Energy-efficient traffic lights can't melt snow

Quote:

---

MILWAUKEE – Cities around the country that have installed energy-efficient traffic lights are discovering a hazardous downside: The bulbs don't burn hot enough to melt snow and can become crusted over in a storm — a problem blamed for dozens of accidents and at least one death.

"I've never had to put up with this in the past," said Duane Kassens, a driver from West Bend who got into a fender-bender recently because he couldn't see the lights. "The police officer told me the new lights weren't melting the snow. How is that safe?"

Many communities have switched to LED bulbs in their traffic lights because they use 90 percent less energy than the old incandescent variety, last far longer and save money. Their great advantage is also their drawback: They do not waste energy by producing heat.

Authorities in several states are testing possible solutions, including installing weather shields, adding heating elements like those used in airport runway lights, or coating the lights with water-repellent substances.

Short of some kind of technological fix, "as far as I'm aware, all that can be done is to have crews clean off the snow by hand," said Green Bay, Wis., police Lt. Jim Runge. "It's a bit labor-intensive."

---

Those of us in areas that receive heavy amounts of snow will all soon be driving cars about as strong and safe as an aluminum can, on streets that can't be cleared of snow, through intersections with traffic lights we can't see. But what's the loss of a little traffic safety as long as we're saving the planet and have some really, really smart people in charge?

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20091215/ca...Mqpq3.ze7Z0Q--

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Energy-efficient traffic lights can't melt snow



Those of us in areas that receive heavy amounts of snow will all soon be driving cars about as strong and safe as an aluminum can, on streets that can't be cleared of snow, through intersections with traffic lights we can't see. But what's the loss of a little traffic safety as long as we're saving the planet and have some really, really smart people in charge?

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20091215/ca...Mqpq3.ze7Z0Q--

---

This just demonstrates what we have known all along, this is a religious crusade not a serious attempt to deal with issues in a holistic manner

I'm a supporter of using LED WHERE PRACTICAL . They are a big money saver over the traditional bulb and those ridiculous CFL bulbs. When a traditional bulb blows it has to be replaced and often municipalities just replace them as a safety feature anyway. LED's have many smaller bulbs in the bulb and they do not burn out at once. Many of them can burn out before a bulb actually has to be replaced. I think some of the solutions suggested would work to clear the bulbs from the ice. A low power heating unit could be applied and controlled to come on only when needed.

I can't wait however to see what happens when the left gets the northern states to switch to electric battery autos and the temps.drop to below zero .

Why in the hell would Green Bay use LED traffic lights that just makes no sense. Don't get me wrong LED are a great thing but the entire point of them is they don't get hot. Blame the cheese head in Green Bay who didn't know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Energy-efficient traffic lights can't melt snow

---

Hello Steve:

Your post reminds me of a story...

There was this guy who ran a shoe factory. Business wasn't so good, so he sent his youngest son to Africa to seek out new markets... The son came back, disappointed, saying to his father, "they don't wear shoes there"...

Not quite trusting his youngest, he sent his oldest son back. That son came back, excited, saying, "they don't wear shoes there"...

Your post is what the youngest son would have said. Tom replied kind of like the older son...

I say kind of, because neither of you see opportunity. You only see failure...

excon

?? Maybe if you read my response you would find that I thought the problems of the LEDs usage could be solved.

But another explanation could be that there was a practical reason for not wearing shoes .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

but another explanation could be that there was a practical reason for not wearing shoes .

---

Hello again, tom:

There's no practical reasons for smoking either. Come on tom. I DID call you the OLDER son.

excon

I've got no problem selling Eskimos air conditioning if they are suckers to buy them.

There is however a moral responsibility for our elected leaders to spend our money prudently and effectively .They rarely if ever live up to that goal ;but still the imperitive is on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Your post is what the youngest son would have said. Tom replied kind of like the older son...

---

I actually haven't really replied, I just started the discussion.

Quote:

---

I say kind of, because neither of you see opportunity. You only see failure...

---

OK, now my thoughts. In warmer climates these lights will be fine. I'm sure we've been adding them in our city though I doubt they've considered this problem, which for the most part won't be a problem. We do however get some really nasty snowstorms.

Low voltage heaters have been used for a long time in things like security cameras, so there are options. Perhaps even just a blower to keep the snow from being able to settle, but it does sort of take away from the principle of saving energy.

As it becomes practical (affordable) I intend to utilize LED's at home, and I love my LED flashlights. The point is we're still way behind on considering the unintended consequences of going green.

Tom mentioned those corkscrew lights you can't dispose of because of the mercury. Then we have idiots in Seattle that think a snow pack is safe enough since they don't want to use salt or chemicals. I've driven on enough snow to know that it only gets slicker the more you pack the snow.

How about ethanol? That was a real winner wasn't it? Electric cars? How do you deal with all those mega-batteries, not to mention the mining it takes to acquire those metals? How about putting MTBE in gas to make the air cleaner, only to have it seep into the soil and into our water supply? Cash for clunkers? We now have 700,000 junk cars to deal with and used gas guzzling SUV's have been the hottest sellers of late.

It's like this, the green guru types are firmly dedicated to using the precautionary principle to block technology and anything else they don't like... until it comes to their own environmental pet projects. We need some of these really, really smart people to think about the unintended consequences before they jump in with both feet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

OK, now my thoughts. In warmer climates these lights will be fine. I'm sure we've been adding them in our city though I doubt they've considered this problem, which for the most part won't be a problem. We do however get some really nasty snowstorms.

---

Hello Steve:

Couple things...

You seem to think the first step in solving a problem, is the END step, and those who give us the first step are to be excoriated. What a grinchy way to look at it. Besides, technology doesn't work that way.

For a right winger who purportedly BELIEVES in the power of American entrepreneurship, you sure sound defeated... Bummer.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello Steve:

Couple things...

You seem to think the first step in solving a problem, is the END step, and those who give us the first step are to be excoriated.

---

You seem to assume a lot lately.

Quote:

---

What a grinchy way to look at it. Besides, technology doesn't work that way.

---

Some things are no-brainers, like clearing snow instead of packing it, like not pushing mercury filled light bulbs or using new traffic lights without weatherizing them so they'll be useful instead of dangerous.

Quote:

---

For a right winger who purportedly BELIEVES in the power of American entrepreneurship, you sure sound defeated... Bummer.

---

I believe people come before the green agenda, you apparently don't... bummer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I've got no problem selling Eskimos air conditioning if they are suckers to buy them.

---

Reportedly, they need cash to buy freezers due to global warming. I'm not making this up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I believe people come before the green agenda, you apparently don't...bummer.

---

Hello again, Steve:

As I've repeatedly said, even if you don't buy the green agenda, the FIX will bring benefits even IF global warming is a hoax. Among the many reasons I've cited, the one that should appeal most to a fellow of the right wing persuasion, is that the fix WILL prevent our enemy's from bankrolling their wars against us.

For THAT reason, and that reason alone, you should embrace the fix. No, I won't mention the JOBS that the fix would create... Ok, I just did...

So, personally, I don't CARE whether global warming is happening or not... Because we need to FIX/END our use of fossil fuels in any case. IF it happens to solve global warming in the process, that's a great BYPRODUCT.

As a right winger, who purportedly BELIEVES in national security ABOVE all things, you'd think you'd be a supporter of cutting off our enemy's supply of money... But, noooo...

I think you're the one who's wed to an agenda.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

As I've repeatedly said, even if you don't buy the green agenda, the FIX will bring benefits even IF global warming is a hoax.

---

Well thought out practical fixes, OK. But until you can eliminate the political agenda behind it I won't jump in with both feet. I am not going to sacrifice my freedom, independence and well-being so the left can appease their guilt-ridden consciences and impose their political will. Period.

Quote:

---

As a right winger, who purportedly BELIEVES in national security ABOVE all things, you'd think you'd be a supporter of cutting off our enemy's supply of money... But, noooo...

---

Where's the push for nuclear energy? Why can't we drill our own oil or build a refinery? I see no real effort to address the issue domestically other than to shoot ourselves in the foot. An agreement at Copenhagen is NOT going to cut off our enemy's money supply, but it will surrender our sovereignty, transfer our wealth, lower our quality of life and won't solve the alleged problem if passed as planned.

Show me some sound energy policy and I'll support it.

I think we have the domestic sources necessary to do that now. So if that were the true motive then of course you would support the use of American resourses until an economical alternative can be utilized ;rather than cutting off the supply of petroleum before the alternatives have been developed to commercial viability . Right ?

I'm sure you are also aware that moving to alternative will not remove our dependence on foreign supply of the basic raw materials needed for the switch. In fact the minerals needed for the batteries are much rarer than petroleum and come from nations we don't want to be beholden to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

then of course you would support the use of American resourses until an economical alternative can be utilized....

I'm sure you are also aware that moving to alternative will not remove our dependence on foreign supply of the basic raw materials needed for the switch.

---

Hello again, tom:

Couple things.

I support nuclear power. Those plants will last long into the future. I don't support building refinery's for a product that is ending its usefulness.

I AM aware that there will be some lead time before we become energy independent. That's exactly WHY we should start NOW, and BIG.

excon

Anyone dumb enough to install LED's in traffic lights where the temperature in the winter is lower than 32 degrees and snows a lot needs the air in their head changed regularly.

LED's are great for warmer weather locations to save money.

Better idea. Why not just install HEATERS in the LED traffic lights instead? That will make everyone happy. Save electricity by using LED's and waste more electricity defrosting and desnowing (yes I know it's not a word but I just made it up) with heaters!

The old traffic lights are fine. Just don't use the newfangled LED's where it's too cold.

The Traffic Department in that city was sure sold a bill of goods on this new invention. Better check the silverware and be sure it's still there as those guys are sure dumb with a capital D.

The combination of LED and low energy heaters would still be a better alternative than traditional bulbs in both money saved and energy efficiency .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Well thought out practical fixes, ok. But until you can eliminate the political agenda behind it I won't jump in

---

Hello again, Steve:

So, they're Good FIXES, but as long as the liberals like it, you ain't jumping on board... Sounds like there's an agenda at work.

excon