Lights Out!
By E M Barner | Thursday, September 9th, 2010 | Catch-AllIncandescent light bulbs are going the way of the horse and buggy. And with them 200 manufacturing jobs at the General Electric plant in Winchester, Virginia.
The Washington Post called it “the end of an era.” The light bulb has changed very little from Thomas Edison’s basic concept until now.
But why is it changing now? Why are manufacturing jobs going away in the middle of this recession?
Fluorescent light bulbs changed the commercial market but didn’t impact the household market very much until compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) came along. CFLs were a much more energy efficient product. They lasted four times as long as incandescent bulbs. The problem is that they originally cost more than four times as much and Americans were reluctant to buy them. Although the price of CFLs has come down, 75% of the light bulbs sold in America are still incandescent.
So what’s a CFL manufacturer to do? Why, call their friends in the US Congress and the EPA.
Energy efficiency meant the CFL bulbs could be marketed as a “green” solution and that’s very popular on Capitol Hill. So in 2007, the Democratic controlled Congress passed the Energy Independence and Security Act, which imposed new energy-efficiency mandates on light bulbs sold for private homes. The legislation essentially banned incandescent light bulbs and created a 100% market share for CFLs starting in 2014.
Three years later, the unintended consequences of the legislation are already apparent.
Goodbye Winchester made light bulbs. Hello federally mandated CFLs.
Goodbye well-paying American jobs. CFLs are made almost exclusively in China.
And what about the environment? Well, CFLs are much more energy efficient but they also contain trace amounts of mercury, which is toxic and requires special handling and disposal. While the amount of mercury is not large enough to pose a household hazard, they do present a disposal challenge for landfills. Ideally, CFLs should be carefully sequestered and recycled using special processing methods. But not all local recycling facilities are equipped to process CFLs and many consumers are not aware of the long-term environmental hazards posed by discarding CFLs in trash that is headed for the landfill.
What’s at stake when big business joins with Congress and regulators to mandate that consumers buy a product for which there is far less demand in the unimpeded market?
Only liberty.
And jobs.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
E M Barner, the blogger formerly known as DCH / De Civitate Hominis (“concerning the city of man”), writes from a Northern Virginia perspective. Barner has been active in Republican politics and policy since 1994 – as a grassroots volunteer, party leader, and professional.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
18 Responses to "Lights Out!"
Looks like I will buy up all the lightbulbs I can find at Dollar Tree and elsewhere.
Flourescent light is the most unhealthy light there is. In an office setting, it gives you bloodshot eyes & headaches by 3:00pm. Thankfully I can work from home and remote in 2 days a week to get some eye relief.
New generation cfl’s and emerging LED’s are making incandescent light obsolete beyond a doubt. The energy savings are considerable, the quality of light has improved markedly and as the economy of scale grows the cost will drop further. Modern led fixture will not have screw in bases because they will be permanent 50+ year life components, far smaller and less material required than present fixtures. The reason the bulbs will not be built here is because of our high labor cost, profusely high taxes and abandonment of the working class manufacturing labor pool. Lets focus on that. Not everyone wants or needs a college education and making modern lightbulbs would pay better than the bread line.
This is a political problem.
@James “turbo” Cohen
Well yes. And I’m all for energy efficient light bulbs and changing the way we get our artificial lighting.
What I’m not for is the government telling us how and when to do it! Let the market decide. If the CFL manufacturers are making a better product at a reasonable cost then their product will overtake the competition without government mandates.
Turbo –
What do you have against liberty and the freedom of the marketplace? Why do you trust government to entirely demolish one segment of an industry? I’m all for efficient lighting sources, but I still buy traditional bulbs because I hate how long it takes the original CFL’s to get to full strength. Plus the cost. I’m keeping my eye on the developing LED’s because I like that light better than the CFL’s, but why is the government forcing me to make the switch?
This is similar to the government mandating that TV’s go all-digital a couple years ago (don’t forget all the coupons they sent out for new digital receivers). If there’s a TV maker out there who believes he can make a profit continuing to make analog TV’s, then why not let them take that gamble? Were the airwaves really so full that the government had to make it unlawful to manufacture analog components?
The government, and especially the federal government, needs to get the heck out of the business of picking winners and losers in the marketplace. I don’t believe the government ever stuck their nose into outlawing the manufacture of buggy whips. Henry Ford and others, and their innovations, saw to the doom of that industry.
I remember reading some articles a few years back about how General Electric was funding this new candidate by the name of Obama. General Electric owns nbc and cnbc.
Obama now is real big on all these “green” ideas which is making General Electric huge amounts of profits.
General Electric has done real well with its “investment” in Obama.
DCH, we agree. It is a political problem.. our government has mandated their use and overstepped their bounds. Free markets should not be manipulated.
Brad, Feel free to explain how you interpret anything I said as being opposed to freedom and liberty in the marketplace. And while you are at it, please explain how you could possibly interpret my earlier comment as trusting government to demolish any industry. As for why the government is forcing you to switch, please read the last sentence of my first comment above.
As for mandating a switch to digital TV, we had to. Old technology standards were severly hindering modern developments that were not reverse compatible. Everybody bitched when unleaded fuel was mandated but it was required for low emissions as was longer engine life. Todays 250,000 mile engines would not be commonplace without unleaded fuel and other mandated improvements that the oil companies fought. Some poeple still want leaded fuel and 5000ppm sulphur diesel but others want to breath and live longer.. Low sulphur and better overall quality fuel is required for modern engines to meet emissions regs.. Fuel mandates also affect marine engines discharging exhaust into our waterways in a huge way.
James, GE fought cfl’s initially. They had to rethink when Phillips ans my former employer Siemens aka Sylvania went full throttle into the energy efficient lighting business in europe and asia. As is typical these days, our government failed to embrace the incentives route using tax credits that would have been a better route vs mandates. When I was last in Germany they had plenty of incentives for energy efficient technology and renewable energy technology demonstration. It is in their national interest and they are the tip of the technology spear while we sink our wheels right back into that dang ditch.
Auf Wieder Sehen, Turbo
Turbo, much of your previous message and this one led me to infer that you support government interference. I apologize if that is not the case.
Your first message lauds the leaps in efficiency of CFL’s and LED’s. As if to support the outlawing of traditional bulbs, because only a nincompoop would use something that’s not the most efficient. Then some lame platitudes about an uneducated workforce, breadlines, and “the abandonment of the working class”. Again, excuse me if I incorrectly labeled you a liberal in my head.
You make an inappropriate leap from analog TV’s to unleaded fuel in your more recent post. I’m not sure what health or clean air risks are posed by analog TV signals, but good heavens if they’re anywhere near the pollutant levels of leaded gas, we need to get them out of living rooms everywhere ASAP. Better have a “cash for clickers” program to get antennas off the street and into the landfills. More government intrusion and picking winners and losers, which again it appears you support. You don’t even appear to know you’re doing it, trying to cite an example of positive market pressures from Siemens and Philips upon GE, but then in the next sentence you advocate tax credit incentives because that kind of government intervention always works better than mandates.
I stand by my characterizations.
Brad, I abhor government interference but I recognize the value of certain mandates that although are typically burdensome, are intended to remove harmful substances from the air and water. Asthma, autism and a zillion more issues are way higher than the norm elsewhere in the world and there is plenty of scientific evidence to support the connection between toxic emissions and health. Wouldn’t you agree?
Here I leap again.. Energy and environmental conservation ARE conservative causes but true environmentalism was taken hostage by the left in the late 60′s and early 70′s. No degree of hypocracy or nepotism will fool anyone who thinks for themselves but since most folks follow the herd and let the media guide them, conservatives seem to be less prone to associate energy and environment with the GOP than the DNC but younger generations seem to be less naive than mine or older generations… Back to the topic. I made the leap to digital TV because it is similar. Digital TV optimized for cable or sattelite uses about 1/200th of the energy from on site production (where the movie is shot and edited) to your flatscreen than analog transmitted (high radiation level) broadcasting. The whole process is less pollution and more efficient. Movies use digital effects and a whole lot less film (chemical, hazmat, cutting room floor waste). Also, the old analog tv signals interfere with highly efficient modern communications. Still want that old tube type black & white or color tv? Did not think so.. Here I leap again? Yeppers. Modern TV’s or computer screens no longer use a cathode ray gun pointed at the viewer, yes a gun firing cornea and iris damading UV and other wavelength radiation at your eyes… So, the standards of the past eventually get so archaic they become a future burden and incandescent bulbs are just that. Modern light fixtures that currently use 1/12th the energy and produce an order of magnitude less waste heat than incandescent bulbs are here today and will cut back our dependence on imported energy and will conserve domestic. Since we have dirt cheap regulated energy pricing in the US, there is little incentive, in europe they pay a ton more so that is a major incentive. Homes of the future will not have relatively huge and wasteful recessed can fixtures with sockets, copper, insulation etc.. they will be flush panel or you name it led or other efficient fixtures that are compact and use a fraction of the energy and materials that we associate with Lighting today.
Look under the hood of your car, you do not likely see a carburetor or older technology that was problematic before it even left the manufacturing plant. You now see long life fuel efficient 16 or 32 bit closed loop multipoint or direct fuel injection and guess what, Ford embraced it across the brand 30 years ago, GM and Chrysler dragged their feet and fell behind.. that was a good management mandate at Ford imo. Honda and Toyota immediately saw the writing on the wall and followed suit.
I appreciate your characterizations Brad, they are fair fodder for debate which I always welcome. I support zero government intrusion or heavy handed picking of winners and losers.. I sreongly disagree with it in spite of you stating that it appears I support it and I’m very self conscious of that. Until we have representative government in place that is willing to push aside establishment government, special interests will force the next wave of technology on us whether it is good or bad, whether we like it or not. This IS a political problem imo, I think that should be clear by now. Kenny Golden and I have had long discussions about energy and envoronment and he has won my confidence because he supports tax credits and incentives without any government mandates forcing this on the populace. This is working well across Germany and also in some parts of Australia, Sweden, Israel, Denmark, parts of France & Canada and almost all of Japan. I am sure I left some others out but you get the gist of i, the US should be a leader, not a follower as we are today. I support the technology, not the way our government has mandated it though. Hope this clears up the confusion.
Herzliche Grüße, Turbo
Recieved an email asking for clarification.. at the beginning of the second paragraph the word Nepotism is used in this context.. “Nepotism is a common accusation in politics when friends or relatives of a powerful figure ascend to similar power without political experience or appropriate qualifications”. Hope that clears up any confusion.
Make sure you follow the EPA’s procedure for any broken CFLs. Safety first!
@ James
So, you hate government intervention unless it deals with the environment? You sound like a liberal, you hate government intrusion but then you explain the benefits of government intervention.
Global warming is a hoax…enough said.
As for your digital TV analogy conversation, it doesn’t make sense. Here’s how I understand it.
1) The FCC mandated the conversion of digital TV to analog because they needed the bandwidth to sell license to cell phone companies, not because of efficiency or reduce pollution. If they were eliminating analog, they would eliminated AM radio.
2) Electron tubes were replaced by transistors which reduced the size of computers. LCDs replaced CRTs, totally different technology. These advantages were because the private sector invented new technology in the free market. This had nothing to do with government intervention or pollution control.
3) This transition doesn’t change how films are made, movies or dark rooms. Nothing outside the TV station transmitting the signal and a person’s house receiving the TV signal is affected. Just the FCC making more room for cell phones.
All this had to do with technology moving forward such as cell phones. It has nothing to do with government being on the leading edge of technology. Government has no place on the leading edge of technology because they can’t keep up…and they don’t have a clue at what’s going on.
Just like emission standards, they use to be on the trailing edge in regulating emissions but Obama is using regulations to be the leading edge of technology and push emission standards past technology necessarily skyrocketing vehicle costs. This redirects resources to where the Politian thinks it should be, not where consumers see fit.
The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.
I really just don’t like the light given off by the compact fluorescents. I have a bunch in the house, but I prefer the light given off by incandescent bulbs. It’s a shame we’re not going to have that option available anymore.
Speaking of light bulbs.. In your mind is the old school conservative the right wingers new liberal? From your opening remarks it appears that way so I welcome you to correct me if I am mistaken. As for Global warming, its worth repeating that I have called it a hoax for 2 decades. Even while developing ultra low emissions natural gas and lpi vehicle fuel systems, I had people asking if global warming was on my radar and I shake my head and state that energy security is the issue, clean air is the benefit. The whole global warming ploy is a grand hoax, thanks, we can both repeat it.
“The 1964 presidential election would eventually mark the decline of Goldwater’s conservative influence as the social conservatives and the Religious Right began to slowly take over the movement. Goldwater vociferously opposed their two top issues, abortion and gay rights. His views came to be regarded as more “Libertarian” than conservative, and Goldwater later admitted with wonder that he and his ilk were the “new liberals of the Republican party.”
Goldwater, an avid environmentalist, died in 1998 at the age of 89.”
Now to answer your numbered points.
1. We agree, thank you for repeating what I said with more clarity.
2. Wrong, government mandated the phase out or devices that used lots of lead and mercury. Our govt also established energy star ratings to recognize and reward manufacturers for producing technology that uses less energy.
3. High Def, broadcasting it would tie up a ton more airwave bandwidth. Reread your 3), and I can honestly call you out on the mat, it’s either BS or you are wearing those red glasses and refuse to see.
Back to the light bulb & government.. Like it or not our government regulates the technology and industry that produce the goods we buy. Run for office and bring your agenda to the floor., Short of that, apply for a position at DOE as several of my friends have and be a part of removing roadblocks to the next generation of technology or if you want block technological progress and your ass will get bipartisan steamrolled.
Emission regs predate Obama and he is molesting the leading technology companies by mandating global emission standards that competing countries do not have to comply with. Obama who like Gore is a failure and is no match for W who lived by his words and committments to promote clean energy.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp
John, I remain Damn Proud to be a Goldwater/Reagan/ Golden Environmentalist & Conservative.
Try doing a google search with the words ( General Electric Obama )
Makes for some interesting reading.
While the idea that man is causing global warming is a hoax (we have had global warming for the last 10,000 years), no one has a problem with energy efficiency.
But this is the all too familiar story of how the U.S. does the inventing but workers in other countries reap the rewards of factory production jobs.
The 2007 energy conservation measure passed by fools in Congress is causing Americans to lose their jobs and sending those jobs overseas.
And these same fools can not understand why we have such a high unemployment rate.
James, Greed is causing manufacturers to set up overseas. White collar union leaders are helping themselves to caviar while their members lose work but the blame rests on consumers. Do you look at the label before you buy? Do you drive an american or imported car? Do you burn American or imported oil? It is impossible to not use globally sourced goods today and we must become more competitive if we want the jobs and insist on buying more domestic manufactured goods, not just domestic branded goods. Greed is our problem, from the manufacturer to the buyer.. we are addicted to cheap stuff now, and lots of it, over quality and long term value. As the lowest cost labor countries learn to compete on quality, we in America lose the argument for paying $30 an hr to make light bulbs.
Back to the light bulb discussion.. We have promoted our workforce up and out, just like some companies used to do with management. Fewer of us want to compete with global labor prices so we buy the next generation of light bulbs from the cheap source. Same is true for crops, mexicans come here to work the fields for less so Americans say screw it and take unemployment or welfare and some go to college to go up and get out of relative poverty or to seek a better life while others simply give up. This IS a political problem but its also a cultural problem.
Actually I DO look at labels before I buy which is why I know that is very hard to buy “American Made”.
I drive a Ford Focus that I bought from RIGGINS MOTOR CO 781 Poquoson Ave., Poquoson, VA 23662 , wonderful people who run a truly “hometown” business.
Put a 70% tariff on all communist light bulbs. The best apples in the world are grown in that area of Virginia. Allow the hard working people of Frederick County to continue making the best light bulbs in the world. And yes I did live in that area for a number of years. Does the word “Atoka” mean anything to you?
And perhaps Mike Barrett should consider buying a 2010 F-150 SVT Raptor to drive the 3rd world roads of Virginia Beach. I bet that either Freedom Ford or Riggins Motor would give him a great deal.
http://www.fordvehicles.com/f150raptor/
Turbo –
Do you intend for your posts to be an enigma wrapped in an oxymoron with some hyperbole sprinkled on top? If so, well done.
You think you and John Johnson agree, and wrote that he repeated what you said, with more clarity. You wrote analog TV’s were forced to go digital because of the health risks of cathode-ray tubes firing UV’s at the retinas blah blah blah and he said analog wavelengths were cleared out to be sold for cell phone use. How do those statements agree and how did he repeat what you said? The clarity I get.
You characterize yourself as a Goldwater / Kenny Golden conservative but you can’t wait to throw some massive tax incentives and credits to the “good” manufacturers as long as they’re not caled “mandates”. Perish the thought. How thinly does your government intrusion blade slice?
You have it in for the “greed” of companies forcing jobs overseas, and the white-colar union leaders, but you say the blame for the economy and outsourcing ultimately rests with the consumers? Because we’re so stupid that we don’t properly cherish the “Made in USA” label? But wait, even that’s not good enough for you, because you hold out for domestic manufactured goods, not just “domestic branded” goods. Seriously? I drive a Toyota and an Acura and I shave with a Braun because, for the little research I’ve done, they will hold up longer than competitive domestic brands in the same price range. I buy new Christmas lights every other year on December 26 at Wal-Mart because I can get 300 lights for like 87 cents. I can replace my entire stock for like 40 bucks and I never have to chase the one bulb that’s out. I could care less where they’re made, but I guess I’m going to have to buy the expensive LED strings now because of the original topic of this post.
But that’s not really why I wanted to write tonight…
Who else caught the article in the Business section of the Pilot this morning (Sunday) on this same topic? Nice case study for the out-of-touch-ness of the MSM.
Here we’ve got the last traditional bulb plant in the US closing it down and the Pilot wants to educate us all on how wonderful it will feel to pay 50% more for CFL’s. With a little anecdote of the early CFL’s, just like grammy used to tell us before we drifted off to sleep…
The sub-head (under the catchy title “Lights Out”…they must read BD!) reads “how innovation killed lights made in the U.S.”. Bull. Excrement. Anybody with half a brain knows it wasn’t innovation that killed these lights, it was the government _________. Turbo, please fill in the blank. Was it a mandate or an incentive?
Wait, never mind Turbo. The brainac author answers me in the first column (of 6)…”what made the Winchester plant vulnerable is, in part, a 2007 energy conservation measure passed by Congress…banning ordinary incandescents by 2014.” It was a MEASURE, not a mandate or an incentive. And that only made the plant vulnerable, it was really the big bad corporation (GE) who made the decision to shutter the plant and kill the jobs. For shame.
Turns out the CFL bulbs, according to the article, take an awful lot of manual labor to twist the bulb into that spiral. One manufacturer employs 14,000 Chinese workers who have to do their work sitting next to a furnace. Can you say “jobs Americans won’t do”?? But, the Chinese company is planning some re-tooling and automations which will eliminate 9k of the 14k employees. He better hope they’re no union by then. Even a re-fitted Winchester plant would put out CFL’s that would cost 50% more than Chinse-made.
It’s a light bulb, people. I know it gets hot, I’ve touched one before. Do I think the heat-versus-light ratio, as bad as it is, is going to kill Mother Earth? No. Plus, I can buy a four-pack for 77 cents. This is not a decision the federal government is authorized to have made, if they cared anything about the Constitution. The Pilot looks a little foolish, even though they’re re-printing something from the WaPo, in missing the bigger picture.
Leave your response