On the theme of the Canada ban covered in the last series of posts,
Canadian MP Cheryl Gallant (website, facebook page) has a campaign going against it.
Interestingly, she is a member of the Government Conservative Party launching the ban.
But rather than her being an odd one out, what is odder is surely that her Conservative Party which otherwise proudly proclaims a "free market" and "free choice" agenda, should back such a state totalitarian measure.
And, yes, it is a "ban", setting standards that don't allow them obviously "bans" them, and supposedly allowed "similar" incandescent (halogen type) alternatives will be banned too on adopting US law, EISA tier 2 2014-2017 final rule requirement of 45 lumens per Watt equating to fluorescent bulbs.
For more details of the Canada Government ban proposal, and a 10 section analysis of it, see the first post of the series.
As mentioned, direct appeal to Government itself is possible, they invite comments via their stated comment line (+1) 613-996-4359 or email email@example.com
While formally finished 19th December that does not mean not being able to still "send a message".
The same applies of course to MP Cheryl's campaign.
Albeit launched just recently, there does not seem to have been any news or updates since then. But it's still ongoing, and an MP of the same party as the Government would presumably have "the ear" of those in charge more than an effort by other people, also in any future attempt at reversing a decision, and signing the petition and supporting the campaign in other ways also gives such a backing of course.
Campaign site: stopthelightbulbban.ca
Campaign site message:
Safe and Affordable
The incandescent light bulb is safe and affordable.
Starting next January, 75- and 100-watt incandescent light bulbs will become black market items, and by the end of 2014 the same will happen to 40- and 60-watt versions.
Co-sign Cheryl Gallant’s letter to the Ministers of Natural Resources, Health and Environment, and tell the Government to stop the light bulb ban.
Most Canadians do not know light bulbs will be banned. Tell your friends and family at once. Encourage everyone you know to co-sign Cheryl’s letter before it is too late!
Unlike incandescent lights, which can be disposed of safely in the regular garbage, CFLs contain mercury, which can have significant impacts on both human health and the environment if not disposed of properly. Consequently, these lights are generally not accepted in the regular garbage stream and need to be disposed of using a hazardous waste program.
Proper Disposal 24% Tossed In Regular Garbage 55%
Letter circulated around 14th December
The countdown is on. Starting January 1, 2014 our federal government will commence the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs. The overwhelming response to the constituency survey on whether or not a further delay in the ban is needed was that the ban should not go ahead at all.
The ban arose from the Kyoto Protocol as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an international treaty that sets binding obligations on industrialized countries to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Although Canada did not ratify the agreement, the ban on incandescent light bulbs stayed on our books.
The main alternative to incandescent light bulbs is the compact fluorescent lamp (CFL). CFL bulbs cost roughly 8 times more than incandescent light bulbs. They contain levels of mercury much higher than that of incandescent light bulbs, and are potentially harmful to humans, animals, and our environment.
Mercury is a neurotoxin, and must be specially disposed of, as it can contaminate water supplies and soil if dumped into landfills. According to Environment Canada the mercury contained in a typical thermometer can contaminate five Olympic-size swimming pools to toxic levels. Less than 10 per cent of CFLs are recycled amongst the tens of millions that are sold each year in Canada.
In a recent stroke of irony Canada signed the UN’s Global Mercury Agreement, which imposes a legally binding pledge to cut atmospheric emissions and environmental releases of mercury, in an international effort to reduce global mercury pollution and protect the environment and human health.
We have 17 days to stop the ban. Will you help me?
How Regulations are Wrongly Justified
14 points, referenced:
Includes why the overall society savings aren't there, and even if they were, why alternative policies are better, including alternative policies that target light bulbs.