<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GE Ends Development of Incandescent Bulbs, Focuses on LEDs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:05:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-29107</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:00:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-29107</guid>
		<description>I stopped buying from GE a year ago. I refuse to use CFL&#039;s. They give off horrible light and they have mercury in them. If you break one, you have to treat it like a hazmat accident! No thanks!

I buy Sylvania light bulbs. I will buy incandescent light bulbs wherever I can. So long GE. Don&#039;t let the door hit you on the way out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stopped buying from GE a year ago. I refuse to use CFL&#8217;s. They give off horrible light and they have mercury in them. If you break one, you have to treat it like a hazmat accident! No thanks!</p>
<p>I buy Sylvania light bulbs. I will buy incandescent light bulbs wherever I can. So long GE. Don&#8217;t let the door hit you on the way out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter in Dublin</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-4782</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter in Dublin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:51:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-4782</guid>
		<description>Sounds a pity they abandoned those development plans Jerry...



All lights have advantages, none should be banned.

People can make up their own minds about the advantages, including any energy savings, and pay more for using ordinary light bulbs if that’s what they want.



Does society need to save energy?

No, there’s plenty, including new renewable forms.



Does society need to save on greenhouse gases?

Yes, on current evidence.

But everyone forgets a basic simple fact:

Light bulbs don’t give out any gases.

Power stations don’t necessarily either.

Power station emissions can of course be dealt with themselves (including by new energy forms)

- bans are unfair on emission-free households

and in the end don’t save that much energy or money or emissions anyway as explained on

http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x onwards



Also:

Imagine if LED lamps are so great:

Then people will want to buy a lot of  them.

Again, therfore no need to ban bulbs in that case.

After all, the perverse logic of the light bulb ban is that people don&#039;t want to buy &quot;energy saving&quot; fluorescent lights, so they have to be forced into it:  No need to ban an impopular product!

When transistors came, that didn&#039;t mean having to ban radio tubes (valves)....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds a pity they abandoned those development plans Jerry&#8230;</p>
<p>All lights have advantages, none should be banned.</p>
<p>People can make up their own minds about the advantages, including any energy savings, and pay more for using ordinary light bulbs if that’s what they want.</p>
<p>Does society need to save energy?</p>
<p>No, there’s plenty, including new renewable forms.</p>
<p>Does society need to save on greenhouse gases?</p>
<p>Yes, on current evidence.</p>
<p>But everyone forgets a basic simple fact:</p>
<p>Light bulbs don’t give out any gases.</p>
<p>Power stations don’t necessarily either.</p>
<p>Power station emissions can of course be dealt with themselves (including by new energy forms)</p>
<p>- bans are unfair on emission-free households</p>
<p>and in the end don’t save that much energy or money or emissions anyway as explained on</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x" rel="nofollow">http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x</a> onwards</p>
<p>Also:</p>
<p>Imagine if LED lamps are so great:</p>
<p>Then people will want to buy a lot of  them.</p>
<p>Again, therfore no need to ban bulbs in that case.</p>
<p>After all, the perverse logic of the light bulb ban is that people don&#8217;t want to buy &#8220;energy saving&#8221; fluorescent lights, so they have to be forced into it:  No need to ban an impopular product!</p>
<p>When transistors came, that didn&#8217;t mean having to ban radio tubes (valves)&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter in Dublin</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-21155</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter in Dublin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-21155</guid>
		<description>Sounds a pity they abandoned those development plans Jerry...



All lights have advantages, none should be banned.

People can make up their own minds about the advantages, including any energy savings, and pay more for using ordinary light bulbs if that’s what they want.



Does society need to save energy?

No, there’s plenty, including new renewable forms.



Does society need to save on greenhouse gases?

Yes, on current evidence.

But everyone forgets a basic simple fact:

Light bulbs don’t give out any gases.

Power stations don’t necessarily either.

Power station emissions can of course be dealt with themselves (including by new energy forms)

- bans are unfair on emission-free households

and in the end don’t save that much energy or money or emissions anyway as explained on

http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x onwards



Also:

Imagine if LED lamps are so great:

Then people will want to buy a lot of  them.

Again, therfore no need to ban bulbs in that case.

After all, the perverse logic of the light bulb ban is that people don&#039;t want to buy &quot;energy saving&quot; fluorescent lights, so they have to be forced into it:  No need to ban an impopular product!

When transistors came, that didn&#039;t mean having to ban radio tubes (valves)....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds a pity they abandoned those development plans Jerry&#8230;</p>
<p>All lights have advantages, none should be banned.</p>
<p>People can make up their own minds about the advantages, including any energy savings, and pay more for using ordinary light bulbs if that’s what they want.</p>
<p>Does society need to save energy?</p>
<p>No, there’s plenty, including new renewable forms.</p>
<p>Does society need to save on greenhouse gases?</p>
<p>Yes, on current evidence.</p>
<p>But everyone forgets a basic simple fact:</p>
<p>Light bulbs don’t give out any gases.</p>
<p>Power stations don’t necessarily either.</p>
<p>Power station emissions can of course be dealt with themselves (including by new energy forms)</p>
<p>- bans are unfair on emission-free households</p>
<p>and in the end don’t save that much energy or money or emissions anyway as explained on</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x" rel="nofollow">http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x</a> onwards</p>
<p>Also:</p>
<p>Imagine if LED lamps are so great:</p>
<p>Then people will want to buy a lot of  them.</p>
<p>Again, therfore no need to ban bulbs in that case.</p>
<p>After all, the perverse logic of the light bulb ban is that people don&#8217;t want to buy &#8220;energy saving&#8221; fluorescent lights, so they have to be forced into it:  No need to ban an impopular product!</p>
<p>When transistors came, that didn&#8217;t mean having to ban radio tubes (valves)&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shelley rock</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-4781</link>
		<dc:creator>shelley rock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-4781</guid>
		<description>Wow...this is AWESOME news since there is NO way I would ever endorse CFLS and their nasty mercury!

Thanks Jerry for sharing. Awesome job!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8230;this is AWESOME news since there is NO way I would ever endorse CFLS and their nasty mercury!</p>
<p>Thanks Jerry for sharing. Awesome job!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shelley rock</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-21153</link>
		<dc:creator>shelley rock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-21153</guid>
		<description>Wow...this is AWESOME news since there is NO way I would ever endorse CFLS and their nasty mercury!

Thanks Jerry for sharing. Awesome job!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8230;this is AWESOME news since there is NO way I would ever endorse CFLS and their nasty mercury!</p>
<p>Thanks Jerry for sharing. Awesome job!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shelley rock</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-21154</link>
		<dc:creator>shelley rock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-21154</guid>
		<description>Wow...this is AWESOME news since there is NO way I would ever endorse CFLS and their nasty mercury!

Thanks Jerry for sharing. Awesome job!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8230;this is AWESOME news since there is NO way I would ever endorse CFLS and their nasty mercury!</p>
<p>Thanks Jerry for sharing. Awesome job!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fred heidrick</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-4780</link>
		<dc:creator>fred heidrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 06:00:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-4780</guid>
		<description>like david schuellerman  i allso have seizuer like spells  with the lousy floresent lights all my life from 1954.



so i hope LEDs can have some red light added so i dont have to live out side for the rest of my life becaues you all want to be more energy eficent and having me floping on the floor like a fish out of water.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>like david schuellerman  i allso have seizuer like spells  with the lousy floresent lights all my life from 1954.</p>
<p>so i hope LEDs can have some red light added so i dont have to live out side for the rest of my life becaues you all want to be more energy eficent and having me floping on the floor like a fish out of water.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fred heidrick</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-21151</link>
		<dc:creator>fred heidrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 06:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-21151</guid>
		<description>like david schuellerman  i allso have seizuer like spells  with the lousy floresent lights all my life from 1954.



so i hope LEDs can have some red light added so i dont have to live out side for the rest of my life becaues you all want to be more energy eficent and having me floping on the floor like a fish out of water.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>like david schuellerman  i allso have seizuer like spells  with the lousy floresent lights all my life from 1954.</p>
<p>so i hope LEDs can have some red light added so i dont have to live out side for the rest of my life becaues you all want to be more energy eficent and having me floping on the floor like a fish out of water.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fred heidrick</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-21152</link>
		<dc:creator>fred heidrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 06:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-21152</guid>
		<description>like david schuellerman  i allso have seizuer like spells  with the lousy floresent lights all my life from 1954.



so i hope LEDs can have some red light added so i dont have to live out side for the rest of my life becaues you all want to be more energy eficent and having me floping on the floor like a fish out of water.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>like david schuellerman  i allso have seizuer like spells  with the lousy floresent lights all my life from 1954.</p>
<p>so i hope LEDs can have some red light added so i dont have to live out side for the rest of my life becaues you all want to be more energy eficent and having me floping on the floor like a fish out of water.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kristy Nichols</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/12/02/ge-ends-development-of-incandescent-bulbs-focuses-on-leds/#comment-21150</link>
		<dc:creator>Kristy Nichols</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 13:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=1593#comment-21150</guid>
		<description>It is so unfortunate that even wonderful new technological and environmental advancements are now costing jobs.  Is there no way around this??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is so unfortunate that even wonderful new technological and environmental advancements are now costing jobs.  Is there no way around this??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

