At least it rhymes with his actual slogan.
2 Likes
You know, I have mostly LEDs, a set of fluorescent tubes in the kitchen, a few CFLs left in low usage places (closets that rarely get opened etc) one or two appliance bulbs and a couple of halogen reading bulbs because I DO like the light.
In some places. Here in Massachusetts, 40/60/100 watt incandescents have been off the market for years. AFAIK the only wattages available as incandescent are things like candelabra bulbs, which were also set to be replaced by LEDs, but this rollback eliminates that.
The local power companies and hardware stores also subsidize the cost of LED bulbs; they’re only slightly more expensive than the traditional bulbs they replaced.
1 Like
When lighting for green screen, we throw a bit of light around the edges of the subject that is 180° from green on the color wheel, to cancel it out. So a small green softbox right there at his podium should do the trick.
2 Likes
“I looked at the light problem. People asked me to look at it, me, I have the number one solution. Whales, big fish, are just an absolutely tremendous source of oil. Whale oil lamps. But the Democrat party won’t let us use them. The biggest, most beautiful Navy on the planet and we can’t get oil. Treason?”
17 Likes
I’ve replaced all but 2 incandescent bulbs and 1 fluorescent screw-in bulb with LEDs. In warmer weather and especially while working in my office or reading in bed it’s nice to not be cooked by your light sources.
The drop in our hydro bill was substantial. Nobody’s going back to incandescent lighting because of the idiot currently occupying the White House flapping his gums about yet another thing he knows nothing about.
5 Likes
I guess he should ban the sun as well since he looks pretty orange in daylight, too.
7 Likes
So this is the dystopian timeline where we end up huddled under bar code scanners for light?
3 Likes
Note the article summarizes three unrelated reports, one of which did specifically conclude CO2 emissions would rise. Again, these studies were specific to Canadian conditions and possibly are not relevant at this time. The point is, at the time decisions were made to implement these practices, there may not have been justification to do so. So, no consequences, then? Maybe. Or maybe, better to take real action than to engage in green theater.
He can keep that thing in his pants (says every woman he’s ever been near…or even just seen him…or sensed his presence).
2 Likes
TM30-18 and Gamet (Rg) and Fidelity Indices (Rf) are the new CRI. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/04/f30/tm-30_fact-sheet.pdf
Those spectra need to be overlayed on the human optical response curves to show how they will impact colour rendering.
4 Likes
… and provides links or even proper citations to none of them, another hallmark of shoddy science reporting. 
Although I see two, not three: BC Hydro (which allegedly says that CO2 will increase, presumably because BC Hydro’s name is not an accident), and CCHT (which allegedly says that “the reduction in the lighting energy use was almost offset by the increase in the space-heating energy use”, different from the claim of the headline which isn’t supported even weakly by any of the body text other than one throwaway quote in the second-last paragraph which isn’t reporting a study finding at all, it’s literally just a throwaway guess by the interviewee where he says “it might even cost you money”).
Considering that the support for this premise is a weakly-argued and poorly-reported article, depending on an alleged study performed by a company with a vested interest in a particular outcome, that would look to be a fairly weak “may”.
For that matter, since we’re playing “may”, there may have been an understanding by policy-makers that by juicing the market for efficient bulbs they would produce a move from the status quo into a market where it unequivocally is better to use efficient bulbs because capital costs for them would drop. @lumbercartel makes this point very well upthread. In short the policy people may not have been morons.
I don’t understand that sentence. (I mean it’s grammatically well-constructed, but its connection to the rest of the conversation isn’t obvious.)
I guess you are alleging changing out incandescents for higher-efficiency bulbs was “green theater”? I suppose, see above for critique of “maybe”. Do you also mean to suggest that this lightbulb-changing exercise had the effect of preventing “real action”? If so, what “real action” did it prevent?
I would think that if the BC Hydro study is to be believed, the obvious “real action” that it implies would be to change out fossil-fueled heat for heat pumps, with resistive backup if warranted by conditions, but not to just keep using resistive heat (er, light bulbs). (And then you go down the rabbit hole of computing the embodied energy in the heat pumps and the ancillary CO2 emissions attributed to installing them, if you really want to follow this kind of reasoning all the way.)
Edited to add: I actually do believe that it’s desirable to change out fossil-burning systems for heat pumps and am doing that myself. My old natural gas boiler is EoL and rather than install a like replacement I’m putting in a ground-source heat pump. But without seeing the BC Hydro study, it’s not really possible to agree with it (or disagree with it).
2 Likes
Yeah, the transition was a little frustrating, but now I’m all the happier for it. The current LEDs look good (if you’re careful about what color temp you buy), are cheaper to run, and last longer.
{Man, I sound like some sort of LED shill, but I’m honestly just a content California resident.}
4 Likes
Ahh, I think my point of view is closer to yours than you realize. note my use of qualifiers throughout 
I am recalling the debate that went on at the time, and that people actually had the idea switching lighting would have an impact. Better I think if you are going to make legislative changes in the name of climate change to address energy sources and practices like home insulation standards. I live in a northern city with new construction all the time; the current rage is tall slim houses with a lot of surface area per enclosed volume, six inch fibreglass batts in the walls… and still nat gas heating. And cold lightbulbs
Just wait until he learns that Wilbur Ross can’t threaten to fire the Commission internationale de l’éclairage even if they aren’t impressed by his work.
Because this is the worst timeline we’ll probably end up with a New American Color Space quickly improvised by hacks and interns after [[[globalist]]] color spaces are rejected as unamerican…
1 Like
Some used to paint the actual tubes red to counter that effect.
Ideally, of course, paintings would be made under the light with which they will be displayed.
Insisting on natural light to paint by is kinda’ silly.
I see. Yes, I would be happy to see the rest of that stuff fixed too. I imagine that among other things, the light bulbs were low-hanging fruit. No complex building codes to update, for one thing, and the very low lifespan of most incandescent bulbs means that natural forces get them changed out pretty quickly. It was “free money”.
(I am always amazed to see new construction go up that’s not extremely well insulated, speaking of leaving money on the table. And that doesn’t have PV on the roof, for that matter.)
1 Like
3 Likes
