I don't mind the county deciding to put flourescent lights in county buildings, but I think there is no need for the county to butt in and tell me what kind of light bulbs I can put in my house. I dislike flourescent lights and I don't like the light they give off.

And I feel this is just another instance of a politician trying to ride some recent issue (California just passed some similar legislation recently) for his own self-publicity. I'm tired of the Legislators trying to make themselves sound important. All they do is rubber-stamp County Executive Spano and pass meaningless legislation, while inflating their paychecks and creating as many barriers to prevent losing their seats in the next election.

I support term limits for all county and state elected officials and I think a lot of residents would too if we could get it discussed. I'm sure the career politicians we have would object strenuously. We have too many politicians whose only interest is protecting their seats and their paychecks. It's time to reform government and throw out the bums out. This proposed legislation is just the latest example of how dumbified our political process has become.

First, the idea behind the banning of incandescent bulbs in this story is to
help prevent global warming... but what do you suppose the real effect is?
I think we'll just pay for it in the long run anyway. No Electric company
wants to lose money. They LOVE when they're pushed to the max providing
electricity, because they know they're making the most profit they can eek
out.

But if you reduce your electrical usage, you're reducing the Electric
company's profits. Thus, they'll just raise our electric bills so that they
continue to make tons of money. It's something that's been seen in other
industries regularly.

Secondly, they said "A compact fluorescent bulb may cost $3 to $5 versus the
25 to 50 cents cost of an incandescent bulb, but it lasts for about five
years and uses 75% to 80% less electricity". But - we've replaced nearly
every bulb we use with a compact fluorescent within the last 4 years, yet
have seen no real proof of savings they claim (although it probably would be
hard to track that). And worse - at least 2/3 of those bulbs we purchased
went out within the first year we installed them (sooner than most of our
incandescent bulbs, in fact).

However, the ones that did survive have survived probably 4 years and still
burn OK. I think it's a crap shoot trying to get a decent and
likely-to-last bulb. So, based on our experiences, the odds are not in
favor of getting a bulb that lasts as long as they're estimating.

Third, it's already a well-known fact that there's a huge number of
factories (other than Electricity Producers) that create emissions
contributing to global warming, in much greater degrees than the electric
companies anyway. Many of the automotive manufacturers, and chemical plants
do far worse... but they never get mentioned.

It's like the recent arguments about Freon used in A/C units. They outlawed
R12 and R22, and now there's talk about outlawing use of R134a. But I heard
years ago (I think someone told me it was in the Wall Street Journal) that
you could open the A/C systems of every vehicle and house in the country and
release all that Freon into the air, and out wouldn't even amount to what
one single large factory puts out in o-zone depleting emissions.

Perhaps the real story is that Fluorescent Bulb manufacturers have decided
to use this opportunity to capitalize on the global warming talk to push
their products... and are successfully getting legislators to do this for
them. I wouldn't be surprised a bit.

can someone tell me why a COUNTY government has a GLOBAL warming task force? ridiculous.

What nobody is addressing is the fact that these bulbs use MERCURY. Just where are the savings and the "green" effect when we have massive pollution of groundwater from tons of mercury seeping from landfills? How much will it cost to clean up the mess? What ill effects will there be on the health of people from mercury vapor in the home? I have many of these bulbs and have had quite a few of them leak and burn out in the first year of use!! I fear we have been sold a bill of goods without a close examination of the long-term consequences--again. We may be walking down the primrose path of being "Penny wise and pound foolish."

An article was posted a few days ago on the issues these bulbs present, titled "Mercury in Energy-Saving Bulbs Worries Scientists", here:
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/033007ED.shtml .

Mr Rogowski would better server his constituancy by working on real problems rather than imaginary ones. Short of that, the lunacy of forcing consumers to pay 10 times as much for a light bulb to save us from the global warming boogie monster demonstrates the lack of compassion he has for the poor and middle class, those that are being pounded by environmental "religious" policies that lead to $3.60 per gallon gasoline, $30 cans of R12 freon , nearly a million deaths each year in Africa to malaria since the banning of DDT, and the paralysis this country has for building new nuclear power plants (even the founder of green peace has changed his mind on that one).

Paying much more for far less sets back the standard of living for all Americans and is counter to the rule I grew up on, "things got cheaper and better". This rule is now "pay twice as much for half as much", making the climb out of poverty that much tougher.

Far be it for me assume I know more about the issue than Mr. Rogowski, but couln't varying cyclical elliptical orbits about the sun, solar flares and just plain warming that has occured on Earth about every 10,000 years, suvs or not, have, just maybe, a "little" more to do with global warming than hard working Americans driving themselves to work and school or turning on a light bulb.

Global Warming is war on the world's poor and working class. Only rich "environmentalists" will be able to afford gas powered vehicles while the rest of us drive around on top of little hydrogen bombs or gutless electrics. I resent those gas gussling limousine riding, private jet flying (the SUVs of the sky) hyprocrites. I wonder if Mr Rogowsky would endorse legislating behavioral changes mandated by Christianity or Islam, and why he gives the secular religion of environmentalism such sound endorsement.

I dare to postulate that where it not for the trillions of dollars that will be picked out of American's pockets by propagandizing global warming, politicians and two bit dictators would not have the slightest interest in it. Ever wonder why Fidel Castro is such a strong proponent of the Kyoto protocol? because the very intent is to break the US economy and transfer money in the form of "you used your heater last night Mr American, that will be a hefty fine, and oh Mr Castro here are the billion$ in subsidies not to build fossil fuel power plants in Cuba". Of course I could be misjudging Mr Castro and he may be an upright global citizen...I'm sure he and Mr Rogowski share lots of common environmental concerns for the good of man.

In California the brilliant bulbs at the CalEPA/CARB embraced MTBE in the gasoline, replacing 10% of each gallon with what used to be a byproduct oil companies used to have to spend money to dispose of, and now there are thousands of irreversibly poisoned water wells because MTBE can't be contained by storage tanks, it's that corrosive. The "gross polluter" in this case was CalEPA/CARB, and for this blunder, this crime againt nature if you wil, they get to keep their jobs and continue bloviating their nonsense.

It is a fact that California would be environmentally better off and cleaner had it never heard of reformulated gasoline !

Being forced to pay 900% more for a light bulb so some politician can say he's saving the world? Makes as much sense as the ban on plastic bags that San Francisco board of stupidvisors, whom apparently don't have any real problems to solve, just passed into law.

Why are do many Americans so ready to be oppressed through taxes and regulation by over zealot religious nuts like Mr Rogowsky?

Time for a revolution, time to throw these bums out of office ! and don't forget to confiscate their government provided cars, free gas cards and free parking stickers!

References
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0612_030612_malaria.html
http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2006/04/greenpeace_foun.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070328/ap_on_re_us/plastic_bag_ban

Reference to AR,
For over 100 years the U.S. citizens and almost that long have been paying over 900 % for cost in taxes to town, etc.., plus the cost of cooling our homes in warm weather, because the incandescent lamp emits over 90 % heat and invisible infrared light and we only see less than 10% of what we paid for. I hope this makes my point. Thanks
Lucien Beauley,

Can a landlord install individual heaters on a multi unit building?