Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
It's lights out for Nunavut
Share:
by babblingdweeb | June 5, 2007 at 09:25 am
1154 views | 15 Recommendations | 5 comments
Photos
One Canadian territory has placed a ban on incandescent light bulbs following the lead of many other world governments. Like those other locations, the decision is met with resistance in what some are calling a publicity stunt.
They charge that replacing the old-fashioned bulbs with compact flourescent bulbs would not do much to cut energy consumption and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"I consider that to be a good publicity stunt, that we would be reducing our contribution in terms of national average," Rankin Inlet North MLA Tagak Curley said. "When we do compare our national average, it's really insignificant."
Despite talks of PR campaigns, it appears that the public generally supports the ban. Most consumers already know that while the alternative florescent bulbs cost more upfront, they save on monthly electricity bills. This combined with longevity (florescent bulbs lasting 5-7 years), cost savings adds up. Consumers see this as an advantage to their wallet, and the Earth.
"There's very strong support, almost eight out of every ten Ontarians support the ban on incandescent light bulbs," said SES president Nik Nanos.
Politicians see themselves as catering to the public's concerns.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose State has also announced plans to ban florescent bulbs by 2012, drew national attention yesterday with his visit to Ontario to sign a pact with the province to "fight" greenhouse gases.
Both jurisdictions agreed to promote green technology, develop a low carbon fuel standard for gas and work together on climate change policies ranging from a North American emissions trading system to more energy efficient buildings.
Schwarzenegger, speaking at Queen's Park, said he and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty are "soulmates" on this issue and expressed hope other provinces and U.
S. States will join the accord.
"This bigger this partnership is the more successful it will be," Schwarzenegger said.
Who is right? Well, that's a tough call to make. I can tell you that the money I have saved by switching all of my bulbs in my house to florescent has been grater than the cost of the bulbs. My only frustration is not being able to swap out in the incandescent bulbs in some fixtures that just won't fit at florescent.
What do you think of a ban on incondescent bulbs? Is your local
government considering a ban? Are you a politician/activist? What's
your angle? Tell us your thoughts, comment below!
Other information:
- Where is Nunavut? Ask Wiki
- "Industry wants Ban on Bulb in Europe"; AP via WKRN, Nashville
- "South Africa may ban incandescent light bulbs" ; IOL
- "State Lawmakers Propose Bill To Ban Sale of Incandescent Light Bulbs"; New York 1 News
Arguments for ban:
- "Philips executive supports call to ban incandescent light bulbs; MarketWatch
- "Pro-Con: Should governments ban incandescent bulbs? YES"; KansasCity.com
- "Ban the incandescent bulb"; People and Planet
Arguments against:
- "Why can't we just ban the incandescent bulb?"; Hindustan Times
- "Canadian Climatologist Asks Government to Prove Bulb Ban Saves The Planet"; NewsBusters
- "Pro-Con: Should governments ban incandescent bulbs? No"; KansasCity.com
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
triviaqueen
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
janamills
Lower Edmonton,FelixFortyTwo
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
MadeIn1984
Magnolia, Texas, United States
minusthe_girl
pico rivera, California, United Statesknudsented
Olympia, Washington, United States
daviqh
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
at 09:29 on June 5th, 2007
babblingdweeb, thanks for doing so much work on this story. Great stuff!
at 09:36 on June 5th, 2007
Wow. Can't we turn this story into some kind of contest? You've done a fantastic job - I can easily imagine this sort of thing being a magazine article, organized into the main news item, a couple of "sidebars" , some fotos of people who like and some who hate the idea.
I wish we had the formatting power to do this sort of thing. And to truly crowdsource different aspects of this story.
Great stuff, BD. Really like the way you've organized the material. Somehow I think tho that the stuff at the bottom - the arguments pro and con - should be up higher, where it can inspire commentary.
at 17:11 on June 5th, 2007
I recently picked up a couple of the fluorescent bulbs. The fluorescents have a warning label on them stating that they contain mercury and need to be specially disposed of. That really seriously bothers me. What's really more lethal, another incandescent bulb, or more freaking mercury being dumped? Ugh. I'm not saying I'm pro-incandescent and anti-fluorescent. I just want to see a serious, unbiased study of the impact of fluorescent bulbs and the mercury that's involved.
at 09:36 on June 12th, 2007
Wow, I had not thought of that...and like you I had not looked at the package. I'm with you...I would like to know more about this -I'll have to read the info that Dave provided below to learn more.
at 19:36 on June 5th, 2007
I found this pdf with information on mercury in fluorescent bulbs, including why/how/etc., from the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (bias?)