mm wrote:

It's very much the issue! I recall stories as the poster had where the
starting of a fluorescent tube was equivalent to 1/2 hour running.
Analyse that statement logically and you will see it makes no sense...

First off, it's true, and it may be the basis for the original post,
so it's worth discussing.

I accept that the claim has been made - I have heard people making it as
well.

I also expect that is is a corruption of the original research that was
looking at overall costs including lamp life and not just running costs.
It has just that much of the detail has been lost in the Chinese
whispers along the way and it has been reduced to an absurdity
concerning just energy costs.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/