I hate five paragraph essays. This essay is pretty lame.
Eureka
Tensions are always high in the Senate. With the well being of the Nation at stake, it is important for Senators to focus on the real issues affecting the country and use their allotted time to enact laws for the common good. With that in mind, one can see why there is such a heated debate over the controversial laws affecting the sale of incandescent light bulbs set to come into play beginning January 2012. Incandescent bulbs are to be slowly phased out for the more efficient compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). Lawmakers are very polarized when it comes to this topic for many reasons; proponents of the movement cite the energy efficiency and environmental factors, while dissenters are outraged over the possible legislative precedent being set. Although one can empathize with the worry of encroaching upon consumers' rights, this is an instance where the risk is worth the potential gain.
Light is something many seem to take for granted, a basic necessity of our modern times with a surprising price tag. Energy Star, run by the U.S. Department of Energy to research energy usage and its effects states “lighting accounts for close to 20 percent of the average home's electric bill” (Energy Star 1). CFLs may have a higher cost at initial purchase, but they last 100 times longer while using nearly 75 percent less energy for an average savings of 70 dollars (AJ). Some companies, such as Duke Energy, have embraced the initiative by offering customers vouchers for free starter packs of CFLs replacements for their homes. Otheriwse, the 700 percent price different sounds grandiose without proper data. Comparing 50 cents versus $3.50 with the compounded over time savings makes for a weak counter-argument even in a time of financial crisis.
Another advantage which cannot be ignored is the environmental impact the transition will enumerate. Incandescents use 90 percent of their power resources to produce heat, causing the temperature to rise as much as 5 degrees per hour in some rooms. CFLs burn 6 times cooler, using only 35 percent of their power to produce heat with the rest emitting light. Although CFLs currently contain a small amount of mercury, if properly recycled, the decrease in power demands actually lessens the amount of mercury emissions used by a single light source by 30% (Energy Star 1). 45 percent of US electricity comes from coal based plants, primarily in the Southeastern and Midwestern states. For areas with a high dependency on coal, switching to CFLs is proven to decrease the amount of mercury released into the environment.
Opponents of the legislation view it as an affront on a consumer's right to make their own decisions on which bulbs to use in their homes. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) accused supporters of “always want[ing] to do something that tell[s] us how to make our lives better” (Howell). Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho) relayed “people in Idaho are just astonished that the federal government is telling them what kind of light bulb to put in their home” (Howell). Their statements come across as fear mongering as they chastise supporters by comparing the regulations to abortion issues and grossly skewing the language of the mandate into being a ban versus a progressive upgrade in technology. A more legitimate claim can be held for the concern over potential mercury difficulties and recycling protocols. Some have mentioned a discomfort with CFLs being made primarily in China, which seems biased since most manufacturing for a collection of daily use items takes places overseas.
Proper representation is an important aspect of the political system. Compact fluorescent lamps are a financially viable method of conserving non-renewable resources as well as cut down on pollution. Some view the transition as a threat against consumer rights, but the actual language of the legislation is outlined as a process to weed out out dated and wasteful alternatives via guidelines and regulations. Luckily, the brave elect are around to spend the time and effort to review important issues such as motions that were signed into law back in 2008 to protect the American right and way of life. God bless America.
No comments:
Post a Comment