My sister and brother-in-law are having a little tussle over Facebook concerning lightbulbs. He says the new mandated devices use only one-fifth the electricity that traditional bulbs use and last much much longer, making them better for the environment, and more economical.
She says the light from them is depressing.
I feel like I'm putting my hand on the third rail here, but the simple fact is the new bulbs are the wave of the future. However anyone feels about them, they're here to stay and the incandescent bulbs soon will have gone the way of the dinosaurs.
The question on my mind is: should we discard the old bulbs before they burn out or keep using the inefficient things until they're gone? On television recently I heard a pundit refer to them as "Little heaters that also throw out some light." So my compromise is to burn the old bulbs in winter and the new ones in summer until there's no alternative to the new ones. Since we keep our thermostat rather low, we heat the living room this time of year, but not the rest of the house, while also illuminating it.
That might also alleviate my sister's concerns about the depressing qualities of the new bulbs, at least for the time being.
On a somewhat larger scale, Rick Santorum, his campaign newly invigorated by his Tuesday primary wins, claims President Obama secretly wants Iran to have nuclear weapons. Santorum and the other Republican would-be presidents are starting to appear like a boxer in the fifteenth round who knows he's behind on the scorecards and is throwing haymakers at his opponent in the despeate hope that one of them will somehow land and give him a knockout victory. The odds are long, Mr. Santorum.
No comments:
Post a Comment