[aruanan]

Government mandates have nothing to do with it. It’s just plain economics.

If it were just plain economics, there would be no necessity of any government mandates. And the savings realized are in the ideal use of the CFL compared to average use of incandescent. And, sorry, there are no CFLs available that can give me the type and brilliance of lighting that incandescent (including halogen) can. That is as important a factor as "energy use." If it's doing what I need it to do in a way that another thing cannot, then the energy simply is not wasted--it's just part of the cost.

[stranger and pilgrim]

Again, I don’t support the mandate, nor do I think it was necessary. The facts are enough to convince most people.

Also, to repeat myself, I don’t think people realize how dire the energy situation in America is going to be in a few years. I predict you will look back at the controversy over these light bulbs as quaint.

Utility companies are scrambling to figure out how to keep the lights on. Just a few things I have heard discussed:
— incentive/rebate programs for replacing refrigerators (abandoned for fears about freon/CFCs)
— incentives/rebates for home weatherization, insulation, etc.
— time of day metering with higher rates during peak hours
— voluntary load management programs where utilities would offer attractive rates to consumers who allowed the utility to cycle high demand appliances and HVAC systems off during peak times
— mandatory load management programs
— SIGNIFICANT rate hikes on a more or less annual basis, with no end in sight.

Waste energy all you want. But you WILL pay for your stubbornness. But tell me something. When, exactly, did WASTE become a conservative ideal?