> CFL bulbs are fine; put the dead ones in a box then take the box to the hardware store once every 3 years when it fills up.

So you live with a box filled with fragile glass tubes with mercury in them that you keep putting more glass tubes with mercury in for three years? When you take them to the hardware store, do you double bag them to keep the mercury from leaking when the tubes inevitably shatter against all of the other bulbs? Is that mercury ever recovered in "recycling", or does it just poison a land fill for the next thousand years?

> CFL bulbs are fine; they last years and they don't heat up your house like crazy.

Please tell that to my IKEA and other CFLs that were lucky to last one year. And a properly made incandescent can last many years as well. In fact, when I was a kid, my family restored a 200+ year old home that had a very, very old bulb in it (it was large and looked like an old Edison bulb -- it was bigger than my fist) that still worked great -- it was nice and bright and probably on the order of 150 watts. It was probably from the 1940's, because there were old magazines from the 1940's stacked underneath it. (Great old mags like Popular Mechanics that had ads for "Buy U.S. War Bonds" in them).

CFL's used to (and still) cost a lot more than incandescents. Four to ten times as much when the mandate was introduced, and they were almost as unreliable as cheap incandescents, and produced a horribly cold blue light.

For incandescent bulbs, yes, the heat issue is an issue, and the fact that they're much, much less efficient, but they didn't contain dangerous metals or present a serious environmental hazard when they were disposed of.

LED bulbs did actually exist 20 years ago; in 2000, a friend gave me one (I tried it out and was decidedly not impressed), and I saw them in Fry's for $25+ dollars in 2000 dollars. They were not very bright and had some real issues (and big heat sinks, interestingly enough).

But I miss incandescent bulbs, and believe that the market would have moved us over to LED's soon enough. I would have chosen LED's now over most incandescents, but I'd still prefer incandescents for a few types of uses.

The irony is that the really inefficient incandescent bulbs -- bright and hot halogens -- were not banned; only the run of the mill $1 bulbs (in fact, literally, you could buy a 4 pack of Sylvanias in the dollar store, because that's how I bought bulbs in college).

That's the problem with these mandates: they just harm the poor people, because people who create these mandates are definitely not poor and don't really care -- but these technocrats know better, because of some future energy emergency that never materialized. The CA blackouts wouldn't have been close to mitigated by everyone switching over to CFLs, but it probably helped corporate interests and whoever manufactured all those CFLs clogging up landfills.

And now we have at least a century's worth of oil just in shale that wasn't even accessible 25 years ago, and the sea levels never rose in 2014 as Al Gore so confidently predicted. (I wonder if he bought property in Miami after the prices dropped!) Is this push toward electric cars just another greenhouse warming, ozone depleting, nuclear winter, DDT-thins-bird-eggs proto-catastrophe? We don't know, but it seems clear that the science on macro-events is settled only in hind-sight. Personally, I think we should ban volcanic emissions.