We all have heard the rhetoric supporting the indisputable greatness of led lights, however, the information presented is quite perverted in many ways, such as in the long life and the ecological key points.
We all know led bulbs are almost entirely made of plastic, with the exception of the integrated circuits and semiconductors made of rare earths, so exactly what part of their physical existence is ecological? led's are anything but sustainable, that key point cannot be farther from the truth, because in comparison to incandescent bulbs which are made almost entirely of glass and metal, with materials that are abundant in nature and disintegrate easy, makes them the champions of eco-friendliness, so exactly what physical part of incandescent bulbs makes them not desirable?
People pay for quality food, and some even a premium for their dietary religious alignments, such as kosher and halal foods. So if people are allowed to spend extra money for digestible energy of better quality, why in many countries now are people not allowed to pay extra for visible light energy of better quality? Since when do we expect something good for a cheap price?
If it costs more to have quality light so whats wrong with that? People are allowed to buy luxury cars and big TV's without any prohibition on their energy consumption, if they can pay for it they are allowed to have what they want, but not incandescent bulbs, and the classic response of being so inefficient because so much of their light comes out as invisible infrared comes…So let me know if I got this right, governments are telling you that because you cannot see the infrared spectrum of incandescent bulbs, then they are not worthwhile, because if most electrons that go inside the incandescent bulb come out as invisible infrared frequencies, then that makes them inefficient and should be banned right? So if that's the reasoning, then we should all get continuous receipts for what the government spends our taxes in, because is the same principle, its energy that we put in and we should all see the entire government spending of our units of energy visible with our eyes, measured with the same rigidity of energy accountability as incandescent bulbs, otherwise most of those units of energy that we give are invisible to us.
Am I missing something in the picture that makes incandescence light prohibition make sense? and if there isn't, then we need receipts to evaluate if government spending of our units of energy is more inefficient to begin with.