Banning incandescent lamps?

EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.
I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/~c110KLWOHv:e261985 :
What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?
Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a boom in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?
Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in the laws of physics!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sure, while they are at it they probably will want to inspect my gun collection. Might have a dangerous lightbulb in the gun safes.

That link is a session link.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname 0_cong_bills&docid=f:h6enr.txt.pdf
This should work better.
As far as your original question, I'm trying to read this but it is giving me a headache. Btw, you need ANSI and other standards to understand the bill. So how am a I a common citizen for who ignorance of law is considered no defense supposed to comply with this?
Like most enrolled bills you have to have copies of all the other referenced bills passed into law where one word in a paragraph modified by this bill can drastically change the effect of already enacted laws.
Not only do we need term limits, we need limits on the size of each congress critters staff. This wasn't written my our legislators, they are too busy raising money for their next election.
Wes
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I changed mine out to 4' single tube florescents.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:57:33 -0500, Wes wrote:

I'm not sure that would be a good idea. It might be better to hold congresscritters and their staffs to the standard of liability that civil engineers must meet. I've often said that any law needs to be written with the care of a computer program that will control a machine that can kill people, because a government is just such a machine. For starters, everyone in the legislative process needs an intensive course in the law of unintended consequences. Two of my favorite cases: better car locks led to the rise of violent carjacking, and the once-fashionable idea of making prison sentences for armed robbery comperable to those for murder removed the incentive for a robber to leave his victim alive.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's no problem getting 35mpg, the problem is affording it ;)
Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I had a 1962 MG Midget - fancy version of the Mk. II A-H Sprite - that gave me 33 MPG City, 55 MPG Highway.
If this could be done 45 years ago then why can't it be done today?
BTW, for one car that's slated to hit the market about a year from now that'll (supposedly) get over 180 MPG, go to <http://www/loremo.com>.
Too bad the SafetyNazis will prevent US sales.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RAM wrote:

Good man, i've still got my Mk1 sprite which I have had since 1984 and it did return really good mileage when driven sensibly, still good when driven like a lunatic. From the detail though that's a 948cc engine and unladen weight of 660kg (1452 lbs), given that spec any modern vehicle should be able to beat the mpg easily by a vast margin. It seems to me that while modern vehicles are getting safer and the structure lighter the vehicles are getting heavier. Too many power electric accessories?. Renault introduced a 6k euro car idea for emerging markets a few years ago and IIRC later reduced it to 5k euro. Basic car, no thrills, simple to maintain, one body style, really took off from what I read and many were imported into europe by people wanting simple transport without the bloat.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RAM wrote:

My 1976 Vega with stick shift got 40+ MPG on the highway, with the A/C running. I always wondered if they made a mistake and put in an auto trans axle ratio. I used to joke it had "4 speeds, that's 3rd, 4th, half-grumble and full-grumble". It was a little difficult to drive, a very touchy clutch that wore out at 18,000 miles. I put a 12" clutch in it, and then it was nearly impossible to drive. I had to invent a whole new clutch technique that I called the "inertial dump mode". You revved the engine and then engaged the clutch until you got rolling, then removed your foot from the gas and let is stall - completely. While this happened, the clutch could be locked up and the car's momentum jump-started it. If you tried to feather the clutch in, it would start massive clutch chatter until the front bumper struck the pavement! I'm not kidding, but my wife proved that a Vega can actually do a "wheelie"!
My 1989 Toyota Corolla wagon with 5-speed will do over 40 on the highway under the best conditions, and does 32+ MPG in mixed driving.
Niether of these are extremely light vehicles, or highly aerodynamic. And, they both are straight Otto-cycle engines, with all the pumping losses that entails.
The problem with the Prius and other hybrids is the engine is WAY too big, and the batteries and motor/drives are way too small. The highly aerodynamic Prius ought to be able to cruise on the highway with under 10 Hp applied, mostly for wind resistance. Why the HELL they need an 80+ Hp engine in that thing must be beacuse Toyota has a big plant that makes 80+ Hp 4-cyl engines! Otherwise, that sized engine is totally ludicrous. Properly sizing the engine, and maybe going to a stratified-charge or Diesel cycle, should allow a nearly stock Prius to get 80 + MPG.
Jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    [ ... ]

    Quite simple -- the additional weight mandated by the safety requirements.
    I remember when there was one small UK car -- I think that it was the MGB for a certain year or two -- where the requirements caused it to need three windshield wiper blades. The requirement was that a certain number of square inches of windshield *must* be cleaned by the wipers -- and the whole windshield did not have that many square inches. So -- the solution was a third windshield wiper whose coverage overlapped the other two -- but the sum of the wiped areas of the three was sufficient to get it past the requirements. :-)
    With things as idiotic as this -- how can people make cars light and small enough to be energy efficient?
    Enjoy,         DoN.
--
Email: < snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

' Or survivable.
Gunner
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

More so, the problem is surviving a freeway-speed crash in something capable of getting it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I'd take my chances in our eight-year old mid-size Mercedes diesel sedan over your US truck-based SUV any day. 35mpg highway isn't a problem, and the sedan is no lightweight. Plenty of power and no visible smoke. Now explain to me again how US manufacturers can't do it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:43:30 -0600, Dale Scroggins

You're missing the bigger point that this is for the _average_, not individual vehicles.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm sorry. I thought you were saying it would be difficult to build a crashworthy, safe car that would get 35mpg, so I pointed out that some manufacturers had solved that problem ten years ago. I must have misread your previous post, and missed the part about fleet averages and all that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town. JR Dweller in the cellar
Richard J Kinch wrote:

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of maintenance?
-- Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is the German Rabbit with the 1500 engine. Much smoother and quieter than the 1600 in the US cars. JR Dweller in the cellar
Larry Jaques wrote:

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have a '79 also. I think the older diesel Rabbits got the reputation for noise because the RH motor mount doesn't last long, and when it fails lots of vibration is transmitted to the body. Mine needs changing again, and it isn't easy.
I also have an Isuzu turbodiesel pickup. 35mpg in town, on the road, full, empty, pulling a trailer, whatever. I picked it up a few years ago for less than $1,000. Folks wanted big pickups and SUVs, not small trucks then. Even our Mercedes diesel sedan gets 35mpg on the road. There is no reason the vast majority of vehicles on the road couldn't meet or beat 35MPG. Biodiesel is easier and cheaper to make than ethanol, too.
For those of you who drive the thirsty gassers, and think it should be your birthright, remember how much of your money goes each month to support madrassas around the world. You are making a conscious choice to support radical Islam. You do have a choice.
quickly quoth:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Really? I have a 9 year old car that is the best performing car I've ever owned, but it gets 39 mpg on highway and 32-33 mpg in town. I can't buy one with comparable milage today from the same company. They say it is impossible. Have those laws of phyics changed since they built my car?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And mine too? My 1980 Plymouth Champ easily met the future EPA rules without computers and without fuel injection. Imagine what that car could do today if it had a transplant of ordinary 2000-era technology.
Vaughn
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.