Joe Next Door loses when electricity rates go up in reponse to the increased electricity demand.

So your increase in demand is being subsidized by your Joe Next Door paying more for the same amount of electricity, or by his reduction in electricity use to maintain the same agregate demand.

With this ban, I would be subsidizing Joe's cheap electricity.

[the electricity rates] likely won't come down until years after a new generation plant is built

In this case, the pressure to improve power efficiency would have been delayed while waiting for the invisible hand to stop scratching its ass.

The increased pressure would likely speed that process up, not delay it.

On the broader issue of global warming, waiting for the invisible hand to correct the market is a non-starter. By the time market pressures build enough for people to notice, the damage has been done.

The market exists in people's heads. Are you aware of global warming? Are you ready to spend resources (sacrifice consumption) to curb global warming? By spending your resources this way, you are buying Less-Global-Warming.

The damage needs to be done (ie population reduction due to decreased food production) for there to be a market pressure.

But you are buying Less-Global-Warming in anticipation of that event, so the market does work.

The moon is too bright.

Try it at night, when it's not lit.

It's still too bright.

Use less sensitive optics.

Good idea!

And to make it interesting to slashdot:

To photograph the Moon landing sites in high detail, with cheap home made equipment, the bunch of moon-landing-deniers could each buy a small telescope, coordinate them across the net in real time, and use adaptive optics techniques to combine and sharpen the images, the same way the Keck team photographed those exo-planets.

I think, with a million home telescopes linked up, all pointed at the landing sites, with adaptive optics, they could count the stars on the flags (at least).