Whats with the lighting issue?

Back to the lighting issue, as someone who used to work for a park (not Cedar Point, or at least not in this case) and whose main responsibility was upkeep of the theming, including lighting, lights are a huge part of what makes the rides stand out at night. I know that I saw a trend that the riders at night would drop off on the rides that were not well lit, where as the rides that looked great from the midway would always attract more riders. And as soon as the lighting was fixed on the rides, their rider numbers went up.

But I will qualify that to replace a light bulb on a ride is not as easy as replacing it in your house, not only do most rides have the bulbs in very out of the way places, sometime requiring special equipment to get to them. The lights are not always just a simple screw out, sometimes they are and other times they use special catches that make it harder to change.

So a few lights here and there being out I don't have a problem with, but anytime you get more than 3 or 4 in a row out they really should replace them. You should NEVER see an entire section not working, unless there is an electrical problem and that should be fixed as soon as possible. (Which occasionally means during the off season)

TopThrillChris said:
^I can't blame them with the attendance somewhat down. Everyone is making way to big of a deal about light bulbs. It really is pathetic if you are worried about 5% of the light bulbs out on a ride. IT DOESN'T MATTER. At least there safety record is as close to 100% as any park out there.

I would like to see the safety records that you have looked at. I am not in any way saying that you are incorrect with your statement, but after working at CP for 3 years and now working for Sea World since then. I can tell you that safety down here is 10 times better than CP could ever offer. When I first started learning the safety system of Kraken my mind was blown away compared to TTD or any of the other rides I worked at CP. As for CP and lighting issues, it has been like that for years and until Kinzel is gone it will remain like that. Sad but true

bholcomb said:
Seriously, is "Going Green" not like one of the biggest scams out there?

Obviously, as demonstrated by our creation of a free and limitless supply of energy.

^ I agree with Ben, I work in the electrical industry. The idea and all is great, but now it has turned into a whole status issue. An expensive one at that. It takes much more energy to produce a compact flourecent light bulb compared to a normal incandescent. The "cost savings" to run it are voided by the cost to purchase it and they never last the guaranteed life. In order to get them warranted you have to send it back to the manufacturer (usually in china now) and pay to have it sent back to you. That costs more than the bulbs did in the first place.

That's total BS.

One of the reasons it requires so much energy to produce a CFL is because they're not being produced to scale, as are incandescent bulbs now.

And the cost savings argument is also BS. We're talking about "green", as in energy efficiency, not wallet efficiency.

With and luck, poorly-informed people like you and Ben will simply be forced to purchase CFLs in the future.

I understand light bulbs burn out, and take time to replace. But take the Giant Wheel for an example. Quite literally 50% of the lights were burnt out or not working properly. This does have an impact on the park apperance! Imagine if only 50% of the trash was picked up!

I just dont understand why they let it get to this point! If you dont want to keep the light package in working order, just shut them off!

^^ The regional representitives from Phillips and GE beg to differ.

I do use CFL lamps in my home, I use LED stage lamps for my band, I have water saving toilets, and facuets, I always try to ensure that the thermostat is set to a low level in the winter the a/c is almost always turned off. I bike to work around 8 miles each way to conserve gas.

I don't think I'm poorly-informed and I don't vote with my wallet anymore than you do.

^^ - my only complaint on CFL's is their slow light-up time during Michigan winters. It doesn't do much good for my porch light.

Aside from that, I have no problem with them. They work just as well as regular bulbs.

And there is a lot of BS in the "corporate green" movement. Hotels aren't asking you to re-use your towels because of some noble appreciation of the environment. Its just an easy way to guilt you into saving them money.

Maybe it's my diet, but low-flow toilets suck really bad too. You might save 40% per flush, but when I have to flush 2 and 3 times, we're not helping anyone with anything except me to get pissed off.

I used to work for a bunch of enviro wackos. It's all a joke. Scare people into sending you money to 'save the world mannnnnnnn' so you don't have to get real jobs 'working for the mannnnnnnn'

Give me a break.

With that said, I am not going to disagree that there isn't good things we can do to cut down energy usage. I've got a fluorescent bulb right here in one of my desk lamps - the other is an incandescent. Mostly the style of lamp is why I use one or the other (or both) because the one with the incandescent is tiny and on a long stand so I can put it over me between my monitor and head while I work and see what I'm working on in front of me.

The light in my fridge is still incandescent - why? Because I want to see what my fat ass is trying to grab at from my fridge and not have to wait 30 seconds for it to light up - Which by the way makes me believe that I'd waste more energy because I'd be letting cold air out of the fridge while its lighting up.

Both types have their uses. Even hybrid or small cars have their uses. I don't own one because it wouldn't suit my needs. (LOL - Can't imagine how fun it'd be to drive a Honda Civic through dirt roads in Kansas after a thunderstorm...)

BTW I also forgot to mention - Those carbon credits you can buy are nothing more than a scam to make people feel less guilty and more smug. And really, this whole "Green" everything is pretty much about feelings - Not making a gigantic impact on anything.

JTaylor said:
^^ The regional representitives from Phillips and GE beg to differ.

You mean the people that make the bulbs? You think they're actually going to push the products they make that have lower margins harder than those with higher margins?

Of course not every bulb need be a CFL. But incandescents can, should and hopefully will be outlawed in the near future. We've got perfectly viable alternatives in CFL and LED lighting, and no reason not to use said alternatives across the board.

bholcomb said:
And really, this whole "Green"everything is pretty much about feelings - Not making a gigantic impacton anything.

Oh, please. You're talking out of your ass.

^ - not as much as you'd think. Being green is the new SUV, its nothing more than a status symbol so people can say they are better than others. Are there ways to help the environment? Yes, but not in the big flashy ways that most would have you think. For one, Carbon Credits are not a way to be "more green".

As for lightbulbs, I really hope that incandescents don't get banned, they still have their uses. But they should become more of the margin market as we go, rather than the bulk of the market. Like Ben said, a CFL in a fridge is a waste of time and money.

If they ban incandescent light bulbs what are they going to use in easy bake ovens. Think of our children's future. :)

Vince982 said:
^^Then next litter crews are reduced, then no rides get painted, then you wonder how far it will go before people really notice. It does matter. If it's one or two bulbs on a couple rides it isn't a huge deal, but when whole sections of the Giant Wheel are out and half of Millennium Force's lift hill is out it looks bad.

I dont remember half of Millennium Force's lift hill being out.

ChrisC. said:
Umm attendance isn't down.

One quarter, or even two, of having attendance up makes not a trend after several years of declining attendance.

So where exactly is the problem in jumping on a bandwagon that's actually good for us in the long run?

People laughed at the county I live in when it decided to open a central processing facility for recycling. It's still one of a small number in operation nationwide. We throw everything into one place, it goes to the facility, and nearly 50% of our solid waste gets recycled. Most places are lucky to do 10%.

If you think that which you consume has no consequence, you're part of the problem.

Incandescent bulbs have about as much use as a water pitcher with a big ass hole in the bottom of it.

The line of thinking that suggests that we can't live without them is horribly flawed. I can't think of an implementation where a superior replacement wouldn't work.

^ - which we don't have with CFL's. I agree with you, if we can come up with something better, then the market will replace I-bulbs with that. But right now, CFL's don't work in all applications, particularly cold weather and emergency situations where you need bright light quickly.

In all other applications, I have found no significant difference between the two. And when they can solve the long warm-up time issue I'll be making the switch in other areas.

Jeff - I see a big difference between jumping on the logic bandwagon (i.e. smart recycling centers, lower energy usage, actually DOING something) and the warm and fuzzy bandwagon (i.e. carbon credits, grandstanding).

Cold weather = LEDs.
Emergency lighting = LEDs.

Next? :)

No one here mentioned carbon credits as environmentally valid in any way (unless I missed something).

^ - I'll agree with that. Now they just need to be produced that the same level and price that I-bulbs are. Granted, I haven't looked that much for them yet either.