[Staffbull]

I'm going round the house replacing all with energy efficient lighting,
anyone have any views as to which are the best ? Osram, Phillips etc,
I will be changing two "chandelier" type thingies which have five 40W
candles in em for a pendant with probably 20w energy efficient numbers,
the one in the lounge has to stay as it cost a small fortune so i'm
gonna stick 5 7w candles in there and do away with three dimmers.

Cheers for any pointers

[Ian Stirling]

Staffbull wrote:
I'm going round the house replacing all with energy efficient lighting,
anyone have any views as to which are the best ? Osram, Phillips etc,
I will be changing two "chandelier" type thingies which have five 40W
candles in em for a pendant with probably 20w energy efficient numbers,
the one in the lounge has to stay as it cost a small fortune so i'm
gonna stick 5 7w candles in there and do away with three dimmers.

Well.
Phillips ones - some of them - have 6 year guarantees.
Look for lumen output on the packet - and compute the lumens per watt,
to get efficiency. (usually around 50lm/W, for linear 4' tubes it'll hit
100.)

If a light is usually on under 3 or so mins, it's not a net saving - the
extra switching will probably kill the bulb _well_ before its nominal
life, normal filliment bulb is prolly a better idea.

[Staffbull]

Ian Stirling wrote:
Staffbull wrote:
I'm going round the house replacing all with energy efficient lighting,
anyone have any views as to which are the best ? Osram, Phillips etc,
I will be changing two "chandelier" type thingies which have five 40W
candles in em for a pendant with probably 20w energy efficient numbers,
the one in the lounge has to stay as it cost a small fortune so i'm
gonna stick 5 7w candles in there and do away with three dimmers.

Well.
Phillips ones - some of them - have 6 year guarantees.
Look for lumen output on the packet - and compute the lumens per watt,
to get efficiency. (usually around 50lm/W, for linear 4' tubes it'll hit
100.)

If a light is usually on under 3 or so mins, it's not a net saving - the
extra switching will probably kill the bulb _well_ before its nominal
life, normal filliment bulb is prolly a better idea.

Cheers, just calculated the "standby" costs of the stuff in the house,
comes up to around £25 -£30 a year, fairly surprising but I cant see
why the govt is banging on about that without pushing energy efficiant
lighting first

calculator here
http://www.tvec.org.uk/Energy_calc_2.asp

[notpastityet?]

"Staffbull" wrote in message
ups.com...

Ian Stirling wrote:
Staffbull wrote:


Cheers, just calculated the "standby" costs of the stuff in the house,
comes up to around £25 -£30 a year, fairly surprising but I cant see
why the govt is banging on about that without pushing energy efficiant
lighting first

calculator here
http://www.tvec.org.uk/Energy_calc_2.asp

Maybe because it doesnt work in all cases? The idea assumes a high
proportion of equipment such as Hi Fi ( I was surprised at the consumption
of Hi Fi equipment, well maybe its because I dont have any!)

For someone such as myself who has a duel tariff economy 7 meter standby is
charged at 2p through the night so its far less than most realise. I dont
keep my TV, DVD or Video on standby ( unless I am using the video to record
overnight which is rare anyway). So energy saving limited.

I dont keep lights on in my house so again saving is limited. I still find
low energy bulbs a bit dull ( old age and I cant read in the dimmer light
they most definitely in my view produce).

I suspect a lot of energy is used by relatively few and many like me are
using a lot less than propaganda suggests. This has to be an if the cap fits
scenario.

There are also many other things I could moan about with this energy drive.
I was washing all my clothes on 30 wash ( to save energy). I save more money
washing on 40 or 60 and doing overnight and my clothes are cleaner.

I stopped the 30 degrees washes when my clothes came out stinking!!!!!!
Sweat is not removed at 30 degrees. Tell the story to someone who hasn't
tried it . Of course I dont use a bio washing power because its not
environmentally friendly, maybe thats the reason they stink at 30 degrees.
But stink they do. Give me a good clean boil wash any day.

Cleanliness is next to Godliness and its kills all sorts of nasties too.
Keep your energy efficiency for me.

[[email protected]]

Staffbull wrote:

I'm going round the house replacing all with energy efficient lighting,
anyone have any views as to which are the best ? Osram, Phillips etc,
I will be changing two "chandelier" type thingies which have five 40W
candles in em for a pendant with probably 20w energy efficient numbers,
the one in the lounge has to stay as it cost a small fortune so i'm
gonna stick 5 7w candles in there and do away with three dimmers.

Cheers for any pointers

I'd recommend against this approach, for one simple reason. Some cfls
give great quality light, and some give light with a funny slightly
pinkish cast, that just does not look good. And theres really no way to
know other than buy and try. So I'd buy one of each type of bulb you
want, and try them before buying any more.

There is the other factor of light output. The stated equivalent powers
are simply bs, a factor of 4 is more realistic. Again, try one to see
what power you really need before buying the lot.

FWIW I've had consistently good results with osram, and not so with
philips. Toolstation bulbs also have all been the icky type.

5x 7w = 35w, very roughly equiv to 140w bulb or maybe 200w of less
efficient small filament bulbs.

Another option to replacing your chandelier thing is to put much lower
power bulbs in, eg 15w, and making up the light level with cfl
background light elsewhere. This is a way to maintain the appearance of
filament while getting somewhat better efficiency.


NT

[Dave Liquorice]

On 18 Nov 2006 00:26:28 -0800, wrote:

So I'd buy one of each type of bulb you want, and try them before
buying any more.

And end up with a load of bulbs that you don't want to use. B-)

Asking in here is a good way to find out which ones produce decent
quality light. I replaced the 6 x 40w candles with GEC 9W TBX/XM "Tech
Extra Mini" CFLs, they actually have meaningful data on the packaging:
2700K, 480Lm (the 40W tungsten were rated at 390Lm). I did try one as a
match with tungsten after they where recomended in here and it is pretty
close.

They weren't cheap though 7 or 8 quid each(*) but even at that price
payback on power saved was well less than a year, these lamps are on for
18hrs+/day. They have been in now for a couple, maybe three years and are
starting to show their age in reduced output. Hardly surprising at
6,500hrs/year though.

There is the other factor of light output. The stated equivalent powers
are simply bs, a factor of 4 is more realistic. Again, try one to see
what power you really need before buying the lot.

Agreed, the quoted equivalence is nearly always rather optomistic. Best
to try and find ones that quote their output and compare that with yer
typical tungsten bulb.

(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons £1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

[Lobster]

notpastityet? wrote:

I stopped the 30 degrees washes when my clothes came out stinking!!!!!!
Sweat is not removed at 30 degrees. Tell the story to someone who hasn't
tried it . Of course I dont use a bio washing power because its not
environmentally friendly, maybe thats the reason they stink at 30 degrees.
But stink they do. Give me a good clean boil wash any day.

The whole reason behind the popularity of low-temperature washing is the
development of "biological" washing powder, because - eco-friendly or
not - it's specifically desiged to work at low temperature. It contains
enzymes, which are proteins intended to break down dirt, and which work
at 'biological' temperatures (ie, circa 37 degrees). Use them above
that temperature, and the protein is destroyed, ergo it doesn't wsh
properly.

David

[Mary Fisher]

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.com...


(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons £1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.

I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

Mary

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

[Ian Stirling]

notpastityet? wrote:
snip

I dont keep lights on in my house so again saving is limited. I still find
low energy bulbs a bit dull ( old age and I cant read in the dimmer light
they most definitely in my view produce).

Well.
While low energy bulbs do produce less light than some ordinary bulbs,
replacing one ordinary 100W bulb with 3 '100W equivalent' bulbs still
saves a bit of energy, and produces a hell of a lot more light.

I suspect a lot of energy is used by relatively few and many like me are
using a lot less than propaganda suggests. This has to be an if the cap fits
scenario.

If everyone were to buy new stuff now, it'd be lots more energy
efficient.
(in general).
For example, I have a fridge and a freezer.
Replacing with a new combined unit, with the same amount of space would
save some 50 quid a year - according to measurements, and pay back in
maybe 4 years.
It's almost not possible to buy a freezer as inefficient as I have at
the moment.

[Steve Firth]

On 18 Nov 2006 11:30:47 GMT, Huge wrote:

Are CFLs reasonably resistant to heat?

One advantage seems to be that they produce less heat. I've used CFL
replacements for R25 spots in fittings at Mrs F's shop and also in the
house. The only headache IMO is that despite the claims, a 14W CFL does not
provide as much light as a 25W incandescent bulb.

[Andrew Gabriel]

In article ,
Huge writes:
I'd like to replace the bulb in our lobby with a CFL, but it's a
glass globe fitting, with no ventilation - filament bulbs last
noticeably less time in that fitting than others. Are CFLs reasonably
resistant to heat? I guess I could replace the fitting, too, but
that lengthens the pay-back time even more.

The electronics in a compact fluorescent will be more likely
to fail at higher temperatures. Generally, the life of such
electronic components halves with each 10C rise in temperature.
However, failure of the electronics in compact fluorescents is
rare, so it's certainly not the case that a 10C temperature
rise will half the lamp life. I suspect you'll find that even
if the lamp life is significantly reduced, you'll still cover
the payback period easily, given how cheaply they can be found
nowadays.

--
Andrew Gabriel

[Staffbull]

wrote:
Staffbull wrote:

I'm going round the house replacing all with energy efficient lighting,
anyone have any views as to which are the best ? Osram, Phillips etc,
I will be changing two "chandelier" type thingies which have five 40W
candles in em for a pendant with probably 20w energy efficient numbers,
the one in the lounge has to stay as it cost a small fortune so i'm
gonna stick 5 7w candles in there and do away with three dimmers.

Cheers for any pointers

I'd recommend against this approach, for one simple reason. Some cfls
give great quality light, and some give light with a funny slightly
pinkish cast, that just does not look good. And theres really no way to
know other than buy and try. So I'd buy one of each type of bulb you
want, and try them before buying any more.

There is the other factor of light output. The stated equivalent powers
are simply bs, a factor of 4 is more realistic. Again, try one to see
what power you really need before buying the lot.

FWIW I've had consistently good results with osram, and not so with
philips. Toolstation bulbs also have all been the icky type.

5x 7w = 35w, very roughly equiv to 140w bulb or maybe 200w of less
efficient small filament bulbs.

Another option to replacing your chandelier thing is to put much lower
power bulbs in, eg 15w, and making up the light level with cfl
background light elsewhere. This is a way to maintain the appearance of
filament while getting somewhat better efficiency.


NT

The last option sounds good for the lounge

[Ian Stirling]

Huge wrote:
On 2006-11-18, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On 18 Nov 2006 00:26:28 -0800, wrote:

So I'd buy one of each type of bulb you want, and try them before
buying any more.

And end up with a load of bulbs that you don't want to use. B-)

Asking in here is a good way to find out which ones produce decent
quality light. I replaced the 6 x 40w candles with GEC 9W TBX/XM "Tech
Extra Mini" CFLs, they actually have meaningful data on the packaging:
2700K, 480Lm (the 40W tungsten were rated at 390Lm). I did try one as a
match with tungsten after they where recomended in here and it is pretty
close.

I'd like to replace the bulb in our lobby with a CFL, but it's a
glass globe fitting, with no ventilation - filament bulbs last
noticeably less time in that fitting than others. Are CFLs reasonably
resistant to heat? I guess I could replace the fitting, too, but
that lengthens the pay-back time even more.

The tubes themselves, yes.
However, the electronics tend to drop in life by around half every
increase by 10C.

Depending on design et al, might removing the globe, and replacing with
a large globe CFL, something like
http://www.ryness.co.uk/ProductDetai...?ProductID=904 or
http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products..._source=kelkoo
? work.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Huge wrote:
I'd like to replace the bulb in our lobby with a CFL, but it's a
glass globe fitting, with no ventilation - filament bulbs last
noticeably less time in that fitting than others. Are CFLs reasonably
resistant to heat? I guess I could replace the fitting, too, but
that lengthens the pay-back time even more.

Since they are more efficient they produce far less heat so in
practice will be suitable for nearly any enclosure they will fit.

--
*All generalizations are false.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
One advantage seems to be that they produce less heat. I've used CFL
replacements for R25 spots in fittings at Mrs F's shop and also in the
house. The only headache IMO is that despite the claims, a 14W CFL does
not provide as much light as a 25W incandescent bulb.

In theory it should produce more light - as less than double isn't one of
the extravagant claims. Perhaps it's more to do with the optics and beam
concentration. I've got one of the expensive RO80 replacements, and if
anything it produces more light than its filament predecessor. Can't
really comment on the beam pattern as I have barn doors around it. ;-)

--
*If you can read this, thank a teecher

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[[email protected]]

Huge wrote:

I'd like to replace the bulb in our lobby with a CFL, but it's a
glass globe fitting, with no ventilation - filament bulbs last
noticeably less time in that fitting than others. Are CFLs reasonably
resistant to heat? I guess I could replace the fitting, too, but
that lengthens the pay-back time even more.

Many are fine like this, but some arent. Suck it and see really. The
lower the power, the less likely trouble is to occur. The screwfix
spirals really object to this kind of treatment.


NT

[Ian Stirling]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
I'd like to replace the bulb in our lobby with a CFL, but it's a
glass globe fitting, with no ventilation - filament bulbs last
noticeably less time in that fitting than others. Are CFLs reasonably
resistant to heat? I guess I could replace the fitting, too, but
that lengthens the pay-back time even more.

Since they are more efficient they produce far less heat so in
practice will be suitable for nearly any enclosure they will fit.

Umm - no.

They produce less heat.

However, they are far, far more vulnerable than filliment bulbs to the
heat they do produce.

If the life of filliment bulbs is affected by the enclosure, it's
probable that CFLs will be even worse affected.

However, at 49p/1 pound each, it's not impossible that it is
economically worth it - after all it's only 2 months life at 8 hours a
day.

More important may be the fact that it may be awkward to change the
bulb.

[Steve Firth]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 13:39:20 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
One advantage seems to be that they produce less heat. I've used CFL
replacements for R25 spots in fittings at Mrs F's shop and also in the
house. The only headache IMO is that despite the claims, a 14W CFL does
not provide as much light as a 25W incandescent bulb.

In theory it should produce more light - as less than double isn't one of
the extravagant claims.

These claims are always made for CFL and I have yet to find one that is as
bright as the incandescent it is claimed to replace. The 25W CFL Globes
that I have in my wife's shop are dimmer than 40W incandescent bulbs.

It isn't IMO possible to save 50% of the electricity using CFLs unless one
is willing to accept sitting in the gloom.

We converted to CFL because in a shop one needs a huge number of spots. The
best solution was 50W halogen lighting but we can't tolerate either the
bills or the heat output. Replacing throughout with (more) 14W R25s was the
only way to go but it isn't a patch on the halogen lamps for light quality.

[Ian Stirling]

Steve Firth wrote:
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 13:39:20 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
One advantage seems to be that they produce less heat. I've used CFL
replacements for R25 spots in fittings at Mrs F's shop and also in the
house. The only headache IMO is that despite the claims, a 14W CFL does
not provide as much light as a 25W incandescent bulb.

In theory it should produce more light - as less than double isn't one of
the extravagant claims.

These claims are always made for CFL and I have yet to find one that is as
bright as the incandescent it is claimed to replace. The 25W CFL Globes
that I have in my wife's shop are dimmer than 40W incandescent bulbs.

A light meter will almost certainly disagree.

Some CFL spots are _horrible_ in performance though, and do indeed
produce a fraction of the light.

[Matt]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 10:57:45 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ill.com...


(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons £1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.

I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

Given the prices British Gas charge they could afford to give you one
for every room in the house, a dozen spare for a rainy day and a free
holiday in the sun.

British Gas "Gas" 4.959p per kWh
Equigas "Gas" 2.430p per kWh

(Quarterly billing, pay on receipt of bill by cash/cheque/BACS
transfer)


--

[Andrew Gabriel]

In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" writes:
In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
One advantage seems to be that they produce less heat. I've used CFL
replacements for R25 spots in fittings at Mrs F's shop and also in the
house. The only headache IMO is that despite the claims, a 14W CFL does
not provide as much light as a 25W incandescent bulb.

In theory it should produce more light - as less than double isn't one of
the extravagant claims. Perhaps it's more to do with the optics and beam
concentration.

Compact fluorescents have a large light source, and that makes
for a poor spotlamp.

I've got one of the expensive RO80 replacements, and if
anything it produces more light than its filament predecessor. Can't
really comment on the beam pattern as I have barn doors around it. ;-)

The 23W GE Genura produces more light than a 100W R80 flood lamp
which it replaces (and AFAIK, is still the only compact fluorescent
to do so). However, it's a very different design to any other
compact fluorescent (which I've described in detail in previous
posts).

--
Andrew Gabriel

[Staffbull]

notpastityet? wrote:
"Ian Stirling" wrote in message
...


If everyone were to buy new stuff now, it'd be lots more energy
efficient.
(in general).
For example, I have a fridge and a freezer.
Replacing with a new combined unit, with the same amount of space would
save some 50 quid a year - according to measurements, and pay back in
maybe 4 years.
It's almost not possible to buy a freezer as inefficient as I have at
the moment.

I recently got rid of my 30+ year old fridge for a rate A new one. I was
shouted at by the LA refuse disposal dept for daring to change my
appliances! They said my doing so was causing great damage to the earth and
it was not " green" of me!

So stuck between a stone and a hard place as they say. Buy new to save
energy and be told you are wasting the planet with your items of disposal or
keep the old and be inefficient.

By the way I brought my new fridge because my old one gave up the ghost (
blew up!)

Maybe I should not have replaced the appliance at all. That would be much
greener now wouldn't it?
Better still , had I not bought a fridge in the first place back in the
1970's. there would be no need to dispose of it , worn out as it is, now.
Another saving...... but what about the jobs of those folk who make them?

Can I win? Nah! So I dont bother.

LA = Los Angeles?.... a VERY expensive place to live !!!

[notpastityet?]

"Lobster" wrote in message
...
notpastityet? wrote:

I stopped the 30 degrees washes when my clothes came out stinking!!!!!!
Sweat is not removed at 30 degrees. Tell the story to someone who hasn't
tried it . Of course I dont use a bio washing power because its not
environmentally friendly, maybe thats the reason they stink at 30
degrees.
But stink they do. Give me a good clean boil wash any day.

The whole reason behind the popularity of low-temperature washing is the
development of "biological" washing powder, because - eco-friendly or
not - it's specifically desiged to work at low temperature. It contains
enzymes, which are proteins intended to break down dirt, and which work
at 'biological' temperatures (ie, circa 37 degrees). Use them above
that temperature, and the protein is destroyed, ergo it doesn't wsh
properly.

Use biological washing powders - which I DO NOT and I would have my sewerage
system in tatters ( I have a septic tank. I works bloody well but it doesnt
need a load of enzymes down it!). That aside I am alergic to bio powders
anyway.

The question is which is the lesser evil Biological washing powders or my
washing at boil wash with a non bio powder?

[Steve Firth]

On 18 Nov 2006 15:33:35 GMT, Ian Stirling wrote:

These claims are always made for CFL and I have yet to find one that is as
bright as the incandescent it is claimed to replace. The 25W CFL Globes
that I have in my wife's shop are dimmer than 40W incandescent bulbs.

A light meter will almost certainly disagree.

So people tell me, but I don't use a lightmeter to see by. I do use my
eyes, hence even if the difference is subjective it is important.

[notpastityet?]

"Ian Stirling" wrote in message
...


If everyone were to buy new stuff now, it'd be lots more energy
efficient.
(in general).
For example, I have a fridge and a freezer.
Replacing with a new combined unit, with the same amount of space would
save some 50 quid a year - according to measurements, and pay back in
maybe 4 years.
It's almost not possible to buy a freezer as inefficient as I have at
the moment.

I recently got rid of my 30+ year old fridge for a rate A new one. I was
shouted at by the LA refuse disposal dept for daring to change my
appliances! They said my doing so was causing great damage to the earth and
it was not " green" of me!

So stuck between a stone and a hard place as they say. Buy new to save
energy and be told you are wasting the planet with your items of disposal or
keep the old and be inefficient.

By the way I brought my new fridge because my old one gave up the ghost (
blew up!)

Maybe I should not have replaced the appliance at all. That would be much
greener now wouldn't it?
Better still , had I not bought a fridge in the first place back in the
1970's. there would be no need to dispose of it , worn out as it is, now.
Another saving...... but what about the jobs of those folk who make them?

Can I win? Nah! So I dont bother.

[Steve Firth]

On 18 Nov 2006 15:53:27 GMT, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

The 23W GE Genura produces more light than a 100W R80 flood lamp
which it replaces (and AFAIK, is still the only compact fluorescent
to do so). However, it's a very different design to any other
compact fluorescent (which I've described in detail in previous
posts).

Interesting, all the spots we have are GE branded. They are still ****e,
and even if they start out seeming reasonably bright they dim down after a
few months.

[Staffbull]

notpastityet? wrote:
"Staffbull" wrote in message
ups.com...

notpastityet? wrote:
"Ian Stirling" wrote in message


Can I win? Nah! So I dont bother.

LA = Los Angeles?.... a VERY expensive place to live !!!

LA = Local Authority. Nearly as expensive as Los Angeles though _ SE
Cornwall.


No mate, nowhere near !! you wouldnt beleive what it costs to live
there and it is a horrid place too boot !!
We may complain about the UK, but there would be no way I'd live in
the states, any of them !!

[Staffbull]

Owain wrote:
Mary Fisher wrote:
(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons £1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.
I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got four free from Scottish Power, two free from the Jobcentre at a
careers fair.

I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!

Owain

I'm averaging five per room, 10 rooms, plus the outside stuff plus the
workshop and the utility room but they both have flourescents anyhoo.

[Mary Fisher]

"Owain" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:
(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons £1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.
I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got four free from Scottish Power, two free from the Jobcentre at a
careers fair.

I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!

Yebbut we live in a house ... we have seven low energy bulbs and one of
those tiny things in just one room - but we rarely have more than two on at
the same time. They're only used to light work areas. Where I'm knitting and
where Spouse is tatting.

Mary

Owain

[Ian Stirling]

Staffbull wrote:

Owain wrote:
Mary Fisher wrote:
(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons ?1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.
I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got four free from Scottish Power, two free from the Jobcentre at a
careers fair.

I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!

Owain

I'm averaging five per room, 10 rooms, plus the outside stuff plus the
workshop and the utility room but they both have flourescents anyhoo.

I made up a string of 30 20W of the CFL's from morrisons, for use in the
garage.
It's amazing - I can actually see stuff in there now.

[Dave Liquorice]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 10:57:45 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got 5 free (Philips branded) after doing an home energy survey thing. I
was hoping to get some (more) loft insulation. What we have is in poor
condition and covered in debris from the roof replacement. I'd like to
chuck it all out and start a fresh with 100mm between the current ceiling
joists, fit more 100mm joists cross ways fill that void and board.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

[Staffbull]

Ian Stirling wrote:
Staffbull wrote:

Owain wrote:
Mary Fisher wrote:
(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons ?1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.
I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got four free from Scottish Power, two free from the Jobcentre at a
careers fair.

I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!

Owain

I'm averaging five per room, 10 rooms, plus the outside stuff plus the
workshop and the utility room but they both have flourescents anyhoo.

I made up a string of 30 20W of the CFL's from morrisons, for use in the
garage.
It's amazing - I can actually see stuff in there now.

I'm not surprised with 30 !!!

[notpastityet?]

"Staffbull" wrote in message
ups.com...

notpastityet? wrote:
"Ian Stirling" wrote in message


Can I win? Nah! So I dont bother.

LA = Los Angeles?.... a VERY expensive place to live !!!

LA = Local Authority. Nearly as expensive as Los Angeles though _ SE
Cornwall.

[Ian Stirling]

Staffbull wrote:

Ian Stirling wrote:
Staffbull wrote:

Owain wrote:
Mary Fisher wrote:
(*) This was before the supermarkets where flogging CFLs at 50p each
(Morrisons ?1 BOGOF). Even without the offers branded CFLs prices are
much lower now.
I got a couple free from British Gas recently.
snip
I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!

I'm averaging five per room, 10 rooms, plus the outside stuff plus the
workshop and the utility room but they both have flourescents anyhoo.

I made up a string of 30 20W of the CFL's from morrisons, for use in the
garage.
It's amazing - I can actually see stuff in there now.

I'm not surprised with 30 !!!

It is a rather large garage - 10m*5m, and has no effective windows.

Limewashing the roof helped lots too.

[Mary Fisher]

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.com...
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 10:57:45 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got 5 free (Philips branded) after doing an home energy survey thing. I
was hoping to get some (more) loft insulation. What we have is in poor
condition and covered in debris from the roof replacement. I'd like to
chuck it all out and start a fresh with 100mm between the current ceiling
joists, fit more 100mm joists cross ways fill that void and board.

What's stopping you? :-)

Mary

[Staffbull]

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 10:57:45 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

I got a couple free from British Gas recently.

I got 5 free (Philips branded) after doing an home energy survey thing. I
was hoping to get some (more) loft insulation. What we have is in poor
condition and covered in debris from the roof replacement. I'd like to
chuck it all out and start a fresh with 100mm between the current ceiling
joists, fit more 100mm joists cross ways fill that void and board.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

Youd get a grant towards that, phone your local council, My grant form
has gone in for topping up existing roof insulation in the "old" part
of the house and cavity wall isulation, the extension's all kitted out
with "mucho" kingspan 'n rockwool, with K glass throughout, dunno how
effective the K glass is really, how the hell do you measure it? nice
little earner for Pilkington though

[Mary Fisher]

"Staffbull" wrote in message
oups.com...

nice
little earner for Pilkington though

Do you mind that?

Mary

[Staffbull]

Mary Fisher wrote:
"Staffbull" wrote in message
oups.com...

nice
little earner for Pilkington though

Do you mind that?

Mary

Mind what? that a company has a product they engineered themselfes,
patented it and are making an absolute fortune out of it. No not at
all, let's hear it for Bill Gates while were at it
:-)

[Staffbull]

Owain wrote:
Ian Stirling wrote:
I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!
I made up a string of 30 20W of the CFL's from morrisons, for use in the
garage.
It is a rather large garage - 10m*5m,

That is bigger than my whole flat!

and has no effective windows.

Yes, my lounge has a similar problem :-(

Owain
one of the downfalls of the last house, 300 yr old cottage, tiny
windows and lights on even on a summers day !!

[Ian Stirling]

Staffbull wrote:

Owain wrote:
Ian Stirling wrote:
I've only got six lightbulbs in the whole flat!
I made up a string of 30 20W of the CFL's from morrisons, for use in the
garage.
It is a rather large garage - 10m*5m,

That is bigger than my whole flat!

and has no effective windows.

Yes, my lounge has a similar problem :-(

one of the downfalls of the last house, 300 yr old cottage, tiny
windows and lights on even on a summers day !!

/me passes Staffbull a 12" petrol disk cutter.