Palindrome wrote:

The incandescent light bulb, perfected for mass use by Thomas A. Edison in the late 19th century, is being supplanted by fluorescent lighting that is more efficient and longer lasting.

Last month, California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine announced he would propose a bill to ban the use of incandescent bulbs in his state.

And Thursday, New Jersey Assemblyman Larry Chatzidakis introduced a bill that calls for the state to switch to fluorescent lighting in government buildings over the next three years.

"The light bulb was invented a long time ago and a lot of things have changed since then," said Chatzidakis, a Republican from Burlington. "I obviously respect the memory of Thomas Edison, but what we're looking at here is using less energy."

Many states encourage their residents to replace their incandescent bulbs through a federal program supported by the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency.

If the bulb's demise is on the horizon, Jack Stanley isn't ready to flip the "off" switch just yet.

"It's a convenient target. It's easy to see and easy to critique," said Stanley, curator of a museum that celebrates Edison's inventions in the town that has borne his name since the 1950s. "But think about the benefits and compare them to the drawbacks and your argument is already made."

Edison perfected the process of making the long-burning filaments used inside incandescent light bulbs so they could be mass produced.

Fluorescents, which create light by heating gases inside a glass tube, were developed in the early 20th century and sold publicly by the 1940s. They are generally considered to use more than 50 percent less energy and last several times longer than incandescent bulbs.

However, the mercury vapor inside fluorescents can damage the environment if the bulbs are broken, leading some states to require businesses that use large quantities of fluorescent lights to recycle them.

"It's a 19th-century invention that was perfected in the 20th century," he said. "That's part of the evolution of all inventions."

Fluorescent lighting is against God's way. It is wrong. It makes me ill. I hate it.

If that means screw the environment, then I'm no longer an environmentalist. I'd rather have decent light.

k wrote:

"It's a 19th-century invention that was perfected in the 20th century," he said. "That's part of the evolution of all inventions."

Calling fluorescent lights the "perfection" of lighting technology is like calling a fucking Unicycle the perfection of transit technology.

Don't get me wrong, I'm into saving power... I like that the lights in the common areas of government workplace go off automatically after a set time if no one's moving and I'm even the little gnome who goes around and turns off the desk and office lights of people who leave them on when they leave.

But!
I
HATE
FLUORESCENT
LIGHTING

I can't convey how much I hate it. I can't work effectively bathed in that flat, dimensionless glare; I absolutely feel the effects on my mood and motivation. I feel like I'm suffocating in some oppressive cell if I have to have the fluorescents on. In the halls it's fine (as long as there's no flickering, which is a whole other issue), but in my workspace, it kills me. I was saved in my old building by being in a window cube where the natural light tempered the F-effect, and in my current one by getting an office where I have two, yes, incandescent lamps which I frequently use singly because the light is SOOOOO much more pleasant. I'd rather work in the dark than under fluorescents. I'd rather work with chains on my body and perpetually sticky fingers. Fuck fluorescent lighting 100%.

I see some hope on the horizon in the form of tunable LED lighting which can emit a warmer color spectrum while still being more energy efficient than fluorescent. I don't know that they're available yet, but got I hope they get here before someone demands that I remove my incandescents. I will lose my damn mind.

P.S. Assemblymember* Levine is right when he says

Electricity-saving technologies may not be glamorous, especially when compared with the idea of a shiny new power plant, but the facts are that there are hundreds of electricity-saving innovations now on the market that if fully used throughout the United States, would significantly decrease the electricity the country now uses,

but I don't care if the result is me feeling like shit all the time. Start with weather stripping and insulation and tankless hot water heaters... you'll have to pry my incandescents from my cold, dead fingers.

P.P.S *WTF, seriously. I'm just PC enough to allow that using Assemblymembers to refer to a mixed group of Assemblymen and Assemblywomen is ok, even if it does violate my linguistic sensibilities as unwieldy. Fine, I'll survive. But on his own page? Why, I ask? Why? Who's being offended when I call an Assemblyman an Assemblyman?

Fluorescent lighting irradiates and damages the soul.