Lil White Lies: One Dim Bulb

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists:

CAFE standards were effective in increasing new car and truck fuel economy by 70 percent between 1975 and 1988. In 2000 alone, CAFE standards saved American consumers $92 billion, reduced oil use by 60 billion gallons of gasoline, and kept 720 million tons of global warming pollution out of our atmosphere.

In terms of light bulbs, there are lots of “Energy Savings” calculators available on line to show you how much you save with the new CFL’s over regular bulbs. I now have, at last count, eight 75-watt CFL bulbs in my home. According to one energy saving calculator available on line, over the life of those bulbs, I’ll get $538 in energy savings, prevent 6,496 pounds of CO2 from being added to the air, which is the same as taking half an average car off the road.

But who cares when it is the equivalent of forcing you to choose what kind of car or, in this case, light bulb to buy, as Bryan White claims in his latest grading of a PolitiFact ruling on a claim made in a book by Texas Governor Rick Perry about the reach of the Federal government extending to telling consumers what kind of light bulbs they can buy.

I’m trying to understand Bryan’s point in the sense that, initially, those ugly CFL bulbs are more expensive and don’t have the brightness that incandescents do. But many of them display the potential energy savings on the packaging, which far exceeds the initial cost, so buying them should be a no-brainer. They also have progressed to where you can buy ones that are shaped just like a regular bulb, and also have increased luminosity (see citation below). This is ultimately the classic VHS over Beta type of consumer choice, but until then, some people just don’t like to change.

Peter Ellinwood “is the founder and owner of GreenPoma, an online retailer of hard-to-find, best-in-breed, environmentally-friendly lighting options” and has this to say about why consumers are not taking to CFL bulbs:

1. Old habits die hard. And since these lamps have been around for over 100 years, the incandescent bulb habit is really hard-wired.

2. They're cheap...dirt cheap compared to quality CFL bulbs.

3. CFL bulbs have (cue spooky Halloween music) MERCURY! (about the same amount as a six ounce can of albacore tuna ).

Bryan’s argument shows too much distrust in the innovative capabilities of the lighting industry and a cynicism with regard to market dynamics.  To continue Ellinwood (emphasis added):

“Today's energy-saving light bulbs come in a wide array of color temperatures, ranging from warm white (2700 degrees Kelvin) to virtual daylight (6500 degrees Kelvin) giving consumers choices akin to those they can find among incandescent bulbs.”

As one of the experts stated in PolitiFact’s synopsis “Federal law is requiring that household light bulbs be made more efficient in steps over time as a nationwide energy-saving measure.” Consumers will have choices, and some may not even notice the difference, only that the bulbs are branded as more energy efficient and are more expensive.

Lastly, Bryan makes this rather idiosyncratic concluding statement: “Rather than making an attempt to inform readers about surprising government intrusion, Perry was illustrating the intrusion with an example likely present in the reader's knowledge base.” Huh? If I had not read this story, my *knowledge base* as a person with business background (and seeing CFL’s at a store—ever been in Home Depot’s lighting department?) would have been that the lighting industry is just going green, innovating, and likely making more profit to boot, not being forced to sell these bulbs as a result of “surprising government intrusion.” Oh ye of little faith.

Title and Link	Rick Perry ‘Says Washington's reach extends to "even telling us what kind of light bulb we can use."’
Who? Affiliation	Rick Perry, Republican Governor of Texas
Ruling	Barely True
Checkers	W. Gardner Selby, Writer/Researcher; Ciara O’Rourke, Editor
# of words	693
#Sources Cited	6
Argument Summary	In a new book by Rick Perry, he says that Washington is “even telling us what kind of light bulb we can use." A 2007 law “steps up efficiency requirements and that's expected to result in consumers purchasing and using different bulbs.” But it doesn’t tell a consumer what kind of light bulb they can use, so PF rated his statement “Barely True.”
Bryan’s Argument	“…the sale of light bulbs that fail to meet its efficiency standards … “is equivalent to the government determining that those within its jurisdiction must purchase a specific type of light bulb.”
Quick Interpretation	It’s not the sale, it’s the manufacture, and making them more efficient doesn’t necessarily change consumer buying habits.
My criticism:	Good grief! So, since you’re being *forced*--who exactly is holding a gun to your head?
Guidelines	Number 2: Subjectivity in line with *limited government*
Rhetorical Devices/Logic fallacies	Bryan claims a straw man was created by Jen Stutsman, spokeswoman for the U.S. Dept. of Energy, in the interpretation of Rick Perry’s statement, but in doing so replaces that interpretation with his own. Plus Bryan creates a false equivalency between the efficiency standards and consumer choice.
DOES IT CHANGE THE RULING?	Yes, to True or Mostly True.
My view	Bryan seems to think that anything the government does that actually might help people is being forced on them (or if the *majority* don’t like it, as in the case of Obamacare).
Comments	PF liked Perry's book, as they ruled on a similar statement. I am thinking of having a new Category called “Charitable count” because of Bryan’s excessive use of the term.
Consequences of Bryan’s interpretation (What I have to believe if he is correct)	In a new book by Rick Perry, he states that Washington is “even telling us what kind of light bulb we can use." This is true because the government is prohibiting sale of those bulbs that do not meet efficiency standards as a result of a 2007 law, which is the equivalent of forcing people to chose what type of bulb to use, even though the government doesn’t actually tell a consumer what kind of light bulb they can use, even though consumers can still use whatever kind of lighting they want, have a wide array of choices, and aren’t forced to buy anything if they choose, and even though they won’t know the difference when they buy bulbs except that they are more efficient. But who wants more efficient bulbs!!!!
Bryan’s Grade	Three Pepés for stretching it again (like a Lil White Lie!)
PF Grade	One Pepé