Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #641   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

The point is that in some cities, mass transportation isn't foisted on
people. They choose to use it because the physical realities of
trying to drive into those cities make it insane to consider using a
car on a daily basis. People who use the word "foisted" must be
possessed by some sort of childish cowboy independence mentality. If
the light rail idea had become a reality here in my county, nobody
would've been forced to use it.

Yeah, but you (and millions of others) are forced to PAY for it.

Fares never come close to the operating budget.




We're forced to pay for all sorts of crap. I wouldn't mind paying for a
light rail system.



Then you'd be even more of a fool than you routinely demonstrate yourself
to be. Light rail doesn't work as mass transit No capacity, no speed.

Heavy rail works.

Busses work very very well.

Light rail is a farce.



Do you suppose light rail can do better than 30 mph on a good day?


  #642   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
...


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

MERCIFUL SNIPPAGE



Based on everything I've read, much of the unrest in Saudi Arabia, for
instance, is *already* due to the gross inequities between the royals
and everyone else. This is why the royal family continues to support
schools whose teachers instruct students that WE are the reason for
their miserable lives.

We should've fulfilled their fantasies and put THEIR country under new
management, instead of Iraq. But, that would've required balls.

Wha's this "we" ****, Kimosabe?

You are wearing what uniform and on active duty with which branch
of the US armed forces.

Yeah, thats what I thought.



You're the queen of useless posts today, aren't you? Is this the best
you can do, obsessing about words like "we", instead of the substance of
the message?



Message?


Substance?


You?

Now that at least is funny and mildly entertainng.




Thank you for proving my point. You are afraid of dealing with substance.
Why is that? What conflict frowned upon in your family? Were you taught to
keep quiet to avoid being slapped around by one of your "fathers"?


Pathetic. Worse than a middle school bully.

Unable to actually have a real discussion, Joe resorts to ranking on
families.

Looser.

  #643   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
. ..

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


"HeyBub" wrote in message
...


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


The point is that in some cities, mass transportation isn't foisted on
people. They choose to use it because the physical realities of
trying to drive into those cities make it insane to consider using a
car on a daily basis. People who use the word "foisted" must be
possessed by some sort of childish cowboy independence mentality. If
the light rail idea had become a reality here in my county, nobody
would've been forced to use it.

Yeah, but you (and millions of others) are forced to PAY for it.

Fares never come close to the operating budget.




We're forced to pay for all sorts of crap. I wouldn't mind paying for a
light rail system.



Then you'd be even more of a fool than you routinely demonstrate yourself
to be. Light rail doesn't work as mass transit No capacity, no speed.

Heavy rail works.

Busses work very very well.

Light rail is a farce.




Do you suppose light rail can do better than 30 mph on a good day?


No, it ca't. The one ride everyweekday (Portland Tri Met Yellow Line)
averages a whopping 17 MPH. Per Tri Met.
  #644   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 636
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

jJim McLaughlin wrote:

Of course ifyou want to seea really safe and well run
nuclear power pogram, look at the US Nay.


"Pogram?"

"US Nay?"


  #645   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

HeyBub wrote:
jJim McLaughlin wrote:

Of course ifyou want to seea really safe and well run
nuclear power pogram, look at the US Nay.


"Pogram?"

"US Nay?"


Maybe it's shorthand for the persecution of American nuclear nay-sayers?

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com




  #647   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
news
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
...


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

MERCIFUL SNIPPAGE



Based on everything I've read, much of the unrest in Saudi Arabia, for
instance, is *already* due to the gross inequities between the royals
and everyone else. This is why the royal family continues to support
schools whose teachers instruct students that WE are the reason for
their miserable lives.

We should've fulfilled their fantasies and put THEIR country under new
management, instead of Iraq. But, that would've required balls.

Wha's this "we" ****, Kimosabe?

You are wearing what uniform and on active duty with which branch
of the US armed forces.

Yeah, thats what I thought.



You're the queen of useless posts today, aren't you? Is this the best
you can do, obsessing about words like "we", instead of the substance of
the message?


Message?


Substance?


You?

Now that at least is funny and mildly entertainng.




Thank you for proving my point. You are afraid of dealing with substance.
Why is that? What conflict frowned upon in your family? Were you taught
to keep quiet to avoid being slapped around by one of your "fathers"?

Pathetic. Worse than a middle school bully.

Unable to actually have a real discussion, Joe resorts to ranking on
families.

Looser.



Looser than what?

You asked to be insulted, so I granted your wish. Have you forgotten what
you wrote earlier today?


  #648   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
z z is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 707
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Dec 29, 12:53*pm, (Don Klipstein) wrote:
In ,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than the
indoor bulbs?
Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper


* Where? *Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of NYC,
Chicago or Philadelphia.


Oops, I meant "electric heat is more expensive". D'oh!!!@
  #649   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,431
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

In article , JoeSpareBedroom wrote in
part:
"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I (Don) EDIT FOR SPACE HERE
We're forced to pay for all sorts of crap. I wouldn't mind paying for a
light rail system.


Then you'd be even more of a fool than you routinely demonstrate yourself
to be. Light rail doesn't work as mass transit No capacity, no speed.

Heavy rail works.

Busses work very very well.

Light rail is a farce.


Do you suppose light rail can do better than 30 mph on a good day?


The Route 100 trolley line through Delaware County to Norristown (in
Montgomery Co.), suburbs of Philadelphia, achieves 60 MPH in the fastest
stretch and 35-50 in a lot of other portions of the route. I have seen
some of these go a bit faster in the fastest stretch.
One of the morning rush hour express ones leaves 69th St terminal at
8:15 AM and arrives at the Norristown end of the line at 8:38 according to
the schedule. In that 23 minutes, it travels a distance that I estimate
on a map to be about 11.5 miles. That works out to 30 MPH average speed
from one end of the line to the other, which I consider very high for a
trolley. This line has trolleys running mainly (possibly entirely) on
dedicated right-of-way.

However, I have seen cost estimates of a proposed light rail line
northwestward along the Schuylkill River, where the Reading Railroad used
to run trains. Construction estimate was a gigabuck or two IIRC, despite
running where track already exists for the line that the Reading Railroad
used to run trains between Philadelphia and Reading. With projected
ridership of only a few thousand passengers daily, that price easily makes
this appear to be a bad deal, and it has yet to get off the ground. I
have even not heard anything about this in the past couple or few years.

- Don Klipstein )
  #650   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,103
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

(Don Klipstein) wrote in
:

In article , JoeSpareBedroom wrote in
part:
"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
m...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I (Don) EDIT FOR SPACE HERE
We're forced to pay for all sorts of crap. I wouldn't mind paying
for a light rail system.

Then you'd be even more of a fool than you routinely demonstrate
yourself to be. Light rail doesn't work as mass transit No
capacity, no speed.

Heavy rail works.

Busses work very very well.

Light rail is a farce.


Do you suppose light rail can do better than 30 mph on a good day?


The Route 100 trolley line through Delaware County to Norristown (in
Montgomery Co.), suburbs of Philadelphia, achieves 60 MPH in the
fastest stretch and 35-50 in a lot of other portions of the route. I
have seen some of these go a bit faster in the fastest stretch.
One of the morning rush hour express ones leaves 69th St terminal at
8:15 AM and arrives at the Norristown end of the line at 8:38
according to the schedule. In that 23 minutes, it travels a distance
that I estimate on a map to be about 11.5 miles. That works out to 30
MPH average speed from one end of the line to the other, which I
consider very high for a trolley. This line has trolleys running
mainly (possibly entirely) on dedicated right-of-way.

However, I have seen cost estimates of a proposed light rail line
northwestward along the Schuylkill River, where the Reading Railroad
used to run trains. Construction estimate was a gigabuck or two IIRC,
despite running where track already exists for the line that the
Reading Railroad used to run trains between Philadelphia and Reading.
With projected ridership of only a few thousand passengers daily, that
price easily makes this appear to be a bad deal, and it has yet to get
off the ground. I have even not heard anything about this in the past
couple or few years.

- Don Klipstein )


wouldn't a faster train make fewer stops,with more distance between them?
And the slower light rail make more stops,closer together,meaning less
walking to get to your destination.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net


  #651   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 12:56:01 -0800, jJim McLaughlin wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:


On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:36:58 -0600, Jim Redelfs wrote:

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:



I have a theory which says that if bus occupancy increased that much, it
might be possible to buy more busses. I'm not sure, though.



I'll bet you're not.



Ridership has NOTHING to do (anymore) with buying new busses. Additional
fleecing of the non-riding taxpayer has EVERYTHING to do with it.



I was wondering when the psychotic trolls would chime in.



What part of Redfels post has anything to do with "...psychotic trolls..."?


Where I live, Portland, Oregon, the local mass transit agency, Tri-Met
makes no bones about the failure of the farebox to actually pay for
the service. Tri Met reports that less than 20% of costs are paid by he
farebox.


Add up road costs, add up emergency service (police, fire, medical),
subtract the little taxed onto gas, and you find that public transportation
is a bargain.

Unless, of course, you're a hermit.
  #652   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein wrote:
In ,
z wrote in part:


Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than the
indoor bulbs?


Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper


Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of NYC,
Chicago or Philadelphia.


electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere. The price of fuel oil would have to
quadruple to equal the cost of electric heat and if fossil fuels became so
expensive, electricity would also become more expensive.
  #653   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 13:33:36 -0800, jJim McLaughlin wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
. ..

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


"HeyBub" wrote in message
...


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


The point is that in some cities, mass transportation isn't foisted on
people. They choose to use it because the physical realities of
trying to drive into those cities make it insane to consider using a
car on a daily basis. People who use the word "foisted" must be
possessed by some sort of childish cowboy independence mentality. If
the light rail idea had become a reality here in my county, nobody
would've been forced to use it.

Yeah, but you (and millions of others) are forced to PAY for it.

Fares never come close to the operating budget.




We're forced to pay for all sorts of crap. I wouldn't mind paying for a
light rail system.


Then you'd be even more of a fool than you routinely demonstrate yourself
to be. Light rail doesn't work as mass transit No capacity, no speed.

Heavy rail works.

Busses work very very well.

Light rail is a farce.




Do you suppose light rail can do better than 30 mph on a good day?


No, it ca't. The one ride everyweekday (Portland Tri Met Yellow Line)
averages a whopping 17 MPH. Per Tri Met.


That compares very favorible with the 3mph traffic at rush hour.
  #654   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 13:33:36 -0800, jJim McLaughlin
wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
. ..

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


"HeyBub" wrote in message
...


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


The point is that in some cities, mass transportation isn't foisted
on
people. They choose to use it because the physical realities of
trying to drive into those cities make it insane to consider using a
car on a daily basis. People who use the word "foisted" must be
possessed by some sort of childish cowboy independence mentality. If
the light rail idea had become a reality here in my county, nobody
would've been forced to use it.

Yeah, but you (and millions of others) are forced to PAY for it.

Fares never come close to the operating budget.




We're forced to pay for all sorts of crap. I wouldn't mind paying for a
light rail system.


Then you'd be even more of a fool than you routinely demonstrate
yourself
to be. Light rail doesn't work as mass transit No capacity, no speed.

Heavy rail works.

Busses work very very well.

Light rail is a farce.



Do you suppose light rail can do better than 30 mph on a good day?


No, it ca't. The one ride everyweekday (Portland Tri Met Yellow Line)
averages a whopping 17 MPH. Per Tri Met.


That compares very favorible with the 3mph traffic at rush hour.



Give the man a free case of beer......


  #655   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:


Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than the
indoor bulbs?


Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper


Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of NYC,
Chicago or Philadelphia.


electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.


Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is .0185
per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is 2400 Sq Ft and
is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per month. Of course our
Public Utility District owns its two hydro dams, and sells the surplus
electricity on the open market at market prices.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com




  #656   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
No Name
 
Posts: n/a
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps



Add up road costs, add up emergency service (police, fire, medical),
subtract the little taxed onto gas, and you find that public transportation
is a bargain.

Unless, of course, you're a hermit.


Several years ago, a Minneapolis suburb
funded a public transport ( bus ) system.

After a few years of running DEEP in the red,
some wise man calculated it would be cheaper
to send a ( free ) taxi to each riders home.

In most citys, you'll see empty bus's
plying back and forth,
tying up traffic,
burning up diesel,
and creating another layer of overpriced govt. employees.


rj
  #658   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Dec 23, 4:28 am, Jim Redelfs wrote:
The Nanny Geniuses in D.C. just passed legislation that, in addition to
putting some serious "hurt" on our domestic car and light truck industry,
kills off those outmoded, wasteful and environmentally DEVASTATING electric
lamps we've all come to know and love.

Say "goodbye" to the venerable 100w and 75w, cheap, light bulb. (Thomas Alva
Edison will surely turn over in his grave).

Stock-up and horde 'em now, folks. They'll be worth a LOT in 10-15 years on
the black market.

I just switched all my exterior entryways and garage "eyebrow" fixtures to CF
lamps. I am considering switching BACK the one beside the front door.

I rarely use exterior lighting. Mostly, I switch-on the front porch light
when there is someone at the door - a rare occurrence.

On those occasions, I want IMMEDIATE light.

However, right now, it is 12F outside and that curly, compact fluorescent lamp
outside, by the front door, doesn't provide usable light worth a damn for a
minute or two.

With no apologies to anyone, I believe that switching to CF lamps won't, over
the LONG "haul", provide a bit of "relief" to our ever-increasing energy
consumption. Although that implies that our ever-increasing energy
consumption needs relief, I am adamantly UNconvinced of that in any case.

The Energy Bill provided for NO new energy.

All the windmills, solar panels, methane plants and CF bulbs in the world
cannot, and never will, provide for our energy needs. Conservation alone is
NOT the answer, even IF there were a problem. We have adequate stores of
fossil fuels to keep our grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren cool or
warm and productive. Whether we can overcome all the hand-wringing, crybaby,
do-gooders that think they're saving something by declaring wide swaths of our
land "off limits" to fossil fuel harvesting is another matter.

We learned how to do it cleanly, neatly and with minimal environmental impact
YEARS ago. But that's not good enough now. We simply CAN'T do it because of
some PERCEIVED, detrimental environmental impact. That's B.S.

How about slashing the "red tape" and getting a few, new nuclear power
generating stations on-line within ten years?

We should drill for oil and gas in ANWR (Alaska National Wildlife Refuge)?

Why do you think Seward talked Congress into buying Alaska?

Do you think he would have ever believed that there'd come a day when vast
miles of it would be virtually off-limits to any resource harvesting?

Despite incessant impediments from environmentalists, the Tans-Alaska Pipeline
was finally built. But, Shazam! The devastation to the environment and
wildlife it was predicted to cause never happened. They were WRONG. They're
wrong now.

CF bulbs and set-back thermostats are NOT the final solution, even if there
was a problem. Heck, such measures aren't even a viable stop-gap.

We need more energy. Let's go get it. -Jim Redelfs


Not a related comment as much as just another reason why I HATE CFL.
Anyone else notice that digital camera's auto white balance feature is
usually thrown off kilter by those lights?

I have a ceiling fan with 4 CFL in it, and the camera still think it
looks like incandescent, but the wavelength is still a bit off in the
color spectrum range.

Just bitching.
  #659   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,431
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

In ,
wrote:
On Dec 23, 4:28 am, Jim Redelfs wrote:
The Nanny Geniuses in D.C. just passed legislation that,

EDIT FOR SPACE
We need more energy. Let's go get it. -Jim Redelfs


Not a related comment as much as just another reason why I HATE CFL.
Anyone else notice that digital camera's auto white balance feature is
usually thrown off kilter by those lights?

I have a ceiling fan with 4 CFL in it, and the camera still think it
looks like incandescent, but the wavelength is still a bit off in the
color spectrum range.

Just bitching.


I have had two Canon Powershot series ones (A70 and A640) handle compact
fluorescents (usual ones 2700K with CRI of 82) pretty much as well as
incandescents for indoor work without flash. The main difference I found
was that skin tones come up more pinkish with the compact fluorescents.

The usual solution is to use the flash. If you have to take a still
picture without flash, you can use a photo editor to adjust hue (adjust
yellow a bit towards green) and saturation (a slight decrease) to mostly
fix skin tones at least halfway without messing other stuff up much.
(With non-triphosphor fluorescent, the adjustments would be largely
opposite - mainly adjust hue to make yellow towards red, except that may
screw up some greens, and red objects can come out dark).

If I have to shoot color-critical video or especially color-critical
photos without flash, then I don't consider it a big deal to use
incandescents.

- Don Klipstein )
  #660   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:03:18 -0700, RJ wrote:


Add up road costs, add up emergency service (police, fire, medical),
subtract the little taxed onto gas, and you find that public transportation
is a bargain.

Unless, of course, you're a hermit.


Several years ago, a Minneapolis suburb
funded a public transport ( bus ) system.


After a few years of running DEEP in the red,
some wise man calculated it would be cheaper
to send a ( free ) taxi to each riders home.


I bet his math was ****.

Did he make the fatal assumption that roads and emergency services
cost nothing?


  #661   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:


Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than the
indoor bulbs?


Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper


Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of NYC,
Chicago or Philadelphia.


electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.


Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is .0185
per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is 2400 Sq Ft and
is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per month. Of course our
Public Utility District owns its two hydro dams, and sells the surplus
electricity on the open market at market prices.


0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?

  #662   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,431
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

, AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than the
indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of NYC,
Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.


Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is .0185
per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is 2400 Sq Ft and
is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per month. Of course our
Public Utility District owns its two hydro dams, and sells the surplus
electricity on the open market at market prices.


0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?


This does sound to me like .0185 dollars per KWH, 1.85 cents per KWH,
which is less than 1/5, probably more like 1/6 of the USA national average
per-KWH-portion (as opposed to fees not related to quantity used) of
residential electricity cost.

Accordingly, incandescent lighting costs a lot less in Douglas County WA
than in most of elsewhere in the USA.

- Don Klipstein )
  #665   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than
the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of
NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.


Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is
.0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is
2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per
month. Of course our Public Utility District owns its two hydro
dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the open market at market
prices.


0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?


How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point indicate
something?

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com




  #667   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

"Dave Bugg" wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than
the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of
NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.


Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is
.0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is
2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per
month. Of course our Public Utility District owns its two hydro
dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the open market at market
prices.


0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?


How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point indicate
something?


How would you rationalize anything other than dollars
from 0.0185/KWH???

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #668   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than
the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of
NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.

Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is
.0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is
2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per
month. Of course our Public Utility District owns its two hydro
dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the open market at
market prices.

0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?


How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point
indicate something?


How would you rationalize anything other than dollars
from 0.0185/KWH???


I don't need to rationalize simple math. If you have a problem understanding
the meaning of a decimal, feel free to ask a 5th grader.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


  #669   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

"Dave Bugg" wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than
the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of
NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.

Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is
.0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is
2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per
month. Of course our Public Utility District owns its two hydro
dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the open market at
market prices.

0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?

How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point
indicate something?


How would you rationalize anything other than dollars
from 0.0185/KWH???


I don't need to rationalize simple math. If you have a problem understanding
the meaning of a decimal, feel free to ask a 5th grader.


You do realize that 0.0185 *dollars* is exactly what he
was talking about, and that $0.0185 is equal to 1.85 cents.

Or don't you grok decimals at all?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #670   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,431
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps than
the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas of
NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.

Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate is
.0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My home is
2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is $52.00 per
month. Of course our Public Utility District owns its two hydro
dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the open market at market
prices.

0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?


How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point indicate
something?


How would you rationalize anything other than dollars
from 0.0185/KWH???


I surely rationalize dollars per KWH - as in .0185 dollars per KWH,
which is 1.85 cents per KWH, which is something like 1/6 the average of
USA residental cost for the portion of USA excluding Douglas County WA.

If this is true, that is, which I consider fairly likely for an area
with a hydropower plant with excess capacity and ability to sell its
surplus to "The Grid" at "market rate".

A large majority of the USA outside this county has more need for
compact fluorescents than this county has. In a county with 1.85 cent per
KWH electricity, outside season for air conditioning (which most counties
of WA have low need for), compact fluorescents have main sales opportunity
being long life and a good track record of good life expectancy, to extent
that per-bulb cost exceeds that of incandescents only by a ratio less than
the ratio of life expectancy among those two types.

For that matter, in a super-low-electricity-cost county, the lowest-cost
incandescents are ones of moderately longer life, especially the 1500 hour
ones available at Home Depot, the 130V version of "standard" ones at
Lowes (watts reduced 11%, light output down 23-23%, life multiplied by
roughly 2.5 - to about 1900 hours) and the "/99" ones rated to last 2500
hours with light output reduced 13-15% (check out the Philips lamp catalog
and bulbs.com).
Compact fluorescents can have quite a tough sell in such a county, and
merely a mildly difficult sell for ones with good and well-published and
well-peer-reviewed data indicating life expectancy of at least
6,000-10,000 hours - along with warning buyers of the applications where
they run into shorter life (short runtime per start, heat-hellhole
downlights, whatever) - and those selling them should say where they do
better and where they are more likely to run into whatever specific ones
of the common few pitfalls!

- Don Klipstein )


  #671   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps
than the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas
of NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.

Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate
is .0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My
home is 2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is
$52.00 per month. Of course our Public Utility District owns
its two hydro dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the
open market at market prices.

0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?

How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point
indicate something?

How would you rationalize anything other than dollars
from 0.0185/KWH???


I don't need to rationalize simple math. If you have a problem
understanding the meaning of a decimal, feel free to ask a 5th
grader.


You do realize that 0.0185 *dollars* is exactly what he
was talking about, and that $0.0185 is equal to 1.85 cents.


Oh, semantics to try and backstep, eh? If you had meant a fraction of a
dollar, you should have said ...'0.0185 of a dollar'. By using the word
'Dollars' indicating a plurality, you were mistakenly thinking dollars,
instead of cents.

Or don't you grok decimals at all?


I grok just fine. But you seem to be groping.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


  #672   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

Don Klipstein wrote:

A large majority of the USA outside this county has more need for
compact fluorescents than this county has. In a county with 1.85
cent per KWH electricity, outside season for air conditioning (which
most counties of WA have low need for),


You're right, Don. Counties west of the Cascade mountains have a much milder
climate. And most folks don't know that east of the Cascades, which is the
largest geographical area of Washington State and doesn't receive anywhere
near the rainfall of the west side, is hot in the summer and cold in the
winter.

compact fluorescents have
main sales opportunity being long life and a good track record of
good life expectancy, to extent that per-bulb cost exceeds that of
incandescents only by a ratio less than the ratio of life expectancy
among those two types.


It's interesting that even with our low electrical costs, which are shared
by a number of our neighboring counties who also own their own dams, there
is still a big push for CFs as energy savers. And a lot of folks here still
want to purchase them with the intent to save money on energy costs, as well
as the longer life span of the bulb itself. The Public Utility Districts
also provide energy audits and zero interest loans for insulation upgrades
and other weatherization needs for homes.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


  #673   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

"Dave Bugg" wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 01:51:23 -0800, Dave Bugg
wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC), Don Klipstein
wrote:
In
,
z wrote in part:

Maybe the outdoor bulbs are designed to fire at lower temps
than the indoor bulbs?

Anyway, yeah, electric heat is cheaper

Where? Not USA national average, nor the metropolitan areas
of NYC, Chicago or Philadelphia.

electric heat isn't cheaper anywhere.

Really? Here in Douglas County, WA our residential electric rate
is .0185 per KW hour. We have cold winters and hot summers. My
home is 2400 Sq Ft and is total electric. My average bill is
$52.00 per month. Of course our Public Utility District owns
its two hydro dams, and sells the surplus electricity on the
open market at market prices.

0.0185 what per KWH? cents? dollars?

How do you get dollars from 0.0185 ? Doesn't the decimal point
indicate something?

How would you rationalize anything other than dollars
from 0.0185/KWH???

I don't need to rationalize simple math. If you have a problem
understanding the meaning of a decimal, feel free to ask a 5th
grader.


You do realize that 0.0185 *dollars* is exactly what he
was talking about, and that $0.0185 is equal to 1.85 cents.


Oh, semantics to try and backstep, eh? If you had meant a fraction of a
dollar, you should have said ...'0.0185 of a dollar'. By using the word
'Dollars' indicating a plurality, you were mistakenly thinking dollars,
instead of cents.

Or don't you grok decimals at all?


I grok just fine. But you seem to be groping.


Your grope is getting to be nothing but the whine of the
confused.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #674   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 505
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

Your grope is getting to be nothing but the whine of the
confused.


And your confusion seems to be from gropping too many wine bottles. Be
careful, that much wine will make your backpeddling dangerous. Thanks for
playing, though.

--
Dave


  #675   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

On Dec 23 2007, 3:33�pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 09:31:54 -0500, Frank

frankdotlogullo@comcastperiodnet wrote:
an_Musicant wrote:

: Fact is you can find CF's that don't take a minute to get usable light.
: Some are nearly instant on. The only filament lamps I use at all are
: maybe a couple I haven't bothered to change that I leave on for 5-10
: minutes at a time only.
:
: I find it grating to read posts which make fun of federal lawmakers. I
: wouldn't want to spend more than 10 minutes of every year sitting in the
: halls of congress. I know it's a madhouse, but walk a mile in their
: shoes before you paint them all with the same brush.
:
: Believe it or not, letting people do what they damn well please doesn't
: work in this country.
:
:You must be in the 15% that thinks congress is doing a good job.
:Let the market decide. �

Did I say they are doing a good job? See, that's what psychologists call
"projection." If I thought they were doing a good job I wouldn't have
said I wouldn't want to spend more than 10 minutes a year in their
company. Sheesh.

:I use CFL's not to save the planet but because
:in the long run, I save money.

I get it, like a lot of people you believe in being selfish, and worse,
you ridicule people who do things for reasons other than selfish
reasons.


I think what he was saying was that people operate in their own best
interest because they know what is in their own best interest.
Unfortunately, government is no better a predictor of what is in my
best interest than me, so while I may make a number of decisoins that
work to my detriment, by and large I will make decisions that overall
work best for me.

More unfortunate is the unreliability of information that comes from
government, because once a person has achieved power, he/she will
often do things to maintain that power. Because, by and large, he/she
will do what is in his or her own best interest, and maintaining power
falls in that category. That includes lying about a variety of things
in order to have a compliant public. That lying includes lying about
motive, perhaps even to oneself. You must separate the wheat from the
chaffe in politics, electing people who are not yet in the power grab
mode, or you have to remove the motive to maintain power, which was
the reasoning behind the inclusion of term limits in our system.

It is very easy right now for people to believe that about George
Bush, but these same people won't take a look at those on the other
side of the aisle. The old saying, though, is "Follow the money". I
look at people who have made a fortune on the global warming-as-man-
made concept, who try to maintain control of that concept by saying
that "debate is over" when it clearly is not, I see people threatening
the careers of those who dispute the idea of human causality of global
warming. Then I look at the careers and lifestyles of people in this
camp and I wonder how the two can square with one another. For
example, how much money has Al Gore made on the global warming issue?
How does he live his own life with regard to things like energy
consumption?

Given the unreliability of such prognosticators, I don't rely on their
data. I do, however, rely on the data supplied to me in the form of
an electric bill every month. I have also purchased spiral
flourescent bulbs, and I have done so based upon my own interest. You
may call it selfish, but I have a family which relies upon me for
efficient control of income versus expenditures, so I try to maximize
the value of my money for them as much as or moreso than for me. I am
sure that (Frank, I think ?) probably has a similar thought process.
This is the kind of control of which people are capable, as the closer
information is to you, the more reliable it tends to be, which is
also one of the reasons we have the economic system we do. Another
reason, of course, is the understanding that people will tend to act
in a manner which is best suited for them and those for whom they are
responsible. In other words, the information and the actions are
localized.

A ready example of information being localized here is your assumption
that Frank believes in being selfish. You don't know fully his
motivation for his decision to purchase things which save him money.
Only he knows that, and therefore only he is generally in the best
position to determine what is best for him, based upon is own values,
his personal financial situation, his family situation, etc. As a
wise man once said, walk a mile in his moccasins.

What is of greatest concern to me here is that idea that someone's
reason is more important than his action. We have an economic system
in the U.S.A. set up to tap into individuals' self interests. This is
specifically because any system devised to have a centralized
authority looking out for our interests is necessarily going to
involve people with power and the self interest to hold onto that
power. We further have as part of our political system intentionally
decentralized authority in the form of multiple branches, and
amendments to our Constitution preventing them from being the sole
arbiters and disseminators of information, primarily because
information from those attempting to maintain power can be unreliable
based on their motivations.

Were global warming shown verifiably to be minimal and wholly
unrelated to human activity, would this be good news? If so, do you
think such news would be received happily by those who currently make
a living decrying it? Do you think, for example, that Al Gore would
readily accept that? As a parallel situation, consider the likes of
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton: Do you believe that they truly act on
behalf of black people, or do you believe, based upoon their careers
and lifestyles, that they are acting in their own interests at this
point (regardless of the motivations you may believe they had at the
start)? Do you believe that, if they got everything they demand,
including an end to all racism, they would simply close up shop? Or
are their careers too closely tied to the perception that racism
exists everywhere, and that they might attempt to foment dissent when
none is necessary? They have a product to sell, just as global
warming decriers have a product to sell (and perhaps both have an
agenda to advance). Just as the makers of spiral lightbulbs have a
product to sell. None of them care why you buy the product, only that
you do, and the greater your purchase, the better it is for them.

The difference is that, as more people enter the market for spiral
lightbulbs, the market widens, and economies of scale dictate that the
price will go down. The price has continued to rise with the other
two, because they are nebulous products.


  #676   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,016
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

In article
,
" wrote:


I think what he was saying was that people operate in their own best
interest because they know what is in their own best interest.
Unfortunately, government is no better a predictor of what is in my
best interest than me, so while I may make a number of decisoins that
work to my detriment, by and large I will make decisions that overall
work best for me.


Probably a much worse predictor of what is best for me than I am
because of the self-interest stuff you discuss later on.


More unfortunate is the unreliability of information that comes from
government, because once a person has achieved power, he/she will
often do things to maintain that power. Because, by and large, he/she
will do what is in his or her own best interest, and maintaining power
falls in that category. That includes lying about a variety of things
in order to have a compliant public. That lying includes lying about
motive, perhaps even to oneself. You must separate the wheat from the
chaffe in politics, electing people who are not yet in the power grab
mode, or you have to remove the motive to maintain power, which was
the reasoning behind the inclusion of term limits in our system.

Nicely put, although everywhere you put politics, I would add "and the
bureaucracy". The same power and self interest things get plugged in
here. Probably more so, since most legislation really sketches things
out in general terms and leaves it to the bureaucrats to write the rules
and regs that actually implement the law.


It is very easy right now for people to believe that about George
Bush, but these same people won't take a look at those on the other
side of the aisle. The old saying, though, is "Follow the money". I
look at people who have made a fortune on the global warming-as-man-
made concept, who try to maintain control of that concept by saying
that "debate is over" when it clearly is not, I see people threatening
the careers of those who dispute the idea of human causality of global
warming. Then I look at the careers and lifestyles of people in this
camp and I wonder how the two can square with one another. For
example, how much money has Al Gore made on the global warming issue?
How does he live his own life with regard to things like energy
consumption?


A prof from Wisconsin who is not at all a supporter of man made
global warming on CNBC a couple of weeks ago. One of the things that
came up was that those pro-GW tend to write off most anti_GW results off
because they are paid for by oil companies. His first comment was a
general indication that this was BS and not all were. Then he said
something telling: "Besides when was the last time you heard of anyone
who is anti-GW getting any federal grants?" The implication being that
governments has its own problems with bias. Because something comes from
a governmental or other non-industry group is no guarantee of lack of
bias."
  #677   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,431
Default Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

In , Kurt
Ullman wrote:
In article
,
" wrote:

I think what he was saying was that people operate in their own best
interest because they know what is in their own best interest.
Unfortunately, government is no better a predictor of what is in my
best interest than me, so while I may make a number of decisoins that
work to my detriment, by and large I will make decisions that overall
work best for me.


Probably a much worse predictor of what is best for me than I am
because of the self-interest stuff you discuss later on.

More unfortunate is the unreliability of information that comes from
government, because once a person has achieved power, he/she will
often do things to maintain that power. Because, by and large, he/she
will do what is in his or her own best interest, and maintaining power
falls in that category. That includes lying about a variety of things
in order to have a compliant public. That lying includes lying about
motive, perhaps even to oneself. You must separate the wheat from the
chaffe in politics, electing people who are not yet in the power grab
mode, or you have to remove the motive to maintain power, which was
the reasoning behind the inclusion of term limits in our system.

Nicely put, although everywhere you put politics, I would add "and the
bureaucracy". The same power and self interest things get plugged in
here. Probably more so, since most legislation really sketches things
out in general terms and leaves it to the bureaucrats to write the rules
and regs that actually implement the law.

It is very easy right now for people to believe that about George
Bush, but these same people won't take a look at those on the other
side of the aisle. The old saying, though, is "Follow the money". I
look at people who have made a fortune on the global warming-as-man-
made concept, who try to maintain control of that concept by saying
that "debate is over" when it clearly is not, I see people threatening
the careers of those who dispute the idea of human causality of global
warming. Then I look at the careers and lifestyles of people in this
camp and I wonder how the two can square with one another. For
example, how much money has Al Gore made on the global warming issue?
How does he live his own life with regard to things like energy
consumption?


A prof from Wisconsin who is not at all a supporter of man made
global warming on CNBC a couple of weeks ago. One of the things that
came up was that those pro-GW tend to write off most anti_GW results off
because they are paid for by oil companies. His first comment was a
general indication that this was BS and not all were. Then he said
something telling: "Besides when was the last time you heard of anyone
who is anti-GW getting any federal grants?" The implication being that
governments has its own problems with bias. Because something comes from
a governmental or other non-industry group is no guarantee of lack of
bias."


So how much is being spent by governments on global warming studies,

how much of that is spent to pay those who only keep their jobs if they
produce study results indicating need to remediate man-made global warming,
(I expect a small number due to profit motive to either "defect to the
other side" or "fame motive" [that can lead to profit] to produce studies
and/or papers that show that "The Conventional Wisdom" is wrong. As an
example - Einstein doing some significant boat-rocking of Newtonian
physics!)?

And how much on similar studies (that indicate lack of existence of
man-made global warming that requires remediation) and "counterstudies" is
being spent by industries (and front organizations thereof) that stand to
lose from need (or knowlege thereof) to counteract man-made global
warming?

And why is some of the "counterdata" being misrepresentation of
anthropogenic rate of carbon addition to the atmosphere into a low-by-73%
claim of anthropogenic rate of CO2 to the atmosphere?

(Hint: 44 grams of CO2 has 12 grams of carbon. Next hint: when need
to do web searching, consider gigatons, which are the same as pecagrams,
and for accounting of "anthropogenic input to carbon cycle" (my words,
which I expect low search engine hit usefulness from) gigatons and
pecagrams are the same, and so far in my experience is that one
web-searchable unit of anthropogenic rate of transfer of carbon from the
lithosphere to the atmosphere is "PcG C per year", maybe also PcGC,
give-or-take upper/lower case. Please keep in mind that a pecagram or
gigaton of carbon entering the atmosphere does so mainly [or closer to
entirely] as 3.67 of same units of CO2.)

- Don Klipstein )

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Banning incandescent lamps? Richard J Kinch Metalworking 106 January 11th 08 07:57 AM
Incandescent lamp resistance (from sed} - incandescent.pdf John Fields Electronic Schematics 2 May 23rd 07 06:32 PM
O.T. Making clear lamps into amber lamps NokNokMan Metalworking 14 October 12th 05 06:46 PM
Spotlight bulbs: R63 100W? Bert Coules UK diy 0 May 17th 05 02:54 PM
100w spotlights in multiple-light fitting - desperately sought Spamfree! UK diy 10 January 18th 05 12:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"