Prop-Agency, Propaganda, it's all the same. And for those who don't know it: The European Union has started banning regular incandescent light bulbs, so that in the future their will only be compact fluorescent lamps.|
First: I'm a supporter of Green politics and am generally very glad about such decisions, but this doesn't seem to be the best way for me. Why cold light in a world where as many people fell already depressed? Why a ban that annoys people who then blame the green movement? A ban that probably won't have a real significant outcome? Why lamps that suffer under frequent on and off switching? Half of the time I'm using a lamp it's just for a few seconds. Why lamps that need to be disposed as hazardous waste? How many people give a shit about this? And how many regions can't even handle their normal waste? And what about the Chinese people and environment at the mercury mines and factories? Is the social and environmental damage caused there in a relation to what could be saved with those lamps? Or don't we have to care about this since it's not our business and just in "the evil China that doesn't care anyway about it"? But probably they're just trying to bear the conditions the West imposes them?
Why ban the old light bulbs? Why an absolute decision? Why can't customers decide according to the situation? How should people be responsable when they can't take a decision? Why must the state think it knows everything better? Why not sensitize people?
Anyway: In the end it's just a tiny delay of the inevitable. Fighting slightly the symptomes instead of the real hazard. Why not follow China's exemple and try to reduce the population by a one child policy? A smaller population would also need far less energy. Besides solving many, many other existing problems. But how could a Western politician ever dare to talk about something like that. This would imply a phase of transition with some minor problems, for example concering the pensions, and old people are loyal voters, so why scare them away?