View Single Post
  #40   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
Dave Liquorice Dave Liquorice is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,136
Default Low energy light bulbs - comparison

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 18:11:45 +0000, Andy Hall wrote:

Replacing perfectly good technology in the form of tungsten lighting
which most people do seem to prefer based on sales volumes


Er, "sales volumes" is a false measure unless corrected to take into
account the much longer life of CFLs over tungsten. I was buying and
getting through 16 or so 40W tugnsten candle bulbs for the lounge lights
a year until I replaced them with 6 CFLs. I have yet to replace those
CFLs and they have been in for at least two years alomost certainly
longer...

If people want to buy these things and use them and if it makes them
feel good, then that's fine.


I quite like the extra cash in my pocket. Tungsten 6 x 40 x 18 =
4.32units/day. 6 * 9 * 18 = 0.972 units/day. Saving 3.348 units at
7.191p/unit, 24p/day, 92 quid/year (once you've added the VAT) or a weeks
groceries.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail