Daily update on Biden tanking america

[TBoneTX 45,572]

12 minutes ago, LIBrty4all said:

If only this phenomenon could have been predicted...

Leftist do-gooders never consider consequences or even think ahead at all.

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

2 hours ago, LIBrty4all said:

Possibly a push to keep more energy "in the grid", since "experts" are now advising people to NOT charge their EVs at home overnight because it is drawing too much power and causing rates to go up (takes more coal and oil to charge more and more EVs).  If only this phenomenon could have been predicted...

Actually yes: they are doing everything possible to NOT increase the capacity of the grid, which btw, is outdated as well. 

 

But really, incandescent bulbs are bad. 

[Mike E 11,741]

20 hours ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

Officials estimate this will cut carbon emissions by 222 million metric tons over 30 years and will save $3 million per year on utility bills."

Why is it one metric is expressed over 30 years and another per year?

 

And both are useless.

 

In 2016 the U.S. emitted 5,011,686,600 tons of CO2 or 4.547 billion metric tons. At 350 million people that is 13 metric tons per person per year.

 

A savings of 222 million metric tons over 30 years is 0.02 metric tons per person per year. 20 kilograms. That is how much CO2 a person exhales in 20 days.

 

$3 million per year in savings less than a penny per person per year.

 

I will never recoup the costs of led bulbs.

 

Useless metrics. Useless results.

 

Won’t save a single puppy from dying

 

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Mike E

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

1 minute ago, Mike E said:

Why is it one metric is expressed over 30 years and another per year?

 

And both are useless.

 

In 2016 the U.S. emitted 5,011,686,600 tons of CO2 or 4.547 billion metric tons. At 350 million people that is 13 metric tons per person per year.

 

A savings of 222 million metric tons over 30 years is 0.02 metric tons per person is 0.02 metric tons of per person per year. 20 kilograms. That is how much CO2 a person exhales in one day.

 

$3 million per year in savings less than a penny per person per year.

 

 

Because the incandescent lightbulbs industry is not as powerful and does not bring as much revenue as other businesses that actually consume way more energy and pollute more. 

The reasoning is similar to banning straws: basically useless but something was done.

 

Now, I won't get tired of repeating the following: incandescent lightbulbs are really bad -they have been banned for many years in other countries-. 

 

 

[yuna628 9,686]

We have slowly replaced almost all of our incandescents with LEDs. They are much better than those dreadful CFLs. My only issue is with the brightness of some of them, which can be a little too much. With some experimenting though we found 'warm color' ones. The thing I hate the most though, are some of the  LEDs in vehicles which I feel are intensely bright, cause eye pain and could be a hazard. Apparently fussing about that has been a thing for a while. Most of the LEDs in our house have lasted a very long time and we're pleased with that, but we did get a box recently that had some odd failures. I never could understand the fuss and huge resistance to LED bulb technology... it's been going on for years. Recently read the most insufferable article of a complainer, and nearly thought it an April Fools joke... nope. The person is just odd.

[Mike E 11,741]

12 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

Now, I won't get tired of repeating the following: incandescent lightbulbs are really bad

Another useless metric. Is really bad worse than bad? Is extremely bad worse than really bad? By how much? What is the SI unit

for bad?

 

They are not bad for me.

 

12 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

they have been banned for many years in other countries-.

Don’t care. Other countries ban other things I like: booze, guns,  GMO food, nuclear power, baby walkers, chewing gum, lip syncing, blue jeans, etc 

 

Now Valentines Day and mullets are banned elsewhere and I support that. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Mike E

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

35 minutes ago, Mike E said:

They are not bad for me.

Seems they're more than "not bad"for you. You're incandescent about them! 🤣

 

[yuna628 9,686]

40 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Another useless metric. Is really bad worse than bad? Is extremely bad worse than really bad? By how much? What is the SI unit

for bad?

 

They are not bad for me.

 

Don’t care. Other countries ban other things I like: booze, guns,  GMO food, nuclear power, baby walkers, chewing gum, lip syncing, blue jeans, etc 

 

Now Valentines Day and mullets are banned elsewhere and I support that. 

Can I ask why you consider incandescents not bad for you? That may be the wrong question to ask - why do you prefer using incandescents compared to LED bulbs? What is the basis? 

There are many pros to LEDs vs cons to other bulbs. To me I see an upgraded and technologically better product which will be more useful, cost and energy efficient for the consumer, and can be customized in a variety of color and light needs. There is also less of a fire risk. Think of our transition to records, 8 tracks, cassettes, CDs, and digital audio. Records are making quite a comeback these days (just as very old fashioned looking bulbs are), but you'd be hard-pressed to find a cassette enthusiast that demands they are better for them compared to a variety of technological advanced options. I'd have a hard time making an argument that LED is bad for you. Perhaps you may point to a random study here or there, which are largely inconclusive and do offer solutions for issues raised, but compared to other bulbs, it would seem LEDs are far better than our stupid foray into CFLs and older technology bulbs. I can imagine before the lightbulb being invented, there were many that cried oil and gas lamps and candles were the best ever.

[TBoneTX 45,572]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

we did get a box recently that had some odd failures

The LED bulbs that I've bought have lasted no longer than most incandescent bulbs do.

[Dashinka 24,630]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

Another useless metric. Is really bad worse than bad? Is extremely bad worse than really bad? By how much? What is the SI unit

for bad?

 

They are not bad for me.

 

Don’t care. Other countries ban other things I like: booze, guns,  GMO food, nuclear power, baby walkers, chewing gum, lip syncing, blue jeans, etc 

 

Now Valentines Day and mullets are banned elsewhere and I support that. 

Now that is a good question.  
 

Personally I don’t really care about incandescent vs LEDs except in one instance.  When driving my wife’s car that has a video rear view mirror, if there is a car with LED DTRLs, they flicker annoyingly and looks like a cop is coming up from behind.

 

I do agree that this is something that governments should leave to the marketplace.

[yuna628 9,686]

24 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

The LED bulbs that I've bought have lasted no longer than most incandescent bulbs do.

That may depend on the brand, as we did have a box of bad ones once...but I've had LEDs still going strong for several years when regular bulbs would have been dead a couple times by now. Also: LEDs that are placed in an enclosed fixture may burn out faster in some situations.

[Mike E 11,741]

46 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Can I ask why you consider incandescents not bad for you?

Incandescents never did anything bad to me.

 

49 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

why do you prefer using incandescents compared to LED bulbs

Because they are forbidden.

 

51 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

I'd have a hard time making an argument that LED is bad for you

Me neither. I never said they were bad.

 

 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,376]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

Can I ask why you consider incandescents not bad for you? That may be the wrong question to ask - why do you prefer using incandescents compared to LED bulbs? What is the basis? 

There are many pros to LEDs vs cons to other bulbs. To me I see an upgraded and technologically better product which will be more useful, cost and energy efficient for the consumer, and can be customized in a variety of color and light needs. There is also less of a fire risk. Think of our transition to records, 8 tracks, cassettes, CDs, and digital audio. Records are making quite a comeback these days (just as very old fashioned looking bulbs are), but you'd be hard-pressed to find a cassette enthusiast that demands they are better for them compared to a variety of technological advanced options. I'd have a hard time making an argument that LED is bad for you. Perhaps you may point to a random study here or there, which are largely inconclusive and do offer solutions for issues raised, but compared to other bulbs, it would seem LEDs are far better than our stupid foray into CFLs and older technology bulbs. I can imagine before the lightbulb being invented, there were many that cried oil and gas lamps and candles were the best ever.

I like LED bulbs because the tend to last forever and I don't have to get my old tired behind on a ladder and change them. 

[Crazy Cat 41,982]

2 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Think of our transition to records, 8 tracks, cassettes, CDs, and digital audio.

I don't mind when I make my own decisions.  

Edited April 6, 2023 by Crazy Cat

[Crazy Cat 41,982]

2 hours ago, yuna628 said:

That may depend on the brand, as we did have a box of bad ones once.

My FIL had several which failed.  I think his issue was the rural electricity provider.