In reply to Britain to switch off energy-guzzling light bulbs
It's not too little or too late. It's just right, and right on schedule and the New World Order wouldn't have it any other way. :-)
'We have these new super bulbs for you that use 1/5th of the energy of the old bulbs, last much longer and we'll even give you your first 4 for free.' Sounds too good to be true right? Well, when something sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
While it can be argued that these new 'energy-saving' bulbs use less energy than the regular bulbs we've all been using, they are far more complex to manufacture, and the process uses 10 times more energy than the manufacturing of regular bulbs.
Now that regular bulbs which we've all been using for decades are to soon be made illegal and you will be fined or arrested if caught using one, lets look at some more of the differences between the two.
Well for years, I've been able to go down to the shops and pick up at least 4 regular bulbs for £1 whereas these new CFL's cost me about £5 per bulb. That's 20 times more expensive. So for 1 'energy-saving' bulb which supposedly lasts 6 years I could instead get 20 regular bulbs which would last me at least 13 years. Looking at the box in front of me, it says right on the front it lasts '6 years' all big and bold. Then when I open the box, on the inside in tiny print it says 'based on 3 hours a day average.' Living in Scotland, I for one use my main bulbs (ie, the rooms I am in most often) more than 3 hours per day even in the summer when you need them less, nevermind in winter. So already they're telling me they're not going to last 6 years. Then you take into account the fact that in order for them to be most efficient, they have to be kept on, permanently, and if you use them like other bulbs and switch them on and off as you need them, it cuts the lifetime of the bulb. So even if you do use them 3 hours a day, they're not going to last 6 years. If you do keep them on all the time then yes, they will use less energy than your regular bulbs but since you are using them all the time it cancels out their supposed energy-saving and makes them use almost the same total energy.
*These new bulbs, don't actualy stay on like normal bulbs. Instead they flicker on and off 50 times a second, just like the TV's in Europe. I know that they've long done all the research into using the flicker rate on the television to put viewers into an unconscious state where the will accept the reality they are given through the television. Can it work just the same with bulbs? I don't know, but I don't see why not, both are simply light afterall. Regardless of whether they make you sleepy or not, if your trying to read under one it can hurt your eyes and the flickering can also give you a headache. People with brain tumors can't be around fluorescent lighting (or mobile phones), and the way things are going most people are going to have brain tumors. Also with the flickering they can make fast-moving machinery appear stationary, which can be quite problematic to say the least.
*New CFLs run at 20 kHz or more ?
So lets see now - they don't save energy, they don't last longer when you take cost into account, they can be dangerous, and they cost much more than regular bulbs. Then you take into account that CFL bulbs use toxic materials, like mercury vapour, which the EU itself banned from landfill sites, so they are going to cost billions in recycling on top of the £3 billion the government admits it's going to cost British homeowners to replace the hundreds of millions of light fittings that can't currently take CFL's.
Virtually the entire environmental movement is New World Order run.
Global warming is big buisness.
Global warming is big money.
Global warming is total control of physical life.
Global warming equals New World Order.
Why do you think all the big names in the New World Order all rally around this one cause? Al Gore, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, the pope, the UN, the EU, the Queen of England, Prince Charles, David Mayer de Rothschild, Edmond de Rothschild, Maurice Strong, Arnold Schwarzenegger, David Rockefeller, Madonna, U2, British Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell, to name a very small number. Virtually all the biggest and most famous people and the wealthiest individuals and corporations have all come out calling for the global carbon tax, we must tackle climate change. All these known and identified criminals.
You really think that they give a damn about you or the planet?
They're always talking about 'oh we have to stop carbon dioxide emissions,' when plants breath CO2 and use it to create oxygen, and they never say anything about all the genetic crossbreeding and DNA splicing thats going on that can wipe out everyone on the planet. They never talk about the nanotechnology where they can create mechanical viruses to wipe everyone out or the anti-matter weapons they think might blow up the galaxy, but lets build them anyway. It's always about 'CO2 is killing the planet,' or 'Iran might get nuclear weapons and kill the planet.'
A human body exhales carbon dioxide, a tax on carbon emissions, is a tax on breathing. This is why your starting to see China's 1 child policy (given to them by the Rockefellers) come in over here. 'Maybe it should be frowned upon if you have more than 2 children', 'you should be allowed to replace yourselves but that's it, another child would create too big a carbon footprint','Well maybe not a real 1 child policy, but perhaps simply a small tax if you have more than one, to help combat climate change (China's started as a tax too.).'
What is it they say about gnats and camels? So all the people go around, having all their little concerts and bring in their own slavery and are all satisfied because they think they've brought about change, they forced the evil New World Order to gives us a carbon tax and a 1 child policy and a global surveillance grid to make sure nobody is committing any enviro-crimes.
Remember these are the very people that for centuries have destroyed entire mountains to get at the gold inside. The people who admittedly invented and unleashed aids. The people who had the technology to create or destroy hurricanes decades ago and admittedly used it during the Vietnam War. The people who signed an international agreement in 1978 at the UN agreeing not to use weather weapons on each other during wartime (of course, nothing stops them using them on themselves), and the treaty even said that HAARP-type technology could cause droughts or floodings, hurricanes or tornadoes, even earthquakes, plus manipulation of the mind of the public by carrying a secondary signal. And when I look out my window, evidently they have been spraying the skies for all this for the past 10+ years.
It's exactly as Gordon Brown said himself, 'We must have a new world order to combat climate change.'
Anthony.
Too little, too late.
http://jahtruth.net/greeneco.htm
Britain to switch off energy-guzzling light bulbs
LONDON, Sept 27 (AFP) Sep 27, 2007
Britain unveiled plans on Thursday to phase out energy-wasting
traditional light bulbs by 2012 to cut the equivalent of a coal-fired
power station's carbon dioxide emissions.
The voluntary initiative foresees removing energy-wasting incandescent
light bulbs from shops and replacing them with low-energy compact
fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs.
It aims to save up to five million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year by
2012, or the equivalent to the carbon emissions of a typical 1 Giga Watt
coal-fired power station.
"Britain is leading the way in getting rid of energy-guzzling light
bulbs and helping consumers reduce their carbon footprint," Secretary of
State Hilary Benn said.
"Choosing energy-saving light bulbs can help tackle climate change, and
also cut household bills, with each bulb saving up to 60 pounds (85
euros, 120 dollars) over its lifetime," he said.
A British household has 23 to 24 light bulbs on average.
"I am delighted that major companies have said they are prepared to help
deliver this ambitious timetable and offer products which will help
their own customers play their part in combating climate change," Benn said.
But he called for wider action from retailers, manufacturers and service
providers to improve the energy efficiency of other wasteful products
like televisions and offer greener choices to their customers.
While still the finance minister in March, Prime Minister Gordon Brown
said he hoped that the most energy-guzzling light bulbs would disappear
before the end of 2011.
In June, the European Commission announced that manufacturers had
decided to eliminate traditional light bulbs from the European market by
2015.