Remember my post a few weeks back "Another Reason to Hate CFLs" ? Well,
here's yet another. That one that I put in my bench light, that started it
all, has now become so dim, that it is worse than useless. It has been
getting worse and worse over the last week. There are signs of the ballast
enclosure running hot, so I guess that any electros in there, have just
cooked dry, due to the fact that it is predominantly hanging down, in a
semi-enclosed 'shade', much like a lot of household room and decorative
lighting does. They are fundamentally a crap technology that has been forced
on a largely unwanting public, by supposedly green issues with a dubious
foundation in fact.

I know a lot of people on here seem to like the dreadful things, and swear
by them, but my continuing experience, judged from when they first appeared,
right up until now, just makes me want to swear *at* them ...

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste. I have also
just started trying out the halogen versions of traditional light bulbs,
which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox "book of energy savers",
even though they only consume a few watts less than their equivalent
light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am impressed. I
now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my hallway main
light fixture. It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and
has a good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes,
unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't tell
the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:
I know a lot of people on here seem to like the dreadful things, and swear
by them, but my continuing experience, judged from when they first appeared,
right up until now, just makes me want to swear *at* them ...

It's a matter of use and taste. I would not put one in a reading light,
but for general illumination (but not base up), they are fine.

For example, an 11 watt CFL is just perfect for my bathroom, so that at
3am when I stumble in half asleep without my glasses to use the toilet, I
don't trip over the bathtub (it's recessed into the floor). A 11 watt or
even a 30 watt incandescent bulb would not be bright enough.

On the other hand, if I had two 35 watt flourescent lights installed for
more reasonable use, such as being able to read while on the toilet, seeing
well enough to take a bath or shower, or even brushing my teeth.

So in general, I save a lot of money on electricity using one, but
don't expect it to be something it's not.

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste.

As soon as you have the bulbs in hand, share the URL. :-)

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
To help restaurants, as part of the "stimulus package", everyone must order
dessert. As part of the socialized health plan, you are forbidden to eat it. :-)

Yup.

My home workshop is actually a converted bedroom - and when building it
tried to make things as easy as possible to revert back to that when I get
too old to use it. ;-) Ie, any time soon...

The workbenches all have decent lighting above them, but the switches
aren't at the door so I still have a central pendant fitting for just
general illumination. Which was fitted with a clear 150 watt tungsten. Now
blown my last spare of this size.

So after a deal of looking, got a spiral CFL said to be a 120 watt
equivalent. Is it hell - it's dimmer than a 100 watt pearl. And a bilious
shade of yellow. And it takes ages to get to full output - even at an
ambient temp of 20C.

I do like the mains halogen types, though, apart from cost. Have a 100
watt one in the anglepoise at the electronics bench. At my age you need
lots of light when examining PCBs, etc. And that light quality is just
right.

--
*The soldier who survived pepper spray is now a seasoned veteran*

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Yup.

My home workshop is actually a converted bedroom - and when building it
tried to make things as easy as possible to revert back to that when I get
too old to use it. ;-) Ie, any time soon...

The workbenches all have decent lighting above them, but the switches
aren't at the door so I still have a central pendant fitting for just
general illumination. Which was fitted with a clear 150 watt tungsten. Now
blown my last spare of this size.

So after a deal of looking, got a spiral CFL said to be a 120 watt
equivalent. Is it hell - it's dimmer than a 100 watt pearl. And a bilious
shade of yellow. And it takes ages to get to full output - even at an
ambient temp of 20C.

I do like the mains halogen types, though, apart from cost. Have a 100
watt one in the anglepoise at the electronics bench. At my age you need
lots of light when examining PCBs, etc. And that light quality is just
right.

--
*The soldier who survived pepper spray is now a seasoned veteran*

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


Yes Dave. All agreed.

Geoff. Per your request for a URL of someone selling 'proper' light bulbs

http://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/bul...ayonet&f=Pearl

or

http://www.mr-resistor.co.uk/item.as...351&i=3189&a=0

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote...

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste. I have also
just started trying out the halogen versions of traditional light bulbs,
which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox "book of energy savers",
even though they only consume a few watts less than their equivalent
light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am impressed. I
now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my hallway main
light fixture. It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and
has a good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes,
unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't
tell the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\



My Shed is lit by 75W "eco" halogens (only 3 of 'em so far) plus one in the
Danglepoise over the measuring and marking-out "table", very good light. I'm
fitting a 50W 12V halogen in the lathe's worklight (easier to find than 50V
incandescents around here) so will see (I hope) how that works out.

Of course you can tell the difference re colour spectra - the CFLs (and
worse, "white" LEDs) give 3 narrow bands centred on the eye's sensitivities
to RGB light (which works ok with emittive displays) so only illuminate 3
colours correctly when looking at reflective/absorbtive materials - any
colours in between the 3 narrow peaks won't be rendered correctly, for
values of "rendered under a full-spectrum light" as per sunlight,
incandescent lights, even full moonlight...

They're just adequate for the lav's, hallways, front porch and the cluttered
loft though.

Incandescents also have major green bonuses re recycling or landfill - by
design they don't contain any mercury, other toxic heavy metals, radioactive
materials or toxic organic materials (unlike CFLs), can be run through a
crusher to recover the glasses and metals separately, are far cheaper and
simpler to manufacture - one wonders whether the powers that be actually
considered the whole lifecycle of CFLs when promoting them as "green"? In
the USA and probably in the EU they're classified as "hazardous waste" as
they fail the Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure test hence much more
onerous disposal requirements.

Just my ha'pence worth,
Dave H.
--
(The engineer formerly known as Homeless)

"Rules are for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of wise men" -
Douglas Bader

"Dave H." wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote...

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste. I have
also just started trying out the halogen versions of traditional light
bulbs, which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox "book of energy
savers", even though they only consume a few watts less than their
equivalent light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am
impressed. I now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my
hallway main light fixture. It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway)
to see by, and has a good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way
offensive to my eyes, unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone
says that *they* can't tell the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\



My Shed is lit by 75W "eco" halogens (only 3 of 'em so far) plus one in
the Danglepoise over the measuring and marking-out "table", very good
light. I'm fitting a 50W 12V halogen in the lathe's worklight (easier to
find than 50V incandescents around here) so will see (I hope) how that
works out.

Of course you can tell the difference re colour spectra - the CFLs (and
worse, "white" LEDs) give 3 narrow bands centred on the eye's
sensitivities to RGB light (which works ok with emittive displays) so only
illuminate 3 colours correctly when looking at reflective/absorbtive
materials - any colours in between the 3 narrow peaks won't be rendered
correctly, for values of "rendered under a full-spectrum light" as per
sunlight, incandescent lights, even full moonlight...

They're just adequate for the lav's, hallways, front porch and the
cluttered loft though.

Incandescents also have major green bonuses re recycling or landfill - by
design they don't contain any mercury, other toxic heavy metals,
radioactive materials or toxic organic materials (unlike CFLs), can be run
through a crusher to recover the glasses and metals separately, are far
cheaper and simpler to manufacture - one wonders whether the powers that
be actually considered the whole lifecycle of CFLs when promoting them as
"green"? In the USA and probably in the EU they're classified as
"hazardous waste" as they fail the Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure
test hence much more onerous disposal requirements.

Just my ha'pence worth,
Dave H.


Oh yes, Dave. You are preaching to the converted ! Probably, actually, to
the original pastor !! I'm famous on the 'net for crying about CFLs,
lead-free solder, and eco-bollox in general. I have had a good rant many
times about the eco 'credentials' of this so-called 'green' technology,
including the hidden costs of manufacturing, shipping, and disposing of
CFLs - and ugly windmills all over the land and seascapes and tidal
electricity mills and now fields of PV panels.

I just wish that some of the politicians and
'save-the-planet-green-mist-brigade-do-gooders', would actually stop for a
moment and temporarily put aside their evangelical fervour, and have a
realistic look at the wider picture. It's just so frustrating to see good,
proven, mature and reliable technologies, which were developed over many
years with very good reasons for the changes and developments to them,
displaced by these substitute (NOT replacement) technologies, which have
been hurried into production without due respect for many affected areas,
just to satisfy directives and personal 'missions' being thrust upon the
population by politicians, think tanks, and faceless committees and
commissions, desperately trying to either make a name for themselves, or
preserve their jobs and pensions ... :-(

I'm not against responsible use of the planet's resources, and recycling
where appropriate, but it has all turned into nothing short of a religion in
the last few years, without any consideration of issues besides the green
ones, and it really makes me mad that we're all rolling over and letting it
wash over us, in the name of 'doing our bit'.

See ? You've got me going again ... :-)

Arfa

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste. I have also
just started trying out the halogen versions of traditional light bulbs,
which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox "book of energy savers",
even though they only consume a few watts less than their equivalent
light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am impressed. I
now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my hallway main
light fixture. It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and
has a good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes,
unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't
tell
the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\

Don't expect it to last very. If you don't run it long enough to engage the
halogen cycle, the bulb will burn out faster than a conventional
incandescent.

Several weeks ago I said I'd switched to all fluorescents. I was wrong. The
stairwell and hallway lamps are all incandescent. (Almost all of them are
still working after 10 years.) Fixtures that are turned on only briefly
should be regular incandescents -- or LEDs! Other types are not appropriate.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
:

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of
incandescents, including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up
post haste. I have also just started trying out the halogen versions
of traditional light bulbs, which still seem to make it into the
eco-bollox "book of energy savers", even though they only consume a
few watts less than their equivalent light-output 'traditional'
tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am impressed. I now have a 70 watt
actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my hallway main light fixture.
It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and has a
good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes,
unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they*
can't
tell
the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\

Don't expect it to last very. If you don't run it long enough to
engage the halogen cycle, the bulb will burn out faster than a
conventional incandescent.

Several weeks ago I said I'd switched to all fluorescents. I was
wrong. The stairwell and hallway lamps are all incandescent. (Almost
all of them are still working after 10 years.) Fixtures that are
turned on only briefly should be regular incandescents -- or LEDs!
Other types are not appropriate.




I have 130V "contractor" incandescents in my apartment.
there's one bulb in the bathroom fixture(8 40w mini-bulbs) that is
original,still working after 25 years. One in my dining room [heavily
used]lasted 15 years,but that one was on a dimmer.

I use CFLs where a light stays on a long time[living room],and
incandescents for short on-off applications.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Arfa Daily wrote:
Oh yes, Dave. You are preaching to the converted ! Probably, actually, to
the original pastor !! I'm famous on the 'net for crying about CFLs,
lead-free solder, and eco-bollox in general. I have had a good rant many
times about the eco 'credentials' of this so-called 'green' technology,
including the hidden costs of manufacturing, shipping, and disposing of
CFLs - and ugly windmills all over the land and seascapes and tidal
electricity mills and now fields of PV panels.

You don't really remember who invented global warming do you?

Back in the mid 1980's when the coal miner's strike brought the UK economy
to its knees (the pound was $1.05), Margaret Thatcher came up with it as a
way of preventing the miners from ever having a politicial voice again.

The whole idea was to make coal and the miners so "dirty" to the common
man that the mines would be closed and they would be the last generation
of miners destined to finish out their (longer) lives on the dole.

It sort of worked until Al Gore got into the carbon credit business. He
had a professional "pitch" put together to get investors (something
every startup does) and it took off. In the end it became the power point
pitch that won a Nobel prize.

It's not as far fetched as you think. Before she got into politics,
Thatcher was an industrial engineer and is the mother of modern ice
cream. She calculated the exact proportion of air that could be added to
ice cream and still sold as ice cream.

Now except for home made and few specialty products, all ice cream is made
from a variation of her formula.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
To help restaurants, as part of the "stimulus package", everyone must order
dessert. As part of the socialized health plan, you are forbidden to eat it. :-)

In article ,
William Sommerwerck wrote:
Don't expect it to last very. If you don't run it long enough to engage
the halogen cycle, the bulb will burn out faster than a conventional
incandescent.

I'm not convinced about this. I have lots of 12v halogens on dimmers, and
their life doesn't seem any different from those which aren't. If
anything, longer. Nor have they blackened as some say should happen.

One thing that does annoy is most CFLs have a shorter life than claimed
when hung with the connector at the top - as most incandescent lamps. Due
to the heat getting to the electronics.

I bought a very expensive GE RO80 CFL spot which claimed a very long life
- precisely because it was difficult to change. And that failed after
about 1500 hours - because of overheating, I was told. In a fitting
designed for a 100 watt incandescent.

WTF is the point of a spot which can't be pointed where you want the light
to land?

And giving an equivalent light output based on some ancient incandescent
bulb no one ever uses?

--
*Bigamy is having one wife too many - monogamy is the same

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

In article ,
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Back in the mid 1980's when the coal miner's strike brought the UK
economy to its knees (the pound was $1.05), Margaret Thatcher came up
with it as a way of preventing the miners from ever having a politicial
voice again.

And incidentally the rest of the working class population in the UK. As
well as plenty of the middle classes too. The UK is strange in that many
seem to want others to be low paid, rather than all well paid.

The whole idea was to make coal and the miners so "dirty" to the common
man that the mines would be closed and they would be the last generation
of miners destined to finish out their (longer) lives on the dole.

And, of course, North Sea gas was just coming on stream. Now, it is well
past peak prododuction. So our now converted power stations rely on
imported gas. At whatever those who sell it wish to charge.

Who'd have thought a politician would go for short term gain? ;-(

--
*Do paediatricians play miniature golf on Wednesdays?

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

You don't really remember who invented global warming do you?
It's not as far fetched as you think. Before she got into politics,
Thatcher was an industrial engineer and is the mother of modern
ice cream. She calculated the exact proportion of air that could
be added to ice cream and still sold as ice cream.

Now except for home made and few specialty products, all ice
cream is made from a variation of her formula.

I'm certain that the concept of "overrun" long predates Maggie.

All ice cream needs at least a little air, or it would be very hard and
dense. In the US, the maximum amount allowed is 50% by volume.

Don't expect it to last very. If you don't run it long enough to engage
the halogen cycle, the bulb will burn out faster than a conventional
incandescent.

I'm not convinced about this. I have lots of 12v halogens on dimmers,
and their life doesn't seem any different from those which aren't. If
anything, longer. Nor have they blackened as some say should happen.

It depend on how far you dim them. If you dim just a little bit, they'll be
at the point where the temperature is extremely high, but not high enough
for the halogen cycle to kick in. Result: short life.

But if you dim fairly far down, you'll be below that range, and they'll last
"forever".


And giving an equivalent light output based on some ancient incandescent
bulb no one ever uses?

It provides a reference point most people are familiar with. In 20 years, it
will have disappeared.

Hi Arfa,

Arfa Daily wrote:
I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of
incandescents, including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post

puzzled Can't you (still) purchase these over-the-counter?
I'll admit to not having gone shopping for any recently (as I
have several dozen of various bulb types on the shelf) but
i didn't realize they have (?) disappeared...

(which also makes me wonder if lead solder has gone this route)

haste. I have also just started trying out the halogen versions of
traditional light bulbs, which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox
"book of energy savers", even though they only consume a few watts less
than their equivalent light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus

I found the halogens to be a harsh light. Love them outdoors
(can you spell "bright as day"?) but I've removed all of the
indoor bulbs.

far, I am impressed. I now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent,
fitted to my hallway main light fixture. It is very bright, very easy
(for me anyway) to see by, and has a good colour spectrum, not in the
slightest way offensive to my eyes, unlike the CFLs, which no matter how
much anyone says that *they* can't tell the difference with, *I* can
... d :-\

We're waiting for dimmable LED lamps (that won't require growing
extra limbs to purchase)...

"D Yuniskis" wrote in message
...
Hi Arfa,

Arfa Daily wrote:
I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post

puzzled Can't you (still) purchase these over-the-counter?
I'll admit to not having gone shopping for any recently (as I
have several dozen of various bulb types on the shelf) but
i didn't realize they have (?) disappeared...


In theory, they have this side of the pond. There was EU legislation put in
place - that our government of course felt it necessary to sign up to -
which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all of
the supermarkets and sheds stopped selling 60 watt pearl bulbs, ahead of the
'ban' to make sure that they complied, and were not left with cartloads of
unsellable items on their hands. However, as I understand it, due to a
governmental administrative snafu, the actual legislation was never enacted
in the UK, leaving the way wide open for internet sellers, to just carry on
as they were, and take full advantage of people's natural tendencies to
stock up. I guess that the supermarkets etc have not restocked to make sure
that a) they don't catch a cold if the situation suddenly changes, and b)
they don't look bad that they've sold out on their eco-bollox credibility
ratings.



(which also makes me wonder if lead solder has gone this route)



No, not really. Standard leaded solder has disappeared from all commercially
available electronic equipment, with the exception of classes of items such
as avionics, life support, and military (draw your own conclusions on this)
which have been granted dispensations to continue to manufacture in leaded
technology. This has been the case since June 2006 when the RoHS directive
came into full operation. However, there is no requirement for equipment
manufactured and brought to market before that date, and perfectly legally
constructed using non RoHS compliant materials, including solder, to be
repaired using anything other than originally specified non-compliant parts
and solder. Indeed, it is considered to be not particularly metallurgically
good to mix the two types of technology. There is also no requirement for
items constructed for your personal use, and not to be offered for resale,
to be constructed with lead-free parts and solder. For these reasons,
traditional 60/40 solder is still readily available from all the usual parts
supply houses, and is expected to continue to be for the foreseeable future.



haste. I have also just started trying out the halogen versions of
traditional light bulbs, which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox
"book of energy savers", even though they only consume a few watts less
than their equivalent light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus

I found the halogens to be a harsh light. Love them outdoors
(can you spell "bright as day"?) but I've removed all of the
indoor bulbs.


Really ? I have found the light to be perfectly pleasant, if perhaps a
little bright. Maybe that is your interpretation of "harsh" ?



far, I am impressed. I now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent,
fitted to my hallway main light fixture. It is very bright, very easy
(for me anyway) to see by, and has a good colour spectrum, not in the
slightest way offensive to my eyes, unlike the CFLs, which no matter how
much anyone says that *they* can't tell the difference with, *I* can ...
d :-\

We're waiting for dimmable LED lamps (that won't require growing
extra limbs to purchase)...

Although like CFLs, they do seem to be getting a little better, I've yet to
see any that come close to other lighting technologies. My local supermarket
has a number of floodlight fixtures for the car park, split between wall and
pole mounts. Until a couple of weeks ago, these were fitted with some kind
of metal halide or maybe high pressure sodium bulb. Whatever they were, they
were a pale yellow, and did a grand job of lighting the car park in all
weather conditions. They have now replaced the fittings with white LED
arrays. I would guess that each one is probably a 10 x 5 matrix, so 50 LEDs.
They are so bright that you can't look at them so what power rating are they
? 1 watters ? or 3s maybe ? Whatever, still a pretty significant power draw
over 50 of them. However, bright as they are, the light from them is
"harsh" - there's that word again - cold and shadowy. They don't actually
come close to the performance of the previous floodlights, whatever exact
technology they were. It will be interesting to see how well they penetrate
fog, as we're now into that season. When low pressure sodiums were first
introduced for street lighting, as I recall, fog penetration - which *is*
inescapably good for yellow light - was one of the cited advantages for the
technology. Certainly where you find white (mercury vapour ? egg shaped
bulbs) high intensity street lighting in use, it performs nothing like as
well in fog.

Arfa

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:21:52 -0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

Remember my post a few weeks back "Another Reason to Hate CFLs" ?

No. I have a tendency to not read boring bull****.
--
****! I thought no one knew, goddammit!
http://preview.tinyurl.com/29p4ody
Me, jacking off! http://preview.tinyurl.com/3xpntge Available For
Lessons!

On 11/11/2010 12:42 PM, Arfa Daily wrote:When low pressure sodiums were
first
introduced for street lighting, as I recall, fog penetration - which
*is* inescapably good for yellow light - was one of the cited advantages
for the technology. Certainly where you find white (mercury vapour ? egg
shaped bulbs) high intensity street lighting in use, it performs nothing
like as well in fog.

Additionally, it was touted as "shadow free" which was supposed to help
the police "find the bad guys" in higher crime areas.

Jeff

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:42:02 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

No, not really. Standard leaded solder has disappeared from all commercially
available electronic equipment, with the exception of classes of items such
as avionics, life support, and military (draw your own conclusions on this)
which have been granted dispensations to continue to manufacture in leaded
technology. This has been the case since June 2006 when the RoHS directive
came into full operation. However, there is no requirement for equipment
manufactured and brought to market before that date, and perfectly legally
constructed using non RoHS compliant materials, including solder, to be
repaired using anything other than originally specified non-compliant parts
and solder. Indeed, it is considered to be not particularly metallurgically
good to mix the two types of technology. There is also no requirement for
items constructed for your personal use, and not to be offered for resale,
to be constructed with lead-free parts and solder. For these reasons,
traditional 60/40 solder is still readily available from all the usual parts
supply houses, and is expected to continue to be for the foreseeable future.

A bit of trivia on lead. See PDF or XLS for USA lead production at:
http://minerals.usgs.gov/ds/2005/140/

Despite the RoHS ban, new production (mining or primary production) in
the USA has dropped drastically over the years, but recycling
(secondary production) has made up the difference. If you look at the
lead-use numbers above, there's a decrease in the use of lead in
solder, which is more than compensated for by the increased use of
lead in other areas. At best, overall consumption is fairly flat,
with a slight drop due to the current recession.

More on lead:
http://www.basemetals.com/html/pbinfo.htm


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:21:52 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

Remember my post a few weeks back "Another Reason to Hate CFLs" ? Well,
here's yet another. That one that I put in my bench light, that started
it all, has now become so dim, that it is worse than useless. It has
been getting worse and worse over the last week. There are signs of the
ballast enclosure running hot, so I guess that any electros in there,
have just cooked dry, due to the fact that it is predominantly hanging
down, in a semi-enclosed 'shade', much like a lot of household room and
decorative lighting does. They are fundamentally a crap technology that
has been forced on a largely unwanting public, by supposedly green
issues with a dubious foundation in fact.

I'm on my 2nd year of running a 100 watt equiv 6500k CFL upside down and
enclosed in a globe all year long dusk to dawn. I guess the brand does
matter in this case Osram/Sylvania. And there was no indication on the
package of any severe duty specifications.



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
Remember my post a few weeks back "Another Reason to Hate CFLs" ? Well,
here's yet another. That one that I put in my bench light, that started it
all, has now become so dim, that it is worse than useless. It has been
getting worse and worse over the last week. There are signs of the ballast
enclosure running hot, so I guess that any electros in there, have just
cooked dry, due to the fact that it is predominantly hanging down, in a
semi-enclosed 'shade', much like a lot of household room and decorative
lighting does. They are fundamentally a crap technology that has been
forced on a largely unwanting public, by supposedly green issues with a
dubious foundation in fact.

I know a lot of people on here seem to like the dreadful things, and swear
by them, but my continuing experience, judged from when they first
appeared, right up until now, just makes me want to swear *at* them ...

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste. I have also
just started trying out the halogen versions of traditional light bulbs,
which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox "book of energy savers",
even though they only consume a few watts less than their equivalent
light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am impressed. I
now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my hallway main
light fixture. It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and
has a good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes,
unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't
tell the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\

**Why would you stock up on incandescents? In a few years, LEDs will be
pretty much the standard and reasonably priced and they keep their colour
temperature when dimmed. As for experiences, mine is all good (with CFLs).
In the past 7 years, I've had two failures (out of 19 installed). One I
dropped and the other a possum sat on it. I either use CFLs or straight
tubes just about everywhere. When I really need a lot of light, I hook up my
80 Watt (or 160) halide. Either one makes a 500 Watt halogen look sick.
There are a few places in my homoe where I still have
incandescents/halogens. I can't wait to dump them. They're unreliable pieces
of ****. Give me CFLs any day. Or LEDs. Or halides, when I need them.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

On 11/11/2010 3:06 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Arfa wrote in message
...
Remember my post a few weeks back "Another Reason to Hate CFLs" ? Well,
here's yet another. That one that I put in my bench light, that started it
all, has now become so dim, that it is worse than useless. It has been
getting worse and worse over the last week. There are signs of the ballast
enclosure running hot, so I guess that any electros in there, have just
cooked dry, due to the fact that it is predominantly hanging down, in a
semi-enclosed 'shade', much like a lot of household room and decorative
lighting does. They are fundamentally a crap technology that has been
forced on a largely unwanting public, by supposedly green issues with a
dubious foundation in fact.

I know a lot of people on here seem to like the dreadful things, and swear
by them, but my continuing experience, judged from when they first
appeared, right up until now, just makes me want to swear *at* them ...

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste. I have also
just started trying out the halogen versions of traditional light bulbs,
which still seem to make it into the eco-bollox "book of energy savers",
even though they only consume a few watts less than their equivalent
light-output 'traditional' tungsten cousins. Thus far, I am impressed. I
now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt equivalent, fitted to my hallway main
light fixture. It is very bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and
has a good colour spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes,
unlike the CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't
tell the difference with, *I* can ... d :-\

**Why would you stock up on incandescents? In a few years, LEDs will be
pretty much the standard and reasonably priced and they keep their colour
temperature when dimmed. As for experiences, mine is all good (with CFLs).
In the past 7 years, I've had two failures (out of 19 installed). One I
dropped and the other a possum sat on it. I either use CFLs or straight
tubes just about everywhere. When I really need a lot of light, I hook up my
80 Watt (or 160) halide. Either one makes a 500 Watt halogen look sick.
There are a few places in my homoe where I still have
incandescents/halogens. I can't wait to dump them. They're unreliable pieces
of ****. Give me CFLs any day. Or LEDs. Or halides, when I need them.


Arfa's problem is more to do with "green" government ramming CFL's down
peoples throats than actual performance. LCD monitors were trashed by
computer critics when they first came out (rightly so) but now it would
be a fool who buys a CRT monitor, no need for gov't intervention, the
"people" made their own decision. As for CFL reliability, the QC has got
worse, last pack of 6 from Costco , 2 were dead, one failed
spectacularly after 20 minutes, the others are fine but I doubt will
last the quoted lifetime. Also it would be useful if there was an easy
way to dispose of the blasted things.

JC

Archon wrote:
one failed spectacularly after 20 minutes

Care to elaborate?

Geoff.



--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
To help restaurants, as part of the "stimulus package", everyone must order
dessert. As part of the socialized health plan, you are forbidden to eat it. :-)

William Sommerwerck wrote:
You don't really remember who invented global warming do you?
It's not as far fetched as you think. Before she got into politics,
Thatcher was an industrial engineer and is the mother of modern
ice cream. She calculated the exact proportion of air that could
be added to ice cream and still sold as ice cream.

Now except for home made and few specialty products, all ice
cream is made from a variation of her formula.

I'm certain that the concept of "overrun" long predates Maggie.

All ice cream needs at least a little air, or it would be very hard and

That depends on the base used -- as well as other ingredients.
And, of course, how long you let it ripen. E.g., fruits
tend to bring too much water to the mix; sugar substitutes
result in insufficient volume (I suspect sugar also lowers
the freezing point of the mix?)

My butter pecan Rx can tolerate extended ripening before
becoming "hard as a rock" (N.B. ripening seems to be a
self-contradictory term wrt ice cream!)

You can still-freeze some Rx's while others seem to need a
dasher-on-steroids. :

dense. In the US, the maximum amount allowed is 50% by volume.

It's always fun to watch the expression on someone's face
when they taste *real* "iceD cream"!

On 11/11/2010 3:54 PM, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Archon wrote:
one failed spectacularly after 20 minutes

Care to elaborate?

Geoff.



small sparky flame out of one side of the tube hole for a second and
enough smoke to set off the smoke alarm.

JC

Archon wrote:

On 11/11/2010 3:54 PM, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Archon wrote:
one failed spectacularly after 20 minutes

Care to elaborate?

Geoff.



small sparky flame out of one side of the tube hole for a second and
enough smoke to set off the smoke alarm.


Come on. It was just getting warmed up. ;-)


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

It's always fun to watch the expression on someone's
face when they taste *real* "ice cream"!

That is, high-butterfat ice cream with low overrun. The University of
Maryland dairy store sold such ice cream, and it was a wonderful. Even the
"premium" brands don't match that quality.

Arfa Daily wrote in message
...


"D Yuniskis" wrote in message
...


On the wider field of RoHS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...ucks-lead-shot

Law banning use of lead shot in duck hunts ignored

Lead pellets still used as ammunition to shoot ducks, says Wildfowl and
Wetlands Trust

* James Meikle
* guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 10 November 2010 17.20 GMT
Duck hunters are flouting the law on the use of lead ammunition.
The law banning the shooting of ducks and other wildfowl with lead shot is
being widely flouted across England, according to a government-funded study.

Seven in 10 of the ducks checked at game-dealers, butchers and supermarkets
were killed with lead ammunition, while surveys of shooters and shoot
organisers revealed that many admitted they did not always comply with the
regulations introduced in 1999.

The measures were meant to stop the death of waterbirds from lead poisoning
caused by them mistakenly eating spent shot which they mistook for food or
grit needed to aid their digestion. This was thought to account for
one-in-eight bird deaths. But no one is known to have been prosecuted for
breaking the law which could result in a £1,000 fine. The regulations also
ban lead shot being used to kill any birds below the coastal spring-tide
high-water mark or in specified wetlands.

The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT), which wrote the report with the help
of surveys by the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC),
said there had been no improvement since the trust conducted a smaller study
with the RSPB in 2002. Non-compliance remained "high and widespread".
Businesses selling duck killed by lead pellets are not breaking the law.

The checks indicated how the law was particularly poorly observed on inland
game and duck shoots. Wildfowlers shooting birds in coastal areas were less
likely to supply game outlets, the report noted.

The BASC surveys found up to 45% of those responding admitted not always
complying with the law. Some did not believe lead poisoning of wildlife was
a sufficient problem to justify the regulations and others believed lead
shot was more effective and less expensive than alternative ammunition,
including steel, tungsten and bismuth.

The WWT is calling on the government to do more to ensure the law is obeyed.
It recommends that offences are reported, and said shoot organisers should
make compliance with the law a condition of taking part, and that
game-dealers should demand that all their suppliers had behaved legally.

The BASC agrees all regulations applying to the use of lead shot should be
observed. A spokesman said: "We need to address the problems this is showing
up."

The Lead Ammunition Group, a panel established by environment department
Defra and the Food Standards Agency, is to report on the health impacts of
lead shot on both wildlife and humans next summer.

In article , Arfa Daily
writes

There are signs of the ballast
enclosure running hot, so I guess that any electros in there, have just
cooked dry, due to the fact that it is predominantly hanging down, in a
semi-enclosed 'shade'

They don't last as long when run base-up, as you have found.

, much like a lot of household room and decorative
lighting does. They are fundamentally a crap technology that has been forced
on a largely unwanting public, by supposedly green issues with a dubious
foundation in fact.

My thought too. What about the mercury in the tubes?

I know a lot of people on here seem to like the dreadful things, and swear
by them, but my continuing experience, judged from when they first appeared,
right up until now, just makes me want to swear *at* them ...

They have their place, but are not the universal panacea the greenies
profess them to be. They're ok in outside lights, for example, or in
the garage or shed.

I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of incandescents,
including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post haste.

Me too. The pound shops and TJ Hughes are still stocking them, 60 and
100w, clear and pearl, for 99p for four.

I snarfed for free a big bag (about 50) of incandescent R60 spot bulbs
from some guy who had replaced the lot in his new house with CFLs.
Excuse me? Try turning them off occasionally...

--
Mike Tomlinson

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:07:12 -0500, David Sanders wrote:

blown by goats

Really? How so?



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:58:39 +0000 (UTC), Meat Plow wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:07:12 -0500, David Sanders wrote:

Maet Plow is blown by goats

Really? How so?

You tell us.
--
****! I thought no one knew, goddammit!
http://preview.tinyurl.com/29p4ody
Me, jacking off! http://preview.tinyurl.com/3xpntge Available For
Lessons!

Hi Arfa,

Arfa Daily wrote:
"D Yuniskis" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of
incandescents, including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post

puzzled Can't you (still) purchase these over-the-counter?
I'll admit to not having gone shopping for any recently (as I
have several dozen of various bulb types on the shelf) but
i didn't realize they have (?) disappeared...

In theory, they have this side of the pond. There was EU legislation put
in place - that our government of course felt it necessary to sign up to

Ah, OK.

- which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all

What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?

of the supermarkets and sheds stopped selling 60 watt pearl bulbs, ahead
of the 'ban' to make sure that they complied, and were not left with
cartloads of unsellable items on their hands. However, as I understand
it, due to a governmental administrative snafu, the actual legislation
was never enacted in the UK, leaving the way wide open for internet
sellers, to just carry on as they were, and take full advantage of
people's natural tendencies to stock up. I guess that the supermarkets
etc have not restocked to make sure that a) they don't catch a cold if
the situation suddenly changes, and b) they don't look bad that they've
sold out on their eco-bollox credibility ratings.

(which also makes me wonder if lead solder has gone this route)

No, not really. Standard leaded solder has disappeared from all
commercially available electronic equipment, with the exception of
classes of items such as avionics, life support, and military (draw your
own conclusions on this) which have been granted dispensations to
continue to manufacture in leaded technology. This has been the case
since June 2006 when the RoHS directive came into full operation.
However, there is no requirement for equipment manufactured and brought
to market before that date, and perfectly legally constructed using non
RoHS compliant materials, including solder, to be repaired using
anything other than originally specified non-compliant parts and solder.

Ah, OK.

Indeed, it is considered to be not particularly metallurgically good to
mix the two types of technology. There is also no requirement for items
constructed for your personal use, and not to be offered for resale, to
be constructed with lead-free parts and solder. For these reasons,
traditional 60/40 solder is still readily available from all the usual
parts supply houses, and is expected to continue to be for the
foreseeable future.

haste. I have also just started trying out the halogen versions of
traditional light bulbs, which still seem to make it into the
eco-bollox "book of energy savers", even though they only consume a
few watts less than their equivalent light-output 'traditional'
tungsten cousins. Thus

I found the halogens to be a harsh light. Love them outdoors
(can you spell "bright as day"?) but I've removed all of the
indoor bulbs.

Really ? I have found the light to be perfectly pleasant, if perhaps a
little bright. Maybe that is your interpretation of "harsh" ?

shrug *Felt* as if it was shifted towards the blue (violet) end of
the spectrum.

It is interesting to evaluate "light" in A/B tests instead of
"from memory". You can look at two light sources independantly
(separated by a bit of time) and consider them to be a lot
more similar than when you see them "next to each other" (in
time).

Also matters what other light sources are contaminating the area.

far, I am impressed. I now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt
equivalent, fitted to my hallway main light fixture. It is very
bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and has a good colour
spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes, unlike the
CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't tell the
difference with, *I* can ... d :-\

We're waiting for dimmable LED lamps (that won't require growing
extra limbs to purchase)...

Although like CFLs, they do seem to be getting a little better, I've yet
to see any that come close to other lighting technologies. My local
supermarket has a number of floodlight fixtures for the car park, split
between wall and pole mounts. Until a couple of weeks ago, these were
fitted with some kind of metal halide or maybe high pressure sodium
bulb. Whatever they were, they were a pale yellow, and did a grand job
of lighting the car park in all weather conditions. They have now

IIRC, they have special drive requirements. And, suffer from
a slower warm-up time.

We had (some kind of) lamps to illuminate the walkways at school
which could be *shaken* (rather difficult for a 4" metal post
sunk in concrete) "off" -- only to restart some time later.
Mindless game to play when you had nothing more pressing on your
plate. :

replaced the fittings with white LED arrays. I would guess that each one
is probably a 10 x 5 matrix, so 50 LEDs. They are so bright that you
can't look at them so what power rating are they ? 1 watters ? or 3s
maybe ? Whatever, still a pretty significant power draw over 50 of them.
However, bright as they are, the light from them is "harsh" - there's
that word again - cold and shadowy. They don't actually come close to
the performance of the previous floodlights, whatever exact technology
they were. It will be interesting to see how well they penetrate fog, as
we're now into that season. When low pressure sodiums were first
introduced for street lighting, as I recall, fog penetration - which
*is* inescapably good for yellow light - was one of the cited advantages
for the technology. Certainly where you find white (mercury vapour ? egg
shaped bulbs) high intensity street lighting in use, it performs nothing
like as well in fog.

Here, we have ordinances "light polution" so fixtures and
bulb technology tend to be driven by things other than cost,
reliability, etc.

shrug

Hi William,

William Sommerwerck wrote:
It's always fun to watch the expression on someone's
face when they taste *real* "ice cream"!

That is, high-butterfat ice cream with low overrun. The University of

Actually, the fat is just one issue that "surprises" the
innocent's taste buds. More commonly, it is the intensity
of flavor and the "texture" that gets their attention.

Adding eggs to the base has a subtle taste/feel to it
(though makes it dangerous from a health perspective!).
You end up with something between a "Philly-style" cream
and a "Gelato" (custard based). (I've yet to try marrying
the two "technologies")

Flavor intensity can, at first, startle the consumer. But,
I've found that folks quickly get used to the extra "taste"
and invariably want more -- regardless of how much they've
eaten (and been reminded of how *bad* the stuff is for them!).

I, for example, prefer an almond flavored cream with semi-sweet
chocolate chips (sometimes dark chocolate, instead) and almond
slivers. To the uninitiated, it seems like too many tastes
and textures but it grows on you *real* fast! :

Butter Pecan works for everyone. But, there it really *is*
the high fat content that you taste (1/4 pound of butter in
each quart : )

Maryland dairy store sold such ice cream, and it was a wonderful. Even the

Yes, we had a few dairies in my home town that bottled their
own milk (I still recall how heavy those 1G glass bottles
were -- with their "cardboard stopper") and made fresh ice
cream. You never knew what flavor they'd have on hand...

"premium" brands don't match that quality.

It is amusing because people equate the overrun with "premium taste".
"Softer". Sure, there's less ICE CREAM in there! :

"Just let it sit out for a few minutes and it will be plenty soft...
AND good tasting!"

On Nov 11, 5:49*am, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:

You don't really remember who invented global warming do you?

Back in the mid 1980's when the coal miner's strike brought the UK economy
to its knees (the pound was $1.05), Margaret Thatcher came up with it as a
way of preventing the miners from ever having a politicial voice again.

The whole idea was to make coal and the miners so "dirty" to the common
man that the mines would be closed

Not exactly true, though. The uptake of CO2 by oceans and reef-
building
carbonate fixation was a hot science topic for many years. It was
late
eighties that the data got good enough to quantify the problem,
and early nineties when the scientific agreement came together.
Hardly anyone outside the UK knows (or cares, really) about the
Thatcher
contribution.

Remember the old story about the boy who cried "wolf"?
The villagers heard the warning from their watcher in the
field, and did nothing. They lost their child. They lost their
flock.
They had an excuse.
'Maggie Thatcher made me do it' isn't a good enough excuse, either.

"D Yuniskis"


What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?


** The shortage of suitable replacements in CFL for 100 watt bulbs.

IME, it takes a 22 or 27 watt spiral CFL to do the job well.


..... Phil

"D Yuniskis" wrote in message
...
Hi Arfa,
snip

- which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all

What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?

AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlier
phase-out of 60s, was that it was felt that CFLs had reached the point where
they could substitute for them in terms of equivalence of light output,
whereas they still had some way to go to be able to make that claim for
100s. As to why pearl before clear, I have not been able to find a
definitive answer to that one. I have seen it suggested that the pearl
envelope is more inefficient than the clear one, in that it blocks more of
the light output of the filament, causing it to be lost as heat. I'm not at
all sure that I believe that as a valid reason, and subjectively, I've
always thought that a pearl bulb in fact *appears* brighter than a clear
one. Certainly, the fact that the light is diffuse, seems to make it less
prone to generating sharp shadows, and from a purely aesthetic point of
view, pearl bulbs look much more attractive in fittings where they are
visible. Clear bulbs always seem to conjour up that 'seedy' feel that you
get from old thirties gangster and private eye movies.

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

"D Yuniskis" wrote in message
...
Hi Arfa,
snip

- which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all

What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?

AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlier
phase-out of 60s, was that it was felt that CFLs had reached the point where
they could substitute for them in terms of equivalence of light output,
whereas they still had some way to go to be able to make that claim for
100s. As to why pearl before clear, I have not been able to find a
definitive answer to that one. I have seen it suggested that the pearl
envelope is more inefficient than the clear one, in that it blocks more of
the light output of the filament, causing it to be lost as heat. I'm not at
all sure that I believe that as a valid reason, and subjectively, I've
always thought that a pearl bulb in fact *appears* brighter than a clear
one. Certainly, the fact that the light is diffuse, seems to make it less
prone to generating sharp shadows, and from a purely aesthetic point of
view, pearl bulbs look much more attractive in fittings where they are
visible. Clear bulbs always seem to conjour up that 'seedy' feel that you
get from old thirties gangster and private eye movies.


Clear bulbs USED to be 'rugged service' in the US, and made to
withstand shock & vibration better that the frosted bulbs. They were
sold for work lights and hard to replace locations. They are not as
easy to find as they used to be.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

Hi Arfa,

Arfa Daily wrote:

What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?

AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlier
phase-out of 60s, was that it was felt that CFLs had reached the point
where they could substitute for them in terms of equivalence of light
output, whereas they still had some way to go to be able to make that

Ah, that makes sense!

claim for 100s. As to why pearl before clear, I have not been able to
find a definitive answer to that one. I have seen it suggested that the
pearl envelope is more inefficient than the clear one, in that it blocks
more of the light output of the filament, causing it to be lost as heat.
I'm not at all sure that I believe that as a valid reason, and
subjectively, I've always thought that a pearl bulb in fact *appears*

It could, perhaps, be related to the fact that clear bulbs tend to
be "exposed" as part of the "artistry" of the light fixture
whereas frosted bulbs are typically behind a shade? I.e., if
the clear ones were replaced early, people would gripe more
about "how ugly" the CFL replacements are (??)

(who the hell knows... maybe they flipped a coin in some back
room?)

brighter than a clear one. Certainly, the fact that the light is
diffuse, seems to make it less prone to generating sharp shadows, and
from a purely aesthetic point of view, pearl bulbs look much more
attractive in fittings where they are visible. Clear bulbs always seem
to conjour up that 'seedy' feel that you get from old thirties gangster
and private eye movies.

Ah, here we see clear bulbs "exposed" in fixtures more than
frosted equivalents (unless you are talking about "*functional*
lighting fixtures")

From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to do
what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective in
making short-term changes; they are much less effective in effecting proper
long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until they abruptly collapse.)
The problem, of course, is making sure the forced changes are rational and
occur in the correct order.

What people find aesthetically pleasing varies widely. In Jack Finney's
classic novel "Time and Again" (it's the literary equivalent of a box of
chocolate-covered cherries and I recommend it highly, just for fun), when
Simon Morley returns to the 20th century from the 19th with his girlfriend
Julia Charbonneau, she loves the brightness and clarity of incandescent
lamps, but he says he prefers gas light.

In article ,
William Sommerwerck wrote:
when Simon Morley returns to the 20th century from the 19th with his
girlfriend Julia Charbonneau, she loves the brightness and clarity of
incandescent lamps, but he says he prefers gas light.

Both are pretty continuous spectrum light sources. The problem with both
CFL and LED is they ain't - they have troughs and spikes. Which is what
makes them unpleasant to many, IMHO.

--
*It's not hard to meet expenses... they're everywhere.

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

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
:

From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to
do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective
in making short-term changes; they are much less effective in
effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.

if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com