• 0 Posts
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

  • Because the thing that knocks out the power is freezing rain / snow mixes. When that’s happening I conclusively prefer being inside.

    And replacing my current setup with a similarly function primarily-electric setup would be expensive even ignoring my preference for being partially off-grid. Right now I don’t have 220V to my kitchen at all. Decent induction stoves aren’t cheap, especially with space constraints. My cookware is all appropriate for an open flame (e.g. cast iron, enameled cast iron) and while it may work with an induction setup it wouldn’t be optimal there.

  • I can’t find such a study, and it seems extremely unlikely to me that any such study was performed recently. The original law was passed in 2007, and then the regulations were in political limbo for more than a decade.

    My base hypotheses here, subject to easy refutation by any real evidence, are that:

    • The DOE has looked at no study from after 2007 to justify their current policies.
    • This regulation is going into effect now simply because it was on the list of stuff Trump did that the Biden admin reversed.
    • The effect on consumer electricity costs and carbon emissions are negligible, since LED bulbs are a decade cheaper and better and almost everyone voluntarily buys them.

  • Does anybody use incandescent light bulbs as radiators?

    Yes. I’ve done it personally a couple times.

    Because it’s the only alternative use I can think of.

    The thing about alternative uses is that they’re still real even if you can’t think of them.

    Broad bans are a bad policy tool in general. Even if you believe in the progressive ideal of expert regulators making broad societal policies, a simple thought experiment shows the problem: What would it take to do the study to accurately determine all the negative effects of a ban? Not guessing, not wishful thinking, but really collecting and analyzing the information.

    I wish people were as mad when books get banned, but sadly it’s not the case

    When was the last time the US federal government banned a book?

  • And heat is not ready a concern. You can touch most LED bulbs with your bare hands with no risk of severe burn.

    This very clearly indicates that you haven’t seriously considered this issue at all, and are just supporting your political faction with no reflection on what the unintended consequences might be.

    A common application of incandescent bulbs is to produce heat, for a variety of use cases. The typical example is an improvised chicken incubator.

    Consider very carefully why there’s an exception for traffic signals.

  • It’s really bad to support specific policies just because they sound like a kind of policy that you broadly support. I personally broadly support pro-density policies. But many specific policies that are proposed either have fatal flaws or are useless as long as a century worth of accumulated NIMBY policies exist that super-redundantly ban the sort of density increase that would actually be useful.

    And to be clear, only allowing density increases without cars would be exactly the sort of nonsense restriction that would be a fatal flaw, at least in the US.