Dear BFI,

I had the opportunity recently to change a proposal being put forward to the Green Party of New Jersey that would have had fluorescent bulbs. These types of bulbs while being energy saving in comparison to incandescent are not the solution. This is another case of seemingly doing good when superior developments are on the way. Please see my suggestion to look into LED lights below. I do not think Bucky would have been satisfied with fluorescent at this point.

Thank you,
George

--
George DeCarlo, CH
Consulting Hypnotist
908-342-1275 (cell)

VOTE Green Party!

Subject: GPNJ Convention Proposal for Consideration

http://www.gpnj.org/Conventions/Convention%202007/Proposals%202007.htm

The original text that I had seen had fluorescent bulbs mentioned and I was glad to see the removal of such language replaced with “high efficiency lighting devices.” The following e-letter reminded me of the fluorescent v. incandescent issue. Personally, I do not like fluorescent lighting and have always found it problematic for reading as have others. Additionally, the bulbs have a toxic problem associated with them. When I had read the proposal and spoke of it at a GC meeting, I mentioned the LED lighting that exists and is being developed that dramatically cuts down on energy costs. The LED lights are still not up to the same brightness and are a little expensive. But, the initial cost is more than justified with the long term savings and the lighting quality will increase with advance in design. Is anyone aware of any problems with LED bulbs?

This is not an endorsement for the following company but they have examples of the LED bulbs: http://www.ccrane.com/lights/led-light-bulbs/index.aspx

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A California lawmaker wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs as part of California's groundbreaking initiatives to reduce energy use and greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

The "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act" would ban incandescent lightbulbs by 2012 in favor of energy-saving compact fluorescent lightbulbs.

Incandescent lightbulbs were first developed almost 125 years ago, and since that time they have undergone no major modifications," California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine said on Tuesday.

"Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about 5 percent of the energy they receive into light." (Source: Reuters )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

California may ban conventional lightbulbs by 2012

A California lawmaker wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs as part of California's groundbreaking initiatives to reduce energy use and greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

The "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act" would ban incandescent lightbulbs by 2012 in favor of energy-saving compact fluorescent lightbulbs.

Incandescent lightbulbs were first developed almost 125 years ago, and since that time they have undergone no major modifications," California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine said on Tuesday.

"Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about 5 percent of the energy they receive into light." (Source: Reuters)

--
George DeCarlo, CH
908-342-1275 (cell)

VOTE Green Party!