environmental levy - energy-saving light bulbs

missionimpossible

missionimpossible

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
411
Reaction score
14
in this years budget speech it was announced that an environmental levy would be charged if energy-saving light bulbs are not used.

How will ESKOM know hown many non energy-saving light bulbs you have in your house?


http://www.moneywebtax.co.za/moneywebtax/view/moneywebtax/en/page8641?oid=35389&sn=Detail

To encourage the use of energy-saving light bulbs, from 1 October 2009 an environmental levy of R3 will be charged on imports and at manufacturing level of incandescent light bulbs.
 
The tax is on buying the bulb, so you pay R3 extra on the bulb, you dont get charged R3 for every existing bulb you have.
 
Very good idea....

Its this kind of thinking that will move things ahead.. rather than unworkable solutions that try police the end user like little children
 
Terrible idea. Yet another small step to the New Tyranny.

1) It's not the job of governments to regulate these sorts of issues.
2) Yet again the taxpayer is bled, and the poorest suffer most. Besides, this tax goes into general coffers, not into new energy plants.
3) Anthropogenic global warming is a nonsense and a scam. The planet's heating up and there's absolutely zip anyone can do about it, even if every human being disappeared in an instant. We didn't cause it and we can't affect it in any way.
 
Arthur said:
Terrible idea. Yet another small step to the New Tyranny.

1) It's not the job of governments to regulate these sorts of issues.
2) Yet again the taxpayer is bled, and the poorest suffer most. Besides, this tax goes into general coffers, not into new energy plants.
3) Anthropogenic global warming is a nonsense and a scam. The planet's heating up and there's absolutely zip anyone can do about it, even if every human being disappeared in an instant. We didn't cause it and we can't affect it in any way.
Click to expand...

And you have facts and scientific evidence to back up your claims of global warming being nonsense, or a degree in meteorology?
 
semaphore said:
And you have facts and scientific evidence to back up your claims of global warming being nonsense, or a degree in meteorology?
Click to expand...
Yes for facts & scientific evidence.
No for metereology degree. (Not that a degree helps much when it comes to science, as attested by countless examples of famous PhDs getting even basics wrong, often spectacularly.) Besides, what is really at issue here is the wisdom of a light bulb tax, which is not a scientific matter but one of politics, economics and prudence.
 
Arthur said:
Yes for facts & scientific evidence.
No for metereology degree. (Not that a degree helps much when it comes to science, as attested by countless examples of famous PhDs getting even basics wrong, often spectacularly.) Besides, what is really at issue here is the wisdom of a light bulb tax, which is not a scientific matter but one of politics, economics and prudence.
Click to expand...

ok so where are the facts i mean i am interested im not trying to say you are wrong or anything, just out of pure interest i want to see them.

Because in my eyes, pumping out tons of carbon emissions and tens of tons of monoxide cannot be healthy :)
 
semaphore said:
ok so where are the facts i mean i am interested im not trying to say you are wrong or anything, just out of pure interest i want to see them.

Because in my eyes, pumping out tons of carbon emissions and tens of tons of monoxide cannot be healthy :)
Click to expand...
You can't be serious, mate. That's even weirder than religious fundamentalism. I'm trying hard to increase my carbon footprint. It's good for plants, as any biologist will tell you. Did you know that animal farts account for more 'greenhouse gases' than all the cars and factories of the world combined.

But we are deflecting this thread. AGW (anthropogenic global warming) theory belongs elsewhere (under Fantasy or Politics perhaps?). Back to topic.

Google can help you.
 
Last edited:
i know what AGW is :) was not at desk. Job beckoned. Well i still believe that the toxins we put into the air does not help the earth, and yes animal farts might put alot more gases into the air, but still why contribute more when it can be prevented?
 
semaphore said:
i know what AGW is :) was not at desk. Job beckoned. Well i still believe that the toxins we put into the air does not help the earth, and yes animal farts might put alot more gases into the air, but still why contribute more when it can be prevented?
Click to expand...
Because it's good for plants. Animals and people like plants.
 
Carbon monoxide is poison it is not good for plants or animals.
 
Yes but not to much that the plants and animals get saturated with the stuff

also another thing that there is something clearly wrong, is with the amount of cancers happening in this day. Emissions,technology, life styles.. they are all contributing factors. I mean you take lets say 100 years ago, cancer was hardly known, primary due to the fact not many people had it, you look now... its common. Take my family on my uncles wifes side, her entire family is being ravaged by cancer..
 
Arthur, you may be aware that we're also critically short on energy in South Africa. Environmental considerations notwithstanding it makes sense to discourage the use of inefficient appliances.
 
So build more damn power stations! Preferably nuclear ones. Fast!

In my books there are few things more fascist or tyrannical than expropriating people's hard work in order to prevent them from doing otherwise legitimate things like light their houses with incandescent light bulbs. The R3 lightbulb tax is an outrage. It's disgusting. It's obscene. And when people try to justify it in terms of AGW pseudo-science (with all the bluff and bluster of "well, scientists agree" when a quick check will see they don't) is downright nazi.
 
Arthur said:
So build more damn power stations! Preferably nuclear ones. Fast!

In my books there are few things more fascist or tyrannical than expropriating people's hard work in order to prevent them from doing otherwise legitimate things like light their houses with incandescent light bulbs. The R3 lightbulb tax is an outrage. It's disgusting. It's obscene. And when people try to justify it in terms of AGW pseudo-science (with all the bluff and bluster of "well, scientists agree" when a quick check will see they don't) is downright nazi.
Click to expand...

As I've just said in the GW thread. You do the maths. Is ONE CFL bulb more expensive than 10 incandescents? Because CFL lasts 8-15 times longer than an incandescent. And that's not even factoring in the extra little saving on electricity costs.

Anyway, yes, we'll just materialize more power stations in the next couple of months and avert the crisis. Whew. No need to try and be energy efficient.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to get into the whole global warming debate, I saw that running in the science thread and yes, that debate should stay there.

However, I want to state the following:

For the last 10 odd years I've been buying energy savers, purely for the fact that they last a lot longer. 10 years ago, when I was still staying with my folks, we started replacing the blown normal bulbs with energy savers, because the cheap crappy normal bulbs would blow after a month or so.

Skip past the part where I stayed on my own in a townhouse and did the same....

When I bought the house that my family and I stay in now about 7 years ago, I did the same. Every normal bulb that popped was replaced with an energy saver. After about 4 months all the bulbs were replaced, as the normal ones just kept blowing, one after the other.

Since then, I had to replace one of the energy savers, and that was only because of a dodgy light socket burning out and taking the bulb with it.

Cost wise? It has been a lot cheaper with the energy savers for me so far, purely in terms of having to replace bulbs. I'm not even talking about the savings on the electricity bill, as that was not a huge concern for me until about 18 months ago.

Bottom line, for the normal consumer it is much better to buy a CFL, as they will last you a heck of lot longer, and cost you less in energy at the same time.. By putting a R3 tax on normal globes people would be more likely to buy the CFL, so hey, its a great idea!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X