Support Pajamas’ Energy Program
Regardless of where you stand politically, energy conservation and/or energy independence probably is important to you. In order to do our share, Pajamas Media is working on a broad energy initiative that you will be hearing more about shortly. As the first step in this initiative, we are pleased to announce that we have acquired a program and website called One Billion Bulbs (OBB). Read....
Created by Brian Huyser of Symmetric Technologies in 2006, OBB is focused on educating people on the benefits of changing out old light bulbs to newer more energy efficient ones. In addition, OBB can allow you or your group to register your actions on line. As of April 21, 2007, OBB members have recorded over 45,000 bulbs that have been changed.
The broader Pajamas Energy Initiative will also allow people (like former DCI James Woolsey below) and groups to indicate other energy changes they have made in their home (appliances, heating/cooling, wind/solar) and transportation (what type of fuel efficient car they drive).
James Woolsey speaks to PJ Media about his personal contribution to energy conservation and independence
Please join us as we start our new program on Earth Day 2007.
Change a bulb and make a difference in energy conservation and energy independence.
If you really want to contribute to less fuel used. Do the following:
1. Make sure that your vehicles tires are inflated to the max pressure reccomended on the tire.
2. Change out your air cleaner on your vehicle every six months, more often if in dusty conditions.
3. Have your car checked/tuned up yearly. No matter how old the car is.
4. Add additional insulation to your house, use window blinds in addition to curtains, install screen doors to use natural outside air for cooling in the evenings.
5. Replace your home air conditioner/heater if over ten years old.
There are other methods each person can contribute, just google around for more ways.
Opening the car windows in nice weather, instead of running the air conditioning, seems like a logical fuel saver. However, I’ve heard it alleged that opening the windows creates more air drag than the power saved by turning off the A/C–this theory sounds highly dubious to me, at least at normal speeds. Anyone have any insight/data on this?
A couple car-related comments:
At high speeds, use the air conditioner. At low speeds, roll down windows. In general, around 40 MPH is when aerodynamics start to make a significant effect on drag. Below 40 rolling resistance, et al, is most significant.
Do not pump your tires up to the max pressure printed on the side of the tire. This value has nothing to do with what the car designers expect from the tires in terms of handling, nor does it have anything to do with what will give the tire max life. If you pump the tires up too much, you will end up with a worn out center strip on the tire and a car that could behave dangerously, especially at high speeds. Stick with the specs from the car manufacturer, not the tire manufacturer.
Mythbusters did a show on AC vs. windows. Generally speaking, under 40mpg lower the windows and over that use AC.
Fluorescent bulbs contain 3.5mg to 15 mg of Mercury, a heavy metal that is toxic. One billion bulbs means that disposal of 3500kg to 15,000kg of Mercury should be accounted for. That Mercury will be dispersed in landfills, most likely, as the bulbs are used up and thrown out with the trash. Then the mercury will be able to leach out into groundwater (as Greens are so fond of telling us about landfill problems!). So go green, and disperse several metric tons of a toxic heavy metal to the environment!
Over the long run, I believe that in any society where energy efficiency has steadily increased (e.g. the U.S.), total energy consumption has steadily increased as well. Societies with least efficient energy usage also use the least energy. I think energy efficiency, at least where it makes sense, will contribute to economic growth but will not reduce aggregate energy use in the long run. What happens to the savings? Reinvested or otherwise spent.
so, Austin Mike we definitely should avoid doing anything that the greens like because naturally they are wrong…
CF’s latst approximately 10k to 15k hours vs. 1000hrs for incans. That means that for many lights you will NEVER have to change in your lifetime. That is 10x lightbulbs you will never have to manufacture. If you think the manufacture of incans is environmental, think again. NOT making those other bulbs is positive, not using the electricity to make them is positive, you get the picture? NOT using the elctricity required will result in some infintessimally small amount of coal NOT burned, which will keep a very small amount of mercury from the envrionment in an ongoing way. Couple that with the cost savings over time in electricity and they are suddenly a very good bet. YES the mercury MUST be accounted for, but this can be done in several ways with education and reclamation programs. Aside that if on person throws a TV set away, that has far more Me in it that thousands of lightbulbs, maybe we should worry that more, yes?
CFL isn’t a panacea for every ill, but it is a start worth making that over time will pay dividends… and if you don’t want to go along with the greens? FINE. Do it for yourself. CFL save money, and the investment isn’t even all that long till they pay for themselves. If you replace your kitchen, and bathroom bulbs alone, they will pay for themselves quickly, as you use those bulbs for longer periods of illumination.
If you never make a start, you will surely never get there.
Have Bii Gates Foundation buy them for everyone. Would only cost it about 2 billion of his 62 billion. Would help out people who who are living on a fixed income. Help the worldwide enviroment, as well as maybe help lower the price of oil, which would benifit many poor countries.
i’m going to forego lightbulbs altogether and just live in a shallow hole in the backyard. i’ve always liked wearing a loincloth and, after an afternoon of grazing, my teeth are truly green. gaia is my mother. all the little beasts are my pals. next time i get sick i’m going to the dolphin hospital. they’re our smarter older brothers you know…
Compact fluorescents make economic sense where lights are left on a lot — hotel hallways is the classic example. Use as a closet light? Bad investment if you assume any time value of money. So use them where you’d ordinarily keep the light on for hours per day if you want to recover the cost.
By the way, California has been pursuing “negawatts” for decades, I think quite aggressively. Any arms-length studies on results? On the macro level, at least on the surface, it doesn’t look like the promise of reduced energy consumption and cost were achieved.
When I think of our honorable co-PJM bloggers at Iraq the Model just trying to stay alive day to day, continuing their dentristry practice and dreaming of freedom for themselves and their countrymen, the spectacle of our fellow Americans congratulating themselves for replacing light bulbs is breathtakingly banal.
Not only that Austin Mike but aren’t all the Green people bulbs manufactured in China and won’t China need to build hundreds of coal plants in order to manufacture a billion of these these ‘energy-saving’ bulbs?
That said, I live in a 400 sq ft studio, have basically two light bulbs in the living room, one in the kitchen and one in the bathroom. I don’t own an automobile and probably fly twice a year.
I am already doing to much for the Green people that I feel it is their obligation to refund all my non-energy uses.
Come to think of it, in order to make the Green people happy why not insist that all the internet bloggers and adicts only turn on their energy-sucking computers once a week? Let’s make it a law, reduce internet access to only 24 hrs per week per computer to be good Green people!
Do any of the Green people understand just how insane you all are? When will you be sufficiently satisfied that you are good carbon-neutral Green people?
All I can say is that the Green people better keep their grubby little hands off my toilet paper!
A great energy saving on new construction is to build frame houses with 6 inch wall instead of the standard 4 inch wall. Also use storm windows. This is also true in warmer climates, insulation not only keeps in warm, it keeps it cool. There is an added benefit in blocking out noise. A little up front cost saves over the life of the house!
“If you never make a start, you will surely never get there”
After we change our light bulbs, let the next first step start with all these energy-wasting internet blogs to be shut down?
How much energy could be saved if Hollywood would stop producing it’s fossil-fuel based entertainment products? Next to the energy industry, Hollywood is the the #2 producer of energy waste and toxic putput.
Why not go all out, instead of changing every lightbulb in America how about NYC and LA declare themselves energy-free zones where none is allowed to use earth-destroying energy?
Some of the enviro skeptics on here evidently didn’t watch the Woolsey video. They should. As he indicates above all, there’s one very good reason to support all initiatives of this kind whether or not you believe in man-made global warming. It is to shake free of the Islamic fascist leaders of Saudi Arabia and Iran. That should be enough for all of us.
In a 12 hour period the energy consumed to run my desktop computer is almost twice the amount consumed to operate one of my regular lightbulb lamps and during this twelve hour period my computer is in use twice as long as my regular lightbulb lamp (not including energy usage when my computer is at rest)
If you are really serious about Saudia Arabia and Iran, why then not advocate limited computer usage, market the idea by saying that limiting oneself to one 24 hour per week usage would equal taking something like 1 billion cars off the street. Then we’ll all feel better, we’ll have stopped the terrorists and have saved the planet from total distruction in one click of a computer button.
Plus, the entertainment industry will have loads of energy saved from low computer usage to drive across country in a bus promoting the idea that limiting usage to one sheet of toilet paper is equivalent to taking 2 billion cars off the roads.
It should be noted that Islamic terrorist also make loads of cash off the illegal drug market, heroin is Al Queda’s cash crop! But hey wouldn’t want to interfer with anyone’s right to an opium high.
Sanctimonious postering is all your Earth Day 2007 has achieved.
I will use incandescent bulbs as long as possible just because I hate holier-than-thou people.
Of course my house doesn’t have air conditioning, so I save more electricity than the vast majority of people reading this post (does that make me holier than thou?)
How about quitting your bitching and do some small thing to help out.
Yeah, we’d be a lot better off if Hollywood weren’t so hypocritical. We’d be better off if this thing or that thing happened.
But none of those things are under your control. A few stupid light bulbs are.
Damn, it almost looks like the Democratic Underground around here. Except for the death threats.
Oh speaking of which, that site actually has a group up and running. I’d say that kicking their tails soundly in this endeavor would put paid to a lot of lies about how folks like us want to despoil the air and force people to drink mudpuddle water.
And all it’ll take is changing a couple few light bulbs. Save yourself some money and hassle and change the damned bulbs. Stop being so freaking contentious. You’ll hardly notice the difference, unless you’re predisposed to whine about every little thing.
As for the banality of self-congratulation around here, well…I haven’t noticed any. If someone can point out where we’re all clapping each other on the back, I’d appreciate it.
I am with Sissy. Iraq and Al Qaida first, then lets worry about something so blatently stupid.
This is just a bunch of crap. I bought those stupid lightbulbs. They have to warm up for a while before they put out any light and if you get the ones that put out a greenish tint…Ick, it just turns your stomach and makes you dizzy. And why on earth are we supposed to be so concerned in the u.s. about this when most countries don’t give a rats ass. Do we always have to be the ones blamed for most of the polution? I do my part to conserve energy of my own accord, but please quit telling me I have to.
Gawd, fluorescent lights are an overdose of low-level EM radiation, and compact fluorescents are the worst, emitting low-level microwaves as well. Not only will they fritz your brain and mental focus, but also contain toxic mercury and beryllium, so if you drop one you’ll have to call the EPA and a Hazardous Waste unit to your house for clean-up. This is brain-dead environmentalism at its worst. For-get-it. Click on my name for a weblink to a recent report on this subject, how CFLs are deadly bad news!
1)Re the mercury in CFLs: there is also mercury in coal, and it is released when the coal is burned in a power plant–evidently, it is pretty hard to filter out
2)GE says it has developed a new kind of incandescent which will be almost as energy-efficient as the CFL, but which has better light quality and avoids the startup delay. More here.
I am glad this wasn’t framed in terms of the great global warming hysteria. There is indeed a strategic reason to become less dependent on foreign energy supplies.
But this campaign… sigh…
What is the lifetime of CF’s when they are turned on and off a lot? Regular fluorescent bulbs burn out relatively soon if cycled.
I used to have fluorescents in the kitchen and in my home office. The home office lights were never turned off and lasted over 5 years. Kitchen lights were cycled at least once daily, and had much shorter lifetimes. Which ones used less life-cycle energy? Beats me.
I now have CF’s as primary lighting in a couple of major rooms. They fail a LOT sooner than 10k hours, and their slow startup is quite annoying.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp
and
Mercury emissions are addressed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CFL_bulb_mercury_use_environment.svg
Note that the CF mercury with coal generated power is not a sensible comparison, because it uses the least green energy source: coal. Even then, the CFL’s come out only slightly ahead.
It is very likely that cost and energy efficient organic LED (OLED)lighting will be available soon. Why not wait for that?
If you really want green power, why not put your money and effort into combating those preventing the building of more nuclear plants, and those preventing the building of more modern (read cleaner, more efficient) energy infrastructure?
Environmental activism (and NIMBY’ism) has prevented ANY nuclear plant or refinery construction in the US for the last 25 years, and prevented or impeded the recovery of lots of domestic oil and gas (e.g. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge)
Fighting that trend will do more than billions of CFS.
But it won’t feel as righteous.
This whole effort looks like another feel-good initiative.
“I am sooo good. I use CF’s in my house and would in my Hummer if I could figure out how!”
I fitted compact fluorescents all over my house, but had to go back to tungsten filament lamps for the living rooms. I have poor eyesight and simply couldn’t see properly under the CFs.
However, they are fine for hallways, stairs and porches, where they get left on for longer periods. The lifetimes are not as long as promised, but certainly longer than for Tungsten.
Nor are they as bright as claimed, compared to Tungsten. There is some dodgy science going on.
If you really want to help the environment, just don’t have any kids. That will save more than anything else you can do.
I was surprised and pleased when I saw Pajamas Media had bought 1BillionBulbs. Good job.
Now, if you could stop linkning to every right wing blogger who thinks he/she is a climate scientist, that would be great.
While I applaud the conservation of energy, I do have to wonder what happens when people don’t dispose of the CFB’s properly once they burn out. Are we creating another disaster when the mercury in the bulbs is discharged into the environment?
I have to call BS on the light bulb thing not only because of the Mercury but also after having spent a lot of money on these things they have yet to last as long as advertised, I mean not even close!
I see these bulbs as a liability not a benefit.
I think there is a future for LED’s. Somebody prove me wrong. Please!
I have placed a lot of these compact flourescents in my house not so much as to save energy but, with much of the wiring dating back to 1927, the decreased wattage running thru my walls decreases the chances of me losing my home to a fire.
There is one more thing we must consider if we are to get away from giving money to our enemies for oil.
Its time to go to geothermal energy. We have several major sites we can develope, with the potential to produce enough electricity to power our entire electric grid: Long Valley Caldera in California and Yellowstone.
Its time to tap the volcanoes. This would be completely pollution free (recycling the water used to make steam), completely safe (you don’t have to go down anywhere near the magma chambers to get hot enough to flash water), and completely unlimited in the supply available.
What’s with everyone citing “Wikipedia” as some kind of accurate source of info. If I posted info to Wackopedia on bad problems with CFLs, in 10 minutes the CO2 fanatics would erase it and put up something “nice” about them. You may as well reference “MoveOn.org” or “ANSWER” about world events.
Besides all the problems mentioned above, consider this one: The net energy required to make a CFL is dramatically greater than necessary to make an ordinary incandescent, and may outweigh any claimed energy-reduction benefits. Just look at the weight and price differences between CFLs and incandescents on a lumen to lumen basis. The heavier and more costly nature of the CFL reflects the greater quantity of raw materials and fabrication energy and labor. And my impression is, the CFLs are being sold near to or below cost today, in anticipation of when they will push out incandescents, and then the price goes up.
FInally, if you use incandescents in your home, the excess “waste heat” will merely help to warm it. So calculations on energy-efficiency comparisons need to include the consideration, that in cold-weather climates, this “waste” as thermal heat merely reduces your home heating bill from other sources. In the final analysis CFLs are not being honestly represented.
Yes, lets do cut down on imported oil and find energy conserving alternatives, but let’s not make this mandatory. This “billion bulb” stuff is the camel’s nose in the tent, and only reminds me of the Cheryl Crowe recommendations.