On 2007-03-16 08:45:35 +0000, Mike Barnes said:

In uk.d-i-y, Steve Walker wrote:
We use CFLs in our living-room wall lights, but can't in the centre lights
- the fittings have a clearance of only about 12mm from the top of a
standard candle bulb (the bulb has to be angled to get it in) and candle
CFLs are quite a bit longer. We do however mainly use just the wall lights,
but if we can no longer get bulbs for the centre lights, we will have to
spend hundreds of pounds replacing all the existing fittings - incidentally
losing a design that we particularly like.

Well, if it's offending your taste in living-room light fittings or
global catastrophe, it's obvious what's more important, innit? :-)

Yes, it is, because the suggestion that "global catastrophe:" or
anything approaching it
can be remotely influenced by whether or not crappy CFL bulbs are used
in domestic
property is patent nonsense.

This is imply a ruse to "give the plebs something to do" which will
have the effect of making
the gullible feel good while diverting the issue away from the major
contributions of CO2 - always
assuming that it is accepted that climate change is as a result of CO2
emission and that man
has some ability to influence it.


Seriously, though, it needn't be that bad.

It is that bad. The light quality of these things remains apalling.

A few years ago, when CFLs
were a lot clunkier than they are today, I went round this (quite large)
house replacing every standard-fitting (BC or ES) bulb with a CFL. There
were about 50 bulbs in all. Out of that lot, four fittings (one of one
type and three of another, all wall lights) had to be replaced. Although
I found it objectionable at the time, I replaced the four fittings
(quite cheaply, as it turned out) because I Knew It Made Sense, and I've
never regretted it.

My guess is that a future phasing-out of incandescent lamps will start
with standard BS/ES fittings, where the vast bulk of the savings are to
be made, and the more esoteric types will follow quite some time later.

If at all. I am sure that ways will be found around this nonsense,
if it ever happens.

This is the first time that I can think of where the development of a
new lighting technology
is coupled with attempts to explicitly remove others from the market by
legislation.

We can still buy candles, oil for oil lamps and the mantles etc. for
gas lamps. The free market
has moved in the direction of electric lighting by choice.

Likewise, the free market should be allowed to decide this issue as
well. The two basic arguments
being made by the CFL lobby are that money is saved and that there is
an improvement in CO2
emissions. Buying patterns and shelf space indicate otherwise and it
is then said
that people are taking a short term, purchase outlay view as opposed to
the life cost.
This may be true to some extent.

However, the moment that there is a suggestion of legislation to remove
a product from the market
as opposed to allowing people to make their own decisions indicates
that the arguments
were weak in the first place, which they are.