Climate Progress Whines Over Conservatives Making Fun Of $50 Lightbulb

I do thank Think Progress’ Brad Johnson for throwing a little traffic my way, though. Anyhow, he’s unhappy with the Washington Post story from the other day about the $50 LED bulbs, and moves on to say that hey, they really will save people a boatload of money in the long run. More on that later. First

(Climate Progress) Whoriskey’s attack on the innovative, money-saving light bulb was promoted by the Drudge Report and picked up by right-wing blogs as further evidence that American clean-tech innovation is an Obama boondoggle. At Michelle Malkin‘s blog, Doug Powers complains about the “$10 million in prize money taxpayers are on the hook for in order to pay a company to create light bulbs people either can’t afford or won’t want.” Gateway Pundit screams: “It’s an Obama World… Gas Reaches $5 a Gallon & “Green” Light Bulbs Cost You $50 Each.” “The same people who can afford to drive a Volt (and have the limo pick them up when it runs out of charge) will be the ones purchasing this idiocy,” Pirate’s Cove blathers. American Enterprise Institute scholar Kenneth Green blasted the “Ludicrous Prize” as one of “epic energy-failures.” At Ricochet, George W. Bush speechwriter Troy Senik asks, “What lost? A bulb powered by the hoofbeats of unicorns?”

Blathers. I like that. Anyhow, according to Brad, the LED bulb will cost $80, including the purchase, over 10 years, while Thomas Edison’s bulb would cost $210 over 10 years, including purchases. That assumes that the LED would even last 10 years. Will they? Who knows. They haven’t been tested in the real world.

For my part, I’ve said I support better bulbs that save money. And, I actually support government contests to promote innovation. I did when I was a warmist, and I do now. But, come on, this is a big company, Phillips, getting $10 million for creating a bulb that is not affordable. It may save money, supposedly, in the long run, but $50 is a deal breaker. Even $25 is over the top. Especially if a person doesn’t know what kind of light they will put out, which has been a big problem with CFLs.

But, Warmists should put their money where their mouths are, and start purchasing the expensive bulbs.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Climate Progress Whines Over Conservatives Making Fun Of $50 Lightbulb”

  1. Dana says:

    Remember when the CFL bulbs were going to last four year apiece? (Or was it six?) In the real world — at least, I think my house is part of the real world — the CFL bulbs seem to last just about as long as those evil incandescents.

  2. JohnnyAmerica says:

    Dana, I remember that. Also, how often do you think traffic bulbs are replaced? The only way I will ever pay $50 for a light bulb is if it will come with a lifetime replacement guarantee

  3. That’s part of the reason I switched back. Weren’t monetarily worth it anymore. Though I do use one on my front porch andd one table lamp still. They’ve lasted 4 years. Others, not so much. Can’t get a good three way daylight one.

  4. Gumball_Brains says:

    Teach is famous!!!!!

    $50 for a bulb!?!?!? Hell, $2 is too much for a bulb.

    I once paid $2 for a Halogen Bulb. It was said to be energy efficient. It said so on the box. But, it only lasted 6 months. As I used it, it got darker, darker and darker.

    I replaced it with a $0.50 75 watt bulb. Even if it dies in 2 years… I’m out $1.00 instead of $8.

  5. […] Our good friend William Teach was pleased/ amused/ overjoyed from some notice (and links) he got from the intellectuals on Think Progress: Climate Progress Whines Over Conservatives Making Fun Of $50 Lightbulb […]

  6. Trish says:

    Loved the youtube!!!!

Pirate's Cove