Test entry to test RapidBlog syncing.  Disregard.

Congress has overturned the hare-brained ban on incandescent light bulbs that the Obama  administration had forced onto the public.  Alas, in the meantime all our factories to make these old reliables are closed.

Although I've converted 90% of my house to CFLs, there are many shortcomings.  Among those are the fact that they can't be guaranteed to work in low temperatures.  (I even wound up talking to a tech expert at GE to verify that.)  

The reader comment on the article below outlines yet another exception to their usability.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/16/did-obama-punt-on-light-bulb-ban/

A reader comment of value:

uncleFred

~~~~~

I live at the maximum distance from the pole transformer allowed by the power company. As a result I suffer a greater range of voltage fluctuations than is typical. The fluctuations are within the maximum allowed by the specifications guaranteed by the power company so there is nothing to “fix”. Incandescent light bulbs tolerate these voltage fluctuations quite well. CFL’s die within 6-8 weeks. 

The only solution offered by the power company is for me to pay for the installation of a pole transformer closer to my house, or move my feed to a line that runs along a different part of my lot where the is a closer transformer. The least costly of these choices is about $8,000. My continuing to use 100 watt incandescent bulbs is by far the most efficient choice, and will remain so even if the price of those bulbs were to be double or even triple that of CFLs.

Market solutions allow consumers to make the best choice for their individual situation, not be forced to use a solution that someone wrongly considers “pretty much better in every way”. hat is what freedom is all about. The so called “efficiency standards” were arbitrarily set...