Bulbs / Miliband

[webofevil]

Possible bad news for migraine sufferers: Energy-saving light bulbs could trigger migraines [BBC]. Those fluorescent darkbulbs that take about quarter of an hour to reach their semi-luminescent state, one of which led me on new year’s eve to misread, albeit at a distance, a product on my esteemed colleague’s bathroom shelf as “Foaming Fascist Wash” (rather than “Facial”), turn out to be not only annoying but actively harmful for a select few.

My concern is that the government (1) seem to take at least four years to absorb new information anyway and (2) are puritanical enough at heart, even without David Miliband heading Environment any more, to press ahead with banning normal light bulbs with no regard to what that could do to migraine sufferers. Prove me wrong, envirowonks!

Incidentally, now that “the Mil” has inserted himself into this post, I am slightly disturbed by the number of my female acquaintances who have A Bit Of A Thing for the Foreign Secretary.

[Poll #1114522]

Comments

[strictlytrue.livejournal.com]

Well, no, not in people who aren't already prone to them.

Or in the people who are, either. Looking into the matter is fine, but as far as I can see from that story not all energy-saving bulbs produce the "flickering" effect mentioned anyway.

There's a definite puritanical streak to a whole load of the solutions and behaviour modifications demanded of us in the face of global warming. Maybe they will help stave it off or solve the problems facing us, but even if they don't, we will have been put firmly in our place. Of course, making us all install darkbulbs is by no means the most extreme of these, but they are slightly worse than what we've had in the past and that certainly satisfies something deep in the puritan breast.

Sorry, but I think you're way, way off beam here. Not all energy saving bulbs are as dim as the one experienced on NYE, and the idea that people wanting to replace conventional bulbs with energy saving ones are doing so to satisfy some puritanical impulse just doesn't ring true to me. I mean, by lobbying for less energy consuming light bulbs, just who is trying to put "us" in our place? I know plenty of people who would support such moves - including me - does that make us one of this group trying to put everyone else in their place?

There are areas of Government policy that can be seen as potentially restrictive or repressive, but it's a bit of a stretch to adduce this one as an example.

(and FWIW, I do agree with you that a puritanical streak is present in a great deal of Green thinking, but in this case, I'm not convinced.)

[webofevil.livejournal.com]

> Not all energy saving bulbs are as dim as the one experienced on NYE

That's true, but—although, as with most things, I'm prepared to be convinced—I haven't yet encountered a fluorescent bulb that's any serious rival for a normal one.


> the idea that people wanting to replace conventional bulbs with energy saving ones are doing so to satisfy some puritanical impulse just doesn't ring true to me

Not primarily to satisfy that impulse. I know that normal light bulbs are energy-hungry and need to be dealt with. I'm just saying that the fact that the alternatives are currently a little worse gives that impulse a reassuring little scratch under the chin.