UH-OH
From the rocket scientists who forced us to "save water" by flushing our toilets three times more often than we used to, we face the imminent threat of low-flow ceiling fans.
(Thanks to William F. Cook)
« Previous | Main | Next »
From the rocket scientists who forced us to "save water" by flushing our toilets three times more often than we used to, we face the imminent threat of low-flow ceiling fans.
(Thanks to William F. Cook)
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
I'd like to be the first to say that I am not a fan of this bill.
Posted by: Brainy Jello | April 12, 2005 at 12:11 PM
just like the low flow toilets.
Posted by: andy lichter | April 12, 2005 at 12:14 PM
So a ceiling fan uses as much electricity as an air conditioner? That makes me feel a lot less guilty.
Posted by: Baron Kraft von Easy-Mac | April 12, 2005 at 12:15 PM
Other opponents of the bill say that energy regulations on the fans would restrict their versatility, leading to a decline in celing fan sales overall."What the gummint doesn't realize is that many people use their fans for things besides cooling," says Toddert Notakiller, GX homeowner. "The fan in the rumpus room is for target practice, the fan in the kitchen is for haircuts, and the fan in the Red Room is for tall, boring people who just won't leave." When asked for elaboration, Mr. Notakiller offered to demonstrate. This reporter declined.
Posted by: reneviht | April 12, 2005 at 12:19 PM
You let the government legislate ceiling fans? How much exactly do you pay these people? What happened to oh, crime prevention, improving health care, reducing poverty....
Posted by: Somewhere North | April 12, 2005 at 12:36 PM
The four horsemen of the Apocalypse(revised)
24 Hrs, Cher, Fans and Low Flow Toilets.
Truly the end is Nigh!
Posted by: igloo | April 12, 2005 at 12:41 PM
Hahaha... I slay me. To think that a government politician is actually interested in the citizens. Hee, hee...
Posted by: Somewhere North | April 12, 2005 at 12:42 PM
...call for the Energy Department to establish a federal efficiency standard for home ceiling fans.
The fans in my house spin (they go around and around and around and stuff), and in the process, they put out this really nice cool breeze. Is that federally efficient enough for the federal dumbyament?
Oh, wait, maybe I'm 'exempt', or 'grandfathered', or some such ridiculous thing, since they were already installed at the start of the fiscal year.
Posted by: D'Artagnan | April 12, 2005 at 12:44 PM
Low-Flo ceiling fans? I recommend only using that when at a friend's house.
"Who crapped all over the living room?"
"Sorry. It's your low flow ceiling fans I blame."
"How would a faster fan change the result?"
"Higher flow?"
"Go home."
Posted by: Christobol | April 12, 2005 at 01:13 PM
My late parakeet would have appreciated this proposed legislation.
Please don't ask. It's too painfull.
Posted by: DougBo | April 12, 2005 at 02:00 PM
Now, if the sh*t hits the federally regulated low-flow fan, and there is no lame congressperson around to catch the flying poo in their eyebrows, is the lame congressperson still wrong?
Posted by: D'Artagnan | April 12, 2005 at 02:07 PM
No man's life, liberty or property is safe when congress is in session.
Ben Franklin.
Posted by: RDO | April 12, 2005 at 02:19 PM
Whew - it's window air conditioners, not central air-conditioning - I knew my gas & elec. co. would never lie to me!!!!
Posted by: Eleanor | April 12, 2005 at 02:32 PM
A "muffin monster" for shredding - too funny!
Posted by: Eleanor | April 12, 2005 at 02:50 PM
Ceiling fans, when their generally inefficient lights are included, use about as much or more energy each year as refrigerators, dishwashers and window air conditioners...
You suppose to keep the light on all year too!? Now, considering one uses the fan in the summer when there's longer periods of day light one would not need to have it turned on much.
I suppose only a member of Congress would keep the light ON ALL day.
But they aren't known for being too bright anyhow... oh, and probably that guy I just quoted, yea, him too.
Posted by: kibby F5™ | April 12, 2005 at 03:02 PM
The item says that energy consumption could be reduced by one percent ...
I'd be willing to wager a reasonable sum that we could cut energy consumption by 50 percent if we'd just get rid of Congress ...
Posted by: U.O | April 12, 2005 at 03:44 PM
I hope they make a decision before I move. I'd hate to buy the wrong ceiling fans and get hit with a stiff fine.
Posted by: slyeyes | April 12, 2005 at 03:56 PM
D'Artagnan and Cristobol, you sleigh me!!!! And D'Art, who cares if the lame congressperson is wrong, I wanna see the decorative eyebrow poo splatter! That would definitely cheer up a Monday. (Yes, I know it's Tuesday, but it's already been a looooooonnnnggggg week for me.)
And, exactly U.O -- I'd venture to guess that the time they've spent worrying about ceiling fans has already cost us more than that one percent savings.
Posted by: Proud Auntie | April 12, 2005 at 05:59 PM
A ceiling fan draws as much current as a window air conditioner? Most ceiling fans have 40 watt bulbs. Mine has four, which is pretty typical. That's only 120 watts. I think the motor in the fan and the blower motor in the air conditioner would be about the same, so that means the window air conditioner compressor would have to draw about 1 amp (the same as the bulbs) to make the totals the same. What a bunch of baloney. Advantage ceiling fan. The ceiling fan is much cheaper to run, even with the lights on. There is also no freaking way that ceiling fans draw 1/1000 of the electricity used in this country let alone 1/100. Who wrote this tripe? Oh wait, it's a pork spending program from congress; can't clog those Home Depot warehouses now can we?
Posted by: kilgore trout | April 12, 2005 at 06:23 PM
"...Deal's measure would pre-empt stronger fan efficiency requirements already approved or being considered..."
Rep. Nathan Deal R-Ga is obviously in the pocket of the powerful Ceiling Fan Lobby.
Posted by: AlanBoss | April 12, 2005 at 06:51 PM
OK, it's 160 watts. oops. It's still not close.
Posted by: kilgore trout | April 12, 2005 at 07:31 PM
So, you guys figgered out the math to decide which is more effective ... the air conditioner or the ceiling fan, and offer cost comparisons as well ...
Cool!
Posted by: U.O | April 12, 2005 at 08:01 PM
*Knock,knock*
"Yes?"
There's a guy standing at the door, wearing black fatigues, with lots of zippers and velcro and stuff. And a clip-board. Behind him, three more guys, similarly dressed, are getting out of a huge black Suburban with tinted windows. The Suburban is festooned with an array of tiny antennas.
He reads a statement laminated to the back of his clip-board. "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you. As you may have heard, due to national security concerns, the Matress Tag Enforcement Bureau has had its mandate expanded to include toilets and ceiling fans. I am here to inspect your premises to verify compliance in these areas. Since these are Federal regulatory issues, a search warrant is not necessary. Stand aside, please."
And then I woke up screaming.
Posted by: ErnieG | April 13, 2005 at 06:35 AM
oops, hit enter, lol
This is Utter UTTER UTTER BUllshitakemushrooms
Congress has no idea what they have done.
There was a ceiling fan called the hunter original, it used/uses 1.4 amps, this fan was manufactured from 1909-just a few months ago. Becuase it has the most current draw of any fan out there, congress forced hunter fan co to pull it off their line, this fan was the top fo the line model. it moved more air than any other fan on the market, and congress made them pull the plug
Posted by: Brian Hicks | June 22, 2005 at 08:32 AM
hot trans trans oral
Posted by: Dnxmmvxpic | October 24, 2006 at 07:34 AM
dxepl fcznx oybdijh mhbf peugxcnab bpicez riuc
Posted by: lfgzvnstx javi | March 03, 2007 at 10:35 AM