On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:46:38 +0000, Andy Hall wrote:

|!On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:21:49 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:
|!
|!On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:10:13 +0000, Andy Hall wrote:
|!
|!|!On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:15:03 +0000, Steve Firth
|!|!wrote:
|!|!
|!|!On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:08:59 +0000, David Hansen wrote:
|!|!
|!|!CFLs are not yet ready to replace conventional bulbs.
|!|!
|!|! Incorrect.
|!|!
|!|!No, he's correct. However to the hair shirt and sackcloth brigade no doubd
|!|!sitting in gloom gives them a feeling that they are "saving the planet".
|!|!
|!|!
|!|!
|!|!Quite. This is the biggest example of the king's suit of clothes
|!|!since the msn himself rode naked on horseback.
|!
|!IME they are just as good as incandescents for the recommended transfers,
|!I started using them when they first came out, and the first ones I fitted
|!are now failing. Worth every penny I spent when they were *expensive*
|!
|!
|!It really depends on what you want

I want light, of a "colour" I like at the minimum cost over the life of
the fitting.
|!
|!If you are attracted by the "eco" argument, the one that suggests that
|!by buying a more expensive bulb the outlay over time is reduced and
|!you don't care about light quality then fine.

There are several "colours" of lights available.

--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Compare and contrast
Sharia Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
European Convention on Human Rights http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html
Then sign this petition http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Ban-Sharia