No, it's not a light bulb joke. I just don't understand why the government decision to stop the sale of inefficient light bulbs by 2012 infuriated so many of my fellow Conservatives. First of all - it's still five years from now. Believe me, none of the existing incandescent light bulbs will last that long. (Unless of course you stockpile few hundreds of them in your basement.) Then - even after 2012, there will be no "light bulb police" searching houses and smashing old light bulbs. They just won't be on sale anymore. By the way, Home Depot plans to halt the sale of incandescent light bulbs a year earlier - in 2011. So what the panic is all about?
One of the most frequent arguments - the Conservative party is copying the Liberal environmental policy, thus betraying its electorate. I wouldn't agree. The Liberal policy on environment is to tax production. Conservative policy (as I've seen it so far) is to regulate consumption. I oppose Kyoto with its emission trading scheme which doesn't make the air any cleaner. But I don't think it's reasonable to denounce an opportunity to conserve energy (about 100KWh a year per light bulb) just because a Liberal Premier of Ontario thought of it first.
Another argument - the government is not to tell us what light bulbs to use. Yes, banning light bulbs may sound too harsh. But what are the alternatives? Phasing in a new levy on incandescent bulbs so that light bulbs which use nearly five times more energy are taxed nearly five times of their price? Introducing subsidies for compact fluorescent light bulbs so more people consider giving them a try? Or maybe the government should just do nothing and let people use inefficient light-bulbs even if that wastes a few billion Kilowatt-hours a year?
The only valid argument I've noticed so far is that compact fluorescent light bulbs don't work in the cold temperatures, so the phase-out of incandescent light bulbs effectively bans porch lights. Myself I could add that fluorescent light bulbs don't work well with the "touch-turn" lamps, the ones that allow you to choose between three levels of brightness by simply touching the metal ring at the top. But I believe five years should be enough to find a solution for both these issues.
Compact fluorescent light bulbs cost more. But they pay for themselves on a long run. First - because they last few times longer. So even if you rent your apartment and your hydro is paid by the landlord - it makes sense to buy one energy efficient light bulb for $4 than four incandescent light bulbs at $1 each. If however you have to pay your own hydro bills - each energy efficient light bulb will also save you $10 or so in hydro costs per year. That may not sound much. But if you have a big house then I guess you wouldn't mind having some extra $150-$200 for your Christmas shopping, would you?
No comments:
Post a Comment