Once again, 'Your Tax Dollars At Work' ... makes y' wonder, tho' ... A read of this story says they used LED lighting in the House cafeteria - but they tell us WE have to buy and USE those crappy 'compact fluorescent' bulbs that GE has made for 'em in CHINA (read the box). This 'investment' in 'green lighting' will take ONLY ten years to pay for itself ... well, hell, in that case ... I wonder if Pelosi used that 'Valley Gurl Death-Gurgle' laugh of hers when she made the announcement ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/64503

Pelosi Calls Press Conference to Unveil $140,000 Light Fixtures in House Cafeteria

Thursday, April 22, 2010 | By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called a Capitol Hill press conference Wednesday to unveil new light fixtures in the House cafeteria. The light fixtures cost $140,000 and will take almost 10 years to pay off in saved energy.
 
Architect of the Capitol Stephen Ayers told CNSNews.com that the new lights, along with motion sensors and automatic window shades, are a first for the House. The lights already have been installed in one Senate Committee room.
 
“We have a couple of applications,” Ayers said. “This is the first one in the House [and] we have another application that we’ve installed in the Senate – that’s in room SD-G50 in the Dirksen [Senate Office] Building. That’s a committee hearing room. We’re piloting this new technology.”
 
Ayers said that the new light fixtures and window shades were installed in the cafeteria, located in the basement of the Rayburn House Office Building, because the LED [light emitting diode] light fixtures have become much less expensive.

“This particular room, with all of the technology, was about $140,000, which is less than a 10-year return on investment for us.”
 
Pelosi said that the new lights in the cafeteria would make the Capitol a “shining example of sustainability” and green technology. [sic] ...

Personally I wish Nancy Pelosi would die of a stroke or something traumatic to get her out of our misery! She is such a self righteous beyatch!

Governments have been replacing regular bulbs with LEDs for years. Have you checked your local traffic signal light lately?
LEDs last longer and use less power than other bulbs.
What's wrong with the Government leading the way in saving energy?

LED lights are a good way of saving energy but they are very expensive and not very reliable.It is not uncommon to see many LEDs lights out on those newer traffic lights even after a year or less.Those LED traffic light lamps are all on one circut board(for the color they represent)and must all be replaced with a new one.I couldn't find out how expensive they are but I heard many people saying they were several hundred dollars a piece which sounds about right.I am not sure the city has saved any money as far as electricty VS cost of maintaince on those new LED lights.It would probably cost a city several million to replace those lights and if it costs hundreds of thousands to maintain those old lights every year I can only imagine it would cost much more as you are spending several hundred for a LED light as compared to a $1.99 light bulb.

They were for a while using those LED lights for brake lights for cars for a while.Wonder why they stopped using those?Instead of a 89 cent light bulb you are paying several hundred dollars for a new LED light.


I am all for reducing and saving money in our Government.Do I think replacing any of these lights and charging the taxpayer millions of dollars to do it is going to lower our electric bills or cut taxes in any way due to these light upgrades and the money the save?No way.Do I think the electrical company will raise rates in the future because it claims it is taking a loss and can't sustain current income levels due to a drop in revenue.Yes I do.

If we see a lower electric rate on our electric bill due to these improvements I am all for it.If not might as well just leave the lights alone and let us keep our money.

You have to be kidding me!!!???

Republicans or whatever have an issue with saving energy?

Well I hope the government spends lots of money to get us in energy saving mode nationally and keeps it up.

At least then they will be doing one of the things I want for my tax dollars.

Many democrats are vested investors in all of the same energy interests as the Republicans who get blamed for all of it.

You are aware many Republicans have likewise pushed for alternative fuel only to get blocked by senate injunctions.

Example, Kansas. The state and private interests invested huge amounts of money into a 600,000 barrel a day Refinery making methanol out of Corn Waste! Now this gets better. They also had a process to convert Methanol to Ethanol. Cut it with 15% gasoline and you now got E85 fuel. Days before they were supposed to fire the facility up they got shut down. Why? A senate injunction. Reason, BATF didn't like them converting Methanol to Ethanol, major oil didn't want the competition, and Enron was part of the mix as well and they were not going to make money off of it! This was a legitimately bonded and fully legal operation for producing fuel for vehicles. There was also crap spewed about Carbon emissions but they are far less than petrochemical fuels. Even some tree huggers got into the act citing some ludicrous reasons for shutting the plant down.

If the Demoncrats really were all about alternative fuels they would be voting more for alternatives other than Hydrogen. many of these same ***** vilify Bio Diesel which also burns a lot cleaner. Stop blaming the Republicans for everything. The democrats are just as much a part of this mess as anyone else!

Do people understand that the majority of the states in the United states are way over their head in debt and borrowing money from the Government who is also borrowing money from some other country?It is like going over your limit on a credit card and every day you are buying more and more and more.Interest has to be paid on this debt.Changing these light bulbs is something we don't need to be doing right now because they are expensive as hell to purchase.Yes I understand we are going to be saving energy but I don't know if our Government is stupid or just doesn't understand basic economics.If you spend $100,000 or $1,000,000 changing lightblubs when you are borrowing money and paying interest by the time you get this interest paid off that cost of changing those light bulbs will be double or triple what you paid.

Something else nobody is thinking about is there are many states like Washington,Oregon,and Idaho where they get nearly all their energy from hydro electric power plants.You can waste all the electricy you want.The generators are making more then enough power and many times the bypass gates are wide open letting just as much water by pass by the dam as there is going through it.I don't see how it is justified for these huge cities like Portland and Seattle to spend tens of millions at the taxpayers expensese changing these lightbulbs to save electricity which they have more than enough electricty and doesn't produce pollution.

I remember another time while I was living in Seattle they decided to convert all the buses to biofuel.That fuel ended up costing them way over 5 dollars a gallon.Of course that ended up giving us a gas tax increase and a sales tax increase just to pay for it.Then the 170 dollar a barrel for oil came and they were paying so much in fuel that nearly their whole transportation budjet was going to biofuel for these buses.They ended up changing the buses back to standard fuel again costing the taxpayers millions of dollars.By the time it was all over the city had racked up hundreds of millions of dollars on these buses that didn't make the slighest bit of difference in the air quality.


Everyone knows about solar panels.Why doesn't everyone put them on their houses so their electric bill is next to nothing?Because it will take 10-15 years for them to get a return back on what you paid for them.In those 10-15 years chances are one of them or all of them are going to fail and you will have to replace them again.Same thing is with these expensive light bulbs.They are assuming they will last 15 years when in reality I doubt if they will last 5 years.


Like I said before I am all for making our government more efficent.It makes much more sense to save money by leaving our light bulbs alone until our states get out of borrowing instead of putting everything on a charge card and paying triple what it should cost.

And the question is still unanswered: WHY does GOVERNMENT get to use expensive LEDs that at least have the marginal benefit of long life and reasonable operational cost, but they tell US that WE HAVE TO USE those crappy-asss COMPACT FLUORESCENT bulbs that are (by EPA definition) a HAZARDOUS WASTE when they break and MUST (read the box) be disposed of AS hazardous waste. Amazing the double standard some people are willing to tolerate because 'government' is 'doing such a good job saving our tax dollars'. What a load in my diaper ...

Most green Eco Weenies do not understand the fact that Fluorescent bulbs use...


Drum Roll...


Mercury Vapor. As we all know mercury is VERY dangerous.

Incandescent lights, IE regular light bulbs use...

Drum roll again...

Vacuum or a lack of air or anything else. The phosphors used in them are the same as in a fluorescent light because an unphosphored fluorescent light gives of HUGE amounts of UV. Common light bulbs are also more economical in the long run because they do not use mercury which is expensive and hazardous in any amount, they do not involve complicated manufacturing, they do not need special ballasts that all Fluorescent lights have or need, and they are smaller all the way around.

LEDs although efficient for the amount of light vs. power loose out to fluorescent. It takes more power and more LEDs to fill a given area with light vs fluorescent watt for watt. Although incandescent is not as efficient it also gives more light for area watt for watt than LEDs. Given time LEDs will catch up but they need more development.

Eco Weenies think they are SO smart. It is possible to bee to educated. This is how I see tree hugging eco weenies!





Remember folks...



Seeing the world with tunnel vision leaves you blind to a lot going on around you

I bought some of those CFL bulbs to try them out and to see if I would like them.I wanted to replace a few 60 W bulbs so I bought a couple 60W CFL bulbs for the bathroom.I replaced them and turned on the light and the bathroom didn't have nearly the amount of light it did before.It probably had half the light.So I went back and bought the 150W light bulbs and put them in.They worked great but since I went from a 60W to a 150W CFL the savings in electric was cheaper but not by much.I think they look a little goofy out in the open.They probably need to refine those light bulbs a little more and maybe compact the tubes into a normal looking white lightbulb.

I think I'll take the $140,000 on bulbs vs the $493,000 dishware set the Laura Bush had the White House buy very shortly before they left.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/37210359.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUec7PaP3E77K_0c::D3aDhUiacyKUnciaec8O7EyU


First lady Laura Bush showed off a new gold-rimmed set of official George W. Bush state china on Wednesday, with less than two weeks to use it before the family packs up for Texas.

The $493,000 set was inspired by a few pieces of green basketweave-patterned French china in the White House collection believed to have come from James and Dolley Madison. It was paid for by a privately funded trust of the White House Historical Association, which also purchased a second, less formal set.

I think thats just as absurd.Sooner or later you have to get a hold of this out of control spending.I'm sure these stories are just scratching the surface.Over $600,000 for some light bulbs and plates!No wonder this country is going bankrupt.Even Bill gates would shake his head.

In total agreement there.

But rich folks need their opulence! All that money and prestige!


$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$:)$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$


Hey, it ain't their money! is it?