Turnbull's Election Gimmick (1 Viewer)

[wheredanton]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21254130-952,00.html

It's all well and good for Turnbull to get all Green before the election. But the impact of light bulbs on greenhouse emissions is tiny compared to high powered devices such as:

a) air conditioners;

b) electric stoves/ovens;

c) kettles and

d) pool pumps.

These items use many more kw/hours than a single light bulb. For example a small toaster is equal to 8 100w light bulbs. A greater emphasis should be placed on minimizing the use of these higher powered devices or at least it should be recognized that while reducing our power consumption is good idea banning ordinary light bulbs by 2009 is a gimmick which will have little impact on greenhouse emissions.

Additionally compact fluorescent light bulbs while excellent in certain environments...

1. cannot be dimmed and

2. many, due to their odd shape, cannot fit inside existing light fittings.

It would be better for the environment if everyone in Sydney who had access to gas used it for cooking, general heating and water heating. For example there would be hundreds of thousands of electric stoves on across Sydney for over an hour tonight. Each of these would be burning around 4800w (48 100w light bulbs).

Each house replacing 3 or 4 light bulbs with lower powered ones has little impact (saving about 30w per light bulb) is really a tiny drop in the ocean.

If I replace every bulb in my house and save 200w combined I only need to leave my toaster on for about a minute extra to offset the savings. I only need to leave my huge air conditioner on for a second to offset my savings (greenhouse/personal cost). If a school somewhere accidentally leaves the air conditioner on all weekend it pretty much offsets half the power saved in Sydney if everyone used low power light bulbs.

 

[onebytwo]

well, we have to crawl before we can walk

 

[volition]

He was probably gonna win anyway, AFAIK Wentworth is a pretty 'safe liberal' seat.

I personally don't like the idea though, government intervention isn't really required in the light globe market.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

It's ludicrous to suggest that this action was motivated by his electorate. It's more of a quick-fix, knee-jerk action by Howard to try and show off his environmental credentials, or lack thereof, to the entire country. What better way to do it, with one of the most charismatic, fresh faces on the liberal team. Different face, same old liberal party shit.

 

[umop 3pisdn]

well, we have to crawl before we can walk

This is what I've been saying about the uranium industry for years. Coal exports, too.

At any rate it appears that Turnbull doesn't care about poisoning our environment with mercury and other nasties.

These are produced in vastly greater quantities by the material acquisition, manufacture and disposal of fluorescent globe than the trusty incandescent. The fact that incandescents will become unavailable, limiting consumer choice, is quite frightening.

...

If I replace every bulb in my house and save 200w combined I only need to leave my toaster on for about a minute extra to offset the savings.

Or how about

if everyone in Australia turned off their stoves and lights forever

it would be offset in a few weeks by China

who are building a new coal fired plant every 5 days

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

well, we have to crawl before we can walk

This is what I've been saying about the uranium industry for years. Coal exports, too.

Wait, so you're saying that small steps have to be taken before big steps, right? Why then do you contradict this idea when you say that there's no point in Australia taking small steps in regards to cutting global emissions? Maybe I'm missing something?

 

[umop 3pisdn]

Small steps like the current limitation on the amount of uranium mines we can have

before big steps like, well, a lot more uranium mining

and maybe enrichment too.

Australia, meanwhile, is not capable of taking big steps wrt reducing global warmening. Unless:
a) we ceased to exist
b) you believe a reduction of 1.7% of global emissions per annum is a big step, and
c) you don't believe china's population and economic growth will more than replace this 1.7% in a year or two anyway.

 

[HotShot]

Hey libs protrayed the idea much better than the labour -kudos to them. Thats what winning an election is all about. Its not about policy or anything like that - but how you present it to the people. Like GST for eg - hah everyone remember that? Everyone was saying GST was fucked etc etc. But they still won and we have GST and noone really cares about it anymore -not even LAbour.

hey remmeber after the 96 election for the next oneLabour were like we will abolish the GST .. what happened? Got rid of the policy ehh?

Labour sucks.

 

[onebytwo]

b) unless you believe a reduction of 1.7% of global emissions per annum is a big step,

thats more than a big step

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

c) you don't believe china's population and economic growth will more than replace this 1.7% in a year or two anyway.

Yup, I gotcha. Can't make a difference, no point in trying. Can't lead by example, can't have a head held high, can't try because in the end, it all doesn't matter anyway.

 

[Optophobia]

How can i install a fluorescent bulb in my lava lamp?

 

[HotShot]

Labor Dont let generator see that mistake lol


[win]
How many of those items do you have in your house? Compare that to the number of lightbulbs? [/win]

Labour and Labor SUCKS..

 

[ihavenothing]

He was probably gonna win anyway, AFAIK Wentworth is a pretty 'safe liberal' seat.

I personally don't like the idea though, government intervention isn't really required in the light globe market.

2.5% is definately not SAFE

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Good one, fucktard. You completely missed the point. If a government's going to sit there and try to come up with solutions (which would be cool), the least they could do is be credible about it and actually create real solutions...instead of this shitty lightbulb incentive.