium?”
With my limited knowledge on the early life of semiconductors, I would say no. Basic ingredient for a white LED is Galliumnitride and Gallium is produced mostly as a side product of aluminium. There is mercury involved in Gallium extraction, but I understand it’s a closed-cycle process in this respect.
Comment by Antti rn — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
#21 “This is one of the common and classic misconceptions people here have.”
No. It’s not.
I realize that in Australia many people have air conditioning. If Australians used incandescent light bulbs which emit a lot of excess heat, the AC would need to deal with the heat from the light bulbs too, instead of just the “ambient” heat… So obviously using fluorescent tubes will reduce energy consumption and my point stays valid.
Using gas instead of electricity for heating will reduce electricity use like you said. But that isn’t the same thing as reducing _energy_ consumption. I’m not enough of an expert to say which is more energy efficient, gas or electric heating.
Comment by hang 10 — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
kings of leon forever
Comment by Quagga — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
naw, just came back for the Navy USAF Football game. Navy won. But darn if 30 000 drunkin Sailors brings back the memories.
Warning to the sailors of the world: don’t pass out drunk in the back seat of winter’s hummer.
Obligatory music video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwFk2VaDXok
Antti rn:
There is mercury involved in Gallium extraction, but I understand it’s a closed-cycle process in this respect.
“Closed-cycle” is relative. In places without hippie treehugging laws, the process might be considered closed-cycle if you choose the Earth as your system.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
Again, sadly, a Feel good idea has seen the spot light, and
Drum roll please
eject eject eject, missile up the tail pipe
another Government feel good idea is myth busted. No saving the earth with this silly idea.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Punter, I think you missed the point hang 10 was making. Light bulbs produce heat that goes to waste in hot Australia unlike in cold Finland.
Comment by Pave — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
Actually Pave I don’t think I missed anything. The point was that replacing such bulbs in Australia would conserve energy when in fact the time with max energy consumption is summer. Lights are turned off anyway in Australia during summer yet once the AC goes on, BANG max power. Using them in winter hardly counts for anything and in any case, as I mentioned the majority of heating energy is gas. That in fact goes for hot water and cooking too meaning that a private home relies heavily on gas for it’s energy rather than here in Finland where mostly it’s electric, electric or electric.
Comment by Punter — Mon, Oct 1st, 2007 @ 8:42 pm
Don’t forget the district central heating in the towns, which is frankly a lot more efficient than having 100 light bulbs in each room on the go. I think the significance for heating of lighting is not far above zero unless you have some kind of theme park light display in each of your rooms… and even then I suspect the heating sources actually intended for warmth creation are more efficient for your bill and the environment.
Comment by JG — Tue, Oct 2nd, 2007 @ 7:13 pm
If I ever build a house, I’m going to install water circulation-based floor heating. That way I’m able to switch the method of heating (heat pump, oil, wood) with reasonable costs. With direct electric heating, you’re destined to be the electricity companies’ bitch.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Oct 3rd, 2007 @ 11:06 am
To be fair, the British are also banning traditional light bulbs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm
Comment by For a sustainable future — Thu, Oct 4th, 2007 @ 12:20 am
Gee, feel good banning is spreading. Whats the return on investment? Zero?
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, Oct 4th, 2007 @ 6:01 pm
nonathletic nectarium otherworldliness titanotherium rechuck dalle bruno underhanging
The Human Resource Consortium, LLC
http://www.gsc.vic.edu.au/
Comment by Miriam Sampson — Thu, Oct 18th, 2007 @ 1:45 am
nonathletic nectarium otherworldliness titanotherium rechuck dalle bruno underhanging
SurfTrader
http://www.cutlery.com
Comment by Georgette Cleveland — Sun, Oct 21st, 2007 @ 4:40 am
Google
Comment by svxxg — Tue, Oct 23rd, 2007 @ 3:01 am
Juho. There are now saving bulbs that work work dimmers. I have not tried them myself though since I don’t have dimmers.
Why not ban them (with certain exceptions like car and bicycle lights). The first practical incandescent light bulb was made in 1879 and people are still using them in vast quantities! Why, when there are more modern alternatives. The record player was in common use from the 1870s till the 1980s. How many people use them today? The walkman dates from 1979 using a cassette tape. Quite new compared to the incandescent light. Who uses that now? Even I have switched to an mp3 player. So I guess since people are making the progressive switch in technologies as they do with other things then a ban is the only way left.
Comment by Ronnie — Tue, Feb 26th, 2008 @ 7:58 am