You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Pelosi Calls Press Conference to Unveil $140,000 Light Fixtures in House Cafeteria
2010-04-23
Sorry, couldn't find "Stupid Politicians", but this seemed close enough.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called a Capitol Hill press conference Wednesday to unveil new light fixtures in the House cafeteria. The light fixtures cost $140,000 and will take almost 10 years to pay off in saved energy.
For some reason, I don't believe it. I wonder how many thousands of dollars went into the press corps visit. I wonder what it costs for new bulbs.
Architect of the Capitol Stephen Ayers told CNSNews.com that the new lights, along with motion sensors and automatic window shades, are a first for the House. The lights already have been installed in one Senate Committee room.

“We have a couple of applications,' Ayers said. “This is the first one in the House [and] we have another application that we've installed in the Senate – that's in room SD-G50 in the Dirksen [Senate Office] Building. That's a committee hearing room. We're piloting this new technology.'

Ayers said that the new light fixtures and window shades were installed in the cafeteria, located in the basement of the Rayburn House Office Building, because the LED [light emitting diode] light fixtures have become much less expensive.

“It's now becoming much more affordable, so we're sort of kicking the tires on it for the moment. It seems to work terrific. It's got great energy savings, and it's got – we think – great lighting quality, and the price of the light fixtures just in the last year has come down significantly.'

Ayers said that the price had come down from $800 per fixture to $300, meaning that the lights would theoretically pay for themselves in less than 10 years, due to estimated reductions in electricity usage.

“I think this fixture was $800 a year ago, and it's now just over $300, so in one year that's a pretty significant savings – which allows us to begin using this kind of equipment and technology, because we're able to get a good return on investment. At $800 a fixture we can't get a good return on investment, but when it gets down to $300 – and I'm sure it will go even lower – we're able to get a good return on investment.
Shoulda waited. But the press won't come out a second time, so I guess Nancy had to beat the rest to the punch.
“This particular room, with all of the technology, was about $140,000, which is less than a 10-year return on investment for us.'

Pelosi said that the new lights in the cafeteria would make the Capitol a “shining example of sustainability' and green technology.
Now why on earth should Nancy be giving a tour for this? Not that I mind her wasting her time on this crap instead of shoving crap down our throats.
“Three years ago House Democrats launched our Green the Capitol initiative, ensuring that our nation's leaders remain responsible stewards of our environment,' Pelosi told the small crowd of reporters and staff gathered in the cafeteria.

“Today, in that same tradition, we gather to renew that pledge, taking one step forward in our effort to make this Capitol of the United States, this beacon of freedom and liberty, a shining example of sustainability,' she added.
So LED lights make us a beacon of freedom and liberty. Not what our forefathers had in mind. I guess we are in the process of retooling the language now to eliminate the meaning of those kinds of words.
Pelosi said that the new light fixtures and window shades – which raise and lower based on the level of sunlight coming through the windows – would “set the standard for sustainable living nationwide.'

“In making this change we are flipping the switch on a greener future for Congress and setting the standard for sustainable living nationwide,' Pelosi declared.
We'll I'll just run right out and get some for me then.
Posted by:gorb

#14  After one of our delightful blizzards, some of them got "snowed in".

If only scientists could invent some kind of highly efficient light that had a heater in it to melt the snow. I would pay double for that!

And I would think that the inexpensive answer to this expense disaster is to just wait for LED lights to come out that will screw into the existing sockets.

Geniuses run our country.
Posted by: gorb   2010-04-23 21:37  

#13  LED traffic lights have a problem up north, however. After one of our delightful blizzards, some of them got "snowed in". It kind of screwed up traffic control for a while in some places.
Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie   2010-04-23 17:52  

#12  LED is so much a better solution than compact fluorescent. wonder which one the govt is trying to force on us?

CF bulbs do not pay for themselves. they cost of the bulb is pretty much a wash on the energy saving. they are also an environmental nightmare if you look at the production and disposal (conveniently left out by the left in their mad rush of faux piety) when the price point drops i will go LED in my house. what we need is are LED replacements that screw in to current light sockets.
Posted by: abu do you love   2010-04-23 14:19  

#11  Steny, am I...am I...smiling?
I'm not sure, your highn...Madame Speaker.
Posted by: tu3031   2010-04-23 14:19  

#10  LED fixtures are still pretty expensive, yet about half the price (or less) they were a few years ago, so that part is true.

Even if you doubled the estimated '$300/ea' cost to include install labor and misc. materials, that still would equate to about 230 or so light fixtures (I don't remember the House Cafeteria space being large enough to require that many). I haven't seen what they are using yet, but a 10-year payback for 230+ fixtures better offer better savings than the standard 60-watt power reduction per fixture over florescent lighting one typically anticipates (and figuring 13.8Kw/Hr savings for 230 fixtures x local power rate/hr [used .10/hr] x # hours in use = around 4,230 days before payoff if they're on 24/7).

Area 'Occupancy Sensors' that shut down lighting if no one is around would be incredibly cheaper and provide the same cost savings way before these LEDs will.

The 'automatic shades' however, are 'technical nightmares' when they begin to fail (which they will, loooong before the LED lighting).
Posted by: Mullah Richard   2010-04-23 13:22  

#9  Seriously, this is why I Don't have any, if the price comes down (Like the compact flourescents did) then, and only then I'll buy some.

At present they're only attractive to huge electricity users, like department stores, and I've noticrd more Trafic siggnals are now LED, for cities they're cost effective, not for me, not yet.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2010-04-23 11:15  

#8  Are they so desperate they're trying to distract us with shiny objects now?
OUTSTANDING snark, and from a newbie (Keeney) too.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2010-04-23 11:05  

#7  Ayers said that the new light fixtures and window shades were installed in the cafeteria, located in the basement of the Rayburn House Office Building, because the LED [light emitting diode] light fixtures have become much less expensive

Window shades in teh basement huh? Good enough for government work.

How many dems does it take to change a lightbulb? 2 - Pelosi holds the lightbulb while Obama turns the world.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2010-04-23 11:03  

#6  Are they so desperate they're trying to distract us with shiny objects now?

"Unemployment is through the roof, the economy is in the tank, weÂ’ve mortgaged our childrenÂ’s future, our troops are fighting for their lives with little support from their government, healthcare sucks more and more every day, China owns almost $1 trillion of our debt, but look, we have new lights in the basement cafeteria!"

I'm just waiting to hear this woman declare, "Let them eat cake".
Posted by: Keeney   2010-04-23 10:27  

#5  Hey, the lighting won't work. This woman is destined to be forever in the dark.
Posted by: JohnQC   2010-04-23 10:13  

#4  $300-$800 PER light fixture?!?
Posted by: Shoting Unelet2578   2010-04-23 10:08  

#3  Someone should tell her the new lighting makes her look old. They'd be ripping it all out tomorrow.
Posted by: tu3031   2010-04-23 09:21  

#2  This strikes me as one of the least stupid things they have done. Trivial, but not stupid. And the time they spend on stuff like this is time they can't spend on Crap 'n' Trade, etc. Even if it does take 10 years to pay of (or 50) try to name another expenditure they have made that has any chance of paying off. LEDs truly are more efficient than incandescent or even fluorescent bulbs, and are still early on the price/development curve - I expect the light 'quality' to go up and the price to come way down over the next decade.
Posted by: Glenmore   2010-04-23 07:50  

#1  our nationÂ’s leaders remain responsible stewards of our environment

I...I can't ... snark that. My mind .. just ...

Oh, is that what the term "boggle" means?
Posted by: Bobby   2010-04-23 06:45  

00:00