|
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
metspitzer wrote:
WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs ... The bill did _not_ "ban" incandescent bulbs, it set minimum efficiency standards. I'm not taking a position, but if it isn't constitutional, neither are CAFE standards for automobiles or most any other regulations regarding performance levels of any product (say drug effectiveness, for another example). -- |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
dpb wrote in message ... metspitzer wrote: WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs ... The bill did _not_ "ban" incandescent bulbs, it set minimum efficiency standards. I'm not taking a position, but if it isn't constitutional, neither are CAFE standards for automobiles or most any other regulations regarding performance levels of any product (say drug effectiveness, for another example). They would do better to set some minimum standards efficiency for themselves, and then follow the standards. Cheri |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
metspitzer wrote: WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic – the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 Both the ban and the reasons cited here for questioning the ban are the silly result of politicians with poor understanding of the issues involved. The amount of mercury in a CFL is tiny, burning coal to generate electricity also releases mercury, few light bulbs of any sort are US made, and for some applications, incandescent still has advantages. I was searching for a light fixture the other day and discovered that *every* flush mount at both hardware stores I tried are now fluorescent. Naturally they're all super cheaply made, and the ballasts do not support dimming. I was irked and left the store without purchasing anything. The ironic thing is that I've long been using almost entirely compact fluorescents in my house for years and enjoying the substantial energy savings, however I use the screw-in retrofit type which is readily available in a dimming version, various wattages and color temperatures, and the ballast, which in my experience fails as often as the tube, is replaced each time with the tube. I don't need legislation to get me to use more efficient products, it makes economic sense to do so, but if someone wants to pay a fortune to run something inefficient, let them. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
James Sweet wrote:
.... Both the ban ,,, Again, there is _not_ a "ban"... -- |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:08:48 -0500, metspitzer
wrote: WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic – the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 First of all, Congress did not "ban" incandescent lamps -- they simply set minimum efficiency standards, as they have with other consumer products such as air conditioners and refrigerators. Secondly, lighting manufacturers already sell high efficiency incandescent lamps that meet these new standards. You can buy these ones at Home Depot: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...lay.php?mode=1 Cheers, Paul |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:33:54 -0300, Paul M. Eldridge
wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:08:48 -0500, metspitzer wrote: WASHINGTON €“ Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic €“ the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 First of all, Congress did not "ban" incandescent lamps -- they simply set minimum efficiency standards, as they have with other consumer products such as air conditioners and refrigerators. Secondly, lighting manufacturers already sell high efficiency incandescent lamps that meet these new standards. You can buy these ones at Home Depot: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...lay.php?mode=1 Cheers, Paul Of course... 70W IS less than 100W. Read the fine print on lumens output. Sheeeesh! ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
I have been looking for dimmable florescents without luck. Where do
you find them - can you tell me the brand? James Sweet wrote: metspitzer wrote: WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic – the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 Both the ban and the reasons cited here for questioning the ban are the silly result of politicians with poor understanding of the issues involved. The amount of mercury in a CFL is tiny, burning coal to generate electricity also releases mercury, few light bulbs of any sort are US made, and for some applications, incandescent still has advantages. I was searching for a light fixture the other day and discovered that *every* flush mount at both hardware stores I tried are now fluorescent. Naturally they're all super cheaply made, and the ballasts do not support dimming. I was irked and left the store without purchasing anything. The ironic thing is that I've long been using almost entirely compact fluorescents in my house for years and enjoying the substantial energy savings, however I use the screw-in retrofit type which is readily available in a dimming version, various wattages and color temperatures, and the ballast, which in my experience fails as often as the tube, is replaced each time with the tube. I don't need legislation to get me to use more efficient products, it makes economic sense to do so, but if someone wants to pay a fortune to run something inefficient, let them. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts
about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic – the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:47:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:33:54 -0300, Paul M. Eldridge wrote: First of all, Congress did not "ban" incandescent lamps -- they simply set minimum efficiency standards, as they have with other consumer products such as air conditioners and refrigerators. Secondly, lighting manufacturers already sell high efficiency incandescent lamps that meet these new standards. You can buy these ones at Home Depot: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...lay.php?mode=1 Cheers, Paul Of course... 70W IS less than 100W. Read the fine print on lumens output. Sheeeesh! ...Jim Thompson Hi Jim, A 70-watt soft-white Philips Halogená Energy Saver has a 3,000 hour rated service life and produces 1,600 lumens (22.8 lumens per watt). A Philips Duramax soft-white A19 incandescent has a rated service life of 1,500 hours and provides 1,550 lumens (15.5 lumens per watt). Watt for watt, a 70-watt Halogená ES generates 1.5 times more light. Sources: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...pdf/p-5901.pdf http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...pdf/p-8493.pdf Anything else we can clear-up for you? Cheers, Paul |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Jim Thompson wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:33:54 -0300, Paul M. Eldridge wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:08:48 -0500, metspitzer wrote: WASHINGTON €“ Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic €“ the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 First of all, Congress did not "ban" incandescent lamps -- they simply set minimum efficiency standards, as they have with other consumer products such as air conditioners and refrigerators. Secondly, lighting manufacturers already sell high efficiency incandescent lamps that meet these new standards. You can buy these ones at Home Depot: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...lay.php?mode=1 Cheers, Paul Of course... 70W IS less than 100W. Read the fine print on lumens output. Sheeeesh! ...Jim Thompson That came to mind, but I didn't see the lumen output quoted on the page. What is it compared to a standard incandescent? The one incandescent fixture in my house has older Halogena lamps in it, the efficiency of those is exactly the same, but the life is longer, I've never had one burn out. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Jun 20, 1:08*pm, metspitzer wrote:
WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic – the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 CFLs will reduce mercury entered into the environment, the coal burned to generate electricity releases 2-3 times the amount of mercury over the life of the bulb. What isnt made in china, even 30-45% of dental caps etc are made in china. how about poes tv, etc etc Its not a ban, Since when was an incandesant Effecient, do you know only 4-7 watts of a 100w bulb are out put as actual Light you can see, the rest is heat, Thats effecient? Put in 11, 100w bulbs and you have a 1000w heater, and now pay more to run the AC to remove that heat, and release more mercury from Coal plants to run that AC, They should be Taxed to death and CFLs rebated, not banned. Poe is a moron and so are you for not seeing the facts and posting this crap, incandesants should have limited use in todays world |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
metspitzer wrote:
WASHINGTON - Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic - the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe is an idiot. Either the bulbs in question got here through Interstate Commerce or they miracled themselves into existence. If the former, Congress has unfettered authority to regulate them; if the latter, "Let there be light" takes on a new meaning. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:09:23 -0300, Paul M. Eldridge
wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:47:48 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:33:54 -0300, Paul M. Eldridge wrote: First of all, Congress did not "ban" incandescent lamps -- they simply set minimum efficiency standards, as they have with other consumer products such as air conditioners and refrigerators. Secondly, lighting manufacturers already sell high efficiency incandescent lamps that meet these new standards. You can buy these ones at Home Depot: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...lay.php?mode=1 Cheers, Paul Of course... 70W IS less than 100W. Read the fine print on lumens output. Sheeeesh! ...Jim Thompson Hi Jim, A 70-watt soft-white Philips Halogená Energy Saver has a 3,000 hour rated service life and produces 1,600 lumens (22.8 lumens per watt). A Philips Duramax soft-white A19 incandescent has a rated service life of 1,500 hours and provides 1,550 lumens (15.5 lumens per watt). Watt for watt, a 70-watt Halogená ES generates 1.5 times more light. Sources: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...pdf/p-5901.pdf http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...pdf/p-8493.pdf Anything else we can clear-up for you? Cheers, Paul I'll check those out. The ones I've seen on-shelf had less lumens. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Here in Florida, the governor Charlie Crist has crammed Gasahol (10%
Ethanol) onto consumers without any rational discussion or consideration of consumers. Notwithstanding the arguments that ethanol production uses fat more petroleum than it saves. The glaring issue is that the gasahol mix actually reduces fuel efficiency significantly in many if not most vehicles. For example, my vehicle averages 15 MPG with regular unleaded (I will not apologize for not driving a Prius) but now with gasahol it now averages 12.5 MPg. This means that when driving a trip of 150 miles I have to purchase an additional 2 gallons of fuel. So: 1) I was ripped off at the pump paying full price for an adulturated product. 3.96 gallon X 10 gallons X 10% = $3.96 stolen 2) I was ripped off a second time at the pump needing to buy 2 more gallons of same adulturated product. 3.96 X 2 = $7.92 stolen 3) My vehicle still burned 10 gallons of regular gasoline out the tailpipe into the air. Plus it burned an additional 1.2 gallons of ethanol out the tailpipe into the air. So I am ripped off $11.88 for what should have been 1/2 tank full. And the earth is further polluted. Please someone tell me where all this makes any sense? I think this benefits only Archer Daniel Midland and Big Oil. -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." "Follow The Money" ;-P |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Here in Florida, the governor Charlie Crist has crammed Gasohol (10%
Ethanol) onto consumers without any rational discussion or consideration of consumers. Notwithstanding the arguments that ethanol production uses far more petroleum than it saves. The glaring issue is that the gasohol mix actually reduces fuel efficiency significantly in many if not most vehicles. For example, my vehicle averages 15 MPG with regular unleaded (I will not apologize for not driving a Prius) but now with gasohol it now averages 12.5 MPG. This means that when driving a trip of 150 miles I have to purchase an additional 2 gallons of fuel. So: 1) I was ripped off at the pump paying full price for an adulterated product. 3.96 gallon X 10 gallons X 10% = $3.96 stolen 2) I was ripped off a second time at the pump needing to buy 2 more gallons of same adulterated product. 3.96 X 2 = $7.92 stolen 3) My vehicle still burned 10.8 gallons of regular gasoline out the tailpipe into the air. Plus it burned an additional 1.2 gallons of ethanol out the tailpipe into the air. So I am ripped off $11.88 for less than 1/2 tank full. And the earth is further polluted. Please someone tell me where all this makes any sense? I think this benefits only Archer Daniel Midland and Big Oil. -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." "Follow The Money" ;-P |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Jun 20, 2:32*pm, "Joseph Meehan"
wrote: * * This thing sounds a lot more like a troll than a real message. * * Of course I don't limit how stupid Congress can be, I can't see where there is a constitutional issue. *The "facts" provided are weak at best.. Frankly I would question any information coming from the same source. Yes, I was left wondering what kind of an idiot this Congressman is too. He's certainly free to object to the law that Congress passed regarding light bulbs and there is certainly some basis to do so. However, to drag constitutionality into it is silly. Congress has actually banned private ownership of gold and eliminated freon in air conditioning, etc. How can it suddenly be that it's unconstitutional? "metspitzer" wrote in message ... WASHINGTON - Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic - the Constitution doesn't authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks. Poe cited the dangers associated with CFLs, which carry small amounts of mercury that can enter the environment through breakage and disposal. He also objected to reliance on the CFL alternatives when, currently, all are made in China. "Congress passed an energy bill that should be called the anti-American non-energy bill because it punishes Americans for using energy when it should be finding new sources of available energy," Poe stated. (Story continues below) http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67573 -- Joseph Meehan *Dia 's Muire duit- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:30:17 -0400, RFI-EMI-GUY
wrote: [snip] Please someone tell me where all this makes any sense? I think this benefits only Archer Daniel Midland and Big Oil. I think the large numeric dollar-value of "Big Oil" profits confuses the ordinary guy on the street, and politicians use that to their advantage. What is "Big Oil's" ROI? Are they not paying _market_ price for oil? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave | Due to excessive spam, googlegroups, UAR & AIOE are blocked! | |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:23:58 -0700 (PDT), ransley
wrote: Its not a ban, Since when was an incandesant Effecient, do you know only 4-7 watts of a 100w bulb are out put as actual Light you can see, the rest is heat, Thats effecient? Put in 11, 100w bulbs and you have a 1000w heater, and now pay more to run the AC to remove that heat, and release more mercury from Coal plants to run that AC, They should be Taxed to death and CFLs rebated, not banned. Poe is a moron and so are you for not seeing the facts and posting this crap, incandesants should have limited use in todays world Seen any CFL's that'll work outdoors in the winter? I need a few for my yard lights. Got any that'll work on 3V DC? Need some for my flashlights. Will CFL's work in cars? Lots of incandescents there. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant. Speak softly and carry a loaded .45 Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Web Site: www.destarr.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On 6/20/2008 2:30 PM David Starr spake thus:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:23:58 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote: Its not a ban, Since when was an incandesant Effecient, do you know only 4-7 watts of a 100w bulb are out put as actual Light you can see, the rest is heat, Thats effecient? Put in 11, 100w bulbs and you have a 1000w heater, and now pay more to run the AC to remove that heat, and release more mercury from Coal plants to run that AC, They should be Taxed to death and CFLs rebated, not banned. Poe is a moron and so are you for not seeing the facts and posting this crap, incandesants should have limited use in todays world Seen any CFL's that'll work outdoors in the winter? I need a few for my yard lights. Got any that'll work on 3V DC? Need some for my flashlights. Will CFL's work in cars? Lots of incandescents there. Well, he did say "incandescents should have limited use in today's world", which pretty much covers what you've described; the great majority of light bulbs are used for domestic, commercial or industrial lighting, where CFLs are appropriate. The few exceptions where incandescents can't be replaced or where it's impractical to do so are small potatoes by comparison. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:30:58 -0400, David Starr
wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:23:58 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote: Its not a ban, Since when was an incandesant Effecient, do you know only 4-7 watts of a 100w bulb are out put as actual Light you can see, the rest is heat, Thats effecient? Put in 11, 100w bulbs and you have a 1000w heater, and now pay more to run the AC to remove that heat, and release more mercury from Coal plants to run that AC, They should be Taxed to death and CFLs rebated, not banned. Poe is a moron and so are you for not seeing the facts and posting this crap, incandesants should have limited use in todays world Seen any CFL's that'll work outdoors in the winter? I need a few for my yard lights. Got any that'll work on 3V DC? Need some for my flashlights. Will CFL's work in cars? Lots of incandescents there. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant. Speak softly and carry a loaded .45 Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Web Site: www.destarr.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Here in Arizona's mild winters even regular fluorescents tubes flicker in my garage. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave | Due to excessive spam, googlegroups, UAR & AIOE are blocked! | |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
|
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Well in all fairness... Seen any CFL's that'll work outdoors in the winter? I need a few for my yard lights. Yes, plenty of enclosed CFLs work outside in the winter. If you live in an area of extreme cold, there's always HID. A 39W metal halide lamp produces much more light than a 150W incandescent, and lasts 6-10 times as long. I use exclusively CFLs in all my outdoor fixtures, it only gets down to about 15F at the lowest here, so the plain exposed spiral type work fine. Since these are on from dusk till dawn, the savings are substantial and I get 2+ years out of a bulb. Even the vilified mercury vapor lamp so common in yard lights and street lighting of the past is more than twice as efficient as incandescent. Got any that'll work on 3V DC? Need some for my flashlights. Yes, I do, but what's wrong with LEDs? They're perfect for flashlights. You can pick up a 3W white LED Maglight for $22 at Home Depot, they've really come down in price, work better, and the batteries last longer. I do have a fluorescent flashlight, it uses a small cold cathode tube, as well as I have a camping lantern with a conventional 9W CFL tube in it powered by 4 D batteries. Will CFL's work in cars? Lots of incandescents there. Not very many anymore. LEDs and HID are making rapid headway into automotive applications as prices drop and technology improves. I'd bet that within a decade there will be virtually no incandescent lamps anywhere in new cars. No more taking out a zillion screws and clips to dig into the dash and replace lamps, no more burned out taillights, or melted lenses from someone installing the wrong bulbs. There's no delay as the lamp filaments heat either, so response of the brake lights is quicker, not by much, but at 70 mph every millisecond is valuable. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - EnvironmentalProtection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Here in Arizona's mild winters even regular fluorescents tubes flicker in my garage. ...Jim Thompson They're probably those crappy 34W energy saver tubes with magnetic ballasts that usually don't drive them harder than about 25W. Those were a hack from the 70s energy crisis and hardly work in a drafty room indoors. Try some electronic ballasts driving T8 tubes, they work fine in the near freezing temperatures in my unheated garage in the dead of winter. As an added bonus they're 32W and brighter than most of the old 40W tubes and the high frequency operation pretty well eliminates strobing with rotating machinery. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Jim Thompson wrote in
: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:30:17 -0400, RFI-EMI-GUY wrote: [snip] Please someone tell me where all this makes any sense? I think this benefits only Archer Daniel Midland and Big Oil. I think the large numeric dollar-value of "Big Oil" profits confuses the ordinary guy on the street, and politicians use that to their advantage. What is "Big Oil's" ROI? Are they not paying _market_ price for oil? ...Jim Thompson the "Big Oil" companies are making 8.3 cents per $1 of gas sold. Microsoft is making 27 cents per dollar of sales. Banks are making IIRC,15 cents/$1. US industry average is IIRC,9.x cents/$1 -- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net |
fluorescent tube differences was Constitutionality of light bulbban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a brokenbulb
James Sweet wrote:
Here in Arizona's mild winters even regular fluorescents tubes flicker in my garage. ...Jim Thompson They're probably those crappy 34W energy saver tubes with magnetic ballasts that usually don't drive them harder than about 25W. Those were a hack from the 70s energy crisis and hardly work in a drafty room indoors. Try some electronic ballasts driving T8 tubes, they work fine in the near freezing temperatures in my unheated garage in the dead of winter. As an added bonus they're 32W and brighter than most of the old 40W tubes and the high frequency operation pretty well eliminates strobing with rotating machinery. Can someone please explain what T8, T12, etc. are and what are the differences? I have plenty of old T12 40W tubes, fixtures, ballasts, etc. I've had several people recommend updating the ballasts and tubes but are the keystones the same? Length of tubes? nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
fluorescent tube differences was Constitutionality of lightbulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called fora broken bulb
Can someone please explain what T8, T12, etc. are and what are the differences? I have plenty of old T12 40W tubes, fixtures, ballasts, etc. I've had several people recommend updating the ballasts and tubes but are the keystones the same? Length of tubes? nate T = Tubular The number is the diameter in 8ths of inches. Another number in the full designation is usually the nominal wattage, but sometimes the length in inches. Examples: F40T12/CW Fluorescent, 40 Watts, 1.5" diameter, Cool White halophosphate phosphor F32T8/850 Fluorescent, 32 Watts, 1" diameter, 80+ CRI 5000K trichromatic phosphor F96T12/D/HO Fluorescent, 96" length, 1.5" diameter, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, High Output (800mA) and a really rare bird... F48PG17/D Fluorescent, 48" length, 2-1/8" diameter Power Groove dimpled tube, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, VHO (1500mA) T8 and T12 use the same sockets and have the same lengths. High Output (HO) and Very High Output (VHO) are also available, those use RDC rather than bipin end caps and are slightly shorter to accommodate the larger sockets. Fixture lengths are the same for all those. Not all ballasts are created equally. The wattage stamped on the tube is the nominal rating. The actual power is determined by the ballast, which is a constant-current source. The low energy retrofit tubes such as the 34W T12 accomplish this by changing the gas fill to have a lower voltage drop, so with the same current, the wattage is lower. |
fluorescent tube differences was Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 23:00:11 GMT, James Sweet
wrote: Can someone please explain what T8, T12, etc. are and what are the differences? I have plenty of old T12 40W tubes, fixtures, ballasts, etc. I've had several people recommend updating the ballasts and tubes but are the keystones the same? Length of tubes? nate T = Tubular The number is the diameter in 8ths of inches. Another number in the full designation is usually the nominal wattage, but sometimes the length in inches. Examples: F40T12/CW Fluorescent, 40 Watts, 1.5" diameter, Cool White halophosphate phosphor F32T8/850 Fluorescent, 32 Watts, 1" diameter, 80+ CRI 5000K trichromatic phosphor F96T12/D/HO Fluorescent, 96" length, 1.5" diameter, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, High Output (800mA) and a really rare bird... F48PG17/D Fluorescent, 48" length, 2-1/8" diameter Power Groove dimpled tube, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, VHO (1500mA) T8 and T12 use the same sockets and have the same lengths. High Output (HO) and Very High Output (VHO) are also available, those use RDC rather than bipin end caps and are slightly shorter to accommodate the larger sockets. Fixture lengths are the same for all those. Not all ballasts are created equally. The wattage stamped on the tube is the nominal rating. The actual power is determined by the ballast, which is a constant-current source. The low energy retrofit tubes such as the 34W T12 accomplish this by changing the gas fill to have a lower voltage drop, so with the same current, the wattage is lower. I accidentally bought 34W T12 and they were slightly long and wouldn't fit my old T12 fixtures :-( ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | | | | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave | | | | Due to excessive spam, googlegroups, UAR & AIOE are blocked! | |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
In article , dpb wrote:
metspitzer wrote: WASHINGTON – Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs ... The bill did _not_ "ban" incandescent bulbs, it set minimum efficiency standards. That some incandescents available at Home Depot already meet. Also, only certain incandescents are affected - there are many exceptions (colored, flood, spot, appliance, decorative, ones of brightness of "usual 25 watt ones and dimmer, ones brighter than the brighter 150 watt 750 hour ones, other exceptions). - Don Klipstein ) |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:57:54 -0400, krw wrote:
Strawman. Not all electricity comes from not need come from coal. Roughly half of all electricity generated and about 60 per cent of what is generated by electrical utilities. Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri...a/epat1p1.html Cheers, Paul |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
In article vKR6k.18$i5.17@trndny07, James Sweet wrote:
Both the ban and the reasons cited here for questioning the ban are the silly result of politicians with poor understanding of the issues involved. The amount of mercury in a CFL is tiny, burning coal to generate electricity also releases mercury, few light bulbs of any sort are US made, Plenty of A19 lightbulbs 40-100 watts are USA-made. So are plenty of 4-foot fluorescents. - Don Klipstein ) |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
In article , Harry Avant wrote:
I have been looking for dimmable florescents without luck. Where do you find them - can you tell me the brand? GE brand at Target. - Don Klipstein ) |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
In article , David Starr wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:23:58 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote: Its not a ban, Since when was an incandesant Effecient, do you know only 4-7 watts of a 100w bulb are out put as actual Light you can see, the rest is heat, Thats effecient? Put in 11, 100w bulbs and you have a 1000w heater, and now pay more to run the AC to remove that heat, and release more mercury from Coal plants to run that AC, They should be Taxed to death and CFLs rebated, not banned. Poe is a moron and so are you for not seeing the facts and posting this crap, incandesants should have limited use in todays world Seen any CFL's that'll work outdoors in the winter? I need a few for my yard lights. Got any that'll work on 3V DC? Need some for my flashlights. Will CFL's work in cars? Lots of incandescents there. Low voltage incandescents are not affected by the energy legislation. - Don Klipstein ) |
fluorescent tube differences was Constitutionality of lightbulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called fora broken bulb
Jim Thompson wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 23:00:11 GMT, James Sweet wrote: Can someone please explain what T8, T12, etc. are and what are the differences? I have plenty of old T12 40W tubes, fixtures, ballasts, etc. I've had several people recommend updating the ballasts and tubes but are the keystones the same? Length of tubes? nate T = Tubular The number is the diameter in 8ths of inches. Another number in the full designation is usually the nominal wattage, but sometimes the length in inches. Examples: F40T12/CW Fluorescent, 40 Watts, 1.5" diameter, Cool White halophosphate phosphor F32T8/850 Fluorescent, 32 Watts, 1" diameter, 80+ CRI 5000K trichromatic phosphor F96T12/D/HO Fluorescent, 96" length, 1.5" diameter, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, High Output (800mA) and a really rare bird... F48PG17/D Fluorescent, 48" length, 2-1/8" diameter Power Groove dimpled tube, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, VHO (1500mA) T8 and T12 use the same sockets and have the same lengths. High Output (HO) and Very High Output (VHO) are also available, those use RDC rather than bipin end caps and are slightly shorter to accommodate the larger sockets. Fixture lengths are the same for all those. Not all ballasts are created equally. The wattage stamped on the tube is the nominal rating. The actual power is determined by the ballast, which is a constant-current source. The low energy retrofit tubes such as the 34W T12 accomplish this by changing the gas fill to have a lower voltage drop, so with the same current, the wattage is lower. I accidentally bought 34W T12 and they were slightly long and wouldn't fit my old T12 fixtures :-( ...Jim Thompson Sounds like you have HO or VHO fixtures with RDC sockets. Look at the ballast to make sure you get the right tubes, HO and VHO are physically but not electrically interchangeable. |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:30:58 -0400, David Starr
wrote: Hi David: Seen any CFL's that'll work outdoors in the winter? I need a few for my yard lights. These ones are rated to work down to -10F/-23C: http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/...pdf/p-5095.pdf Got any that'll work on 3V DC? Need some for my flashlights. Will CFL's work in cars? Lots of incandescents there. As I've indicated here several times before, the provisions related to incandescent lamps within the "Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (HR6)" are limited to "general service" only -- in other words, your standard A19 household lamp. The Act defines "general service" as: 1) having a medium (E27) screw-base; 2) a light output of between 310 and 2600 lumens; 3) an operating voltage of between 110 and130V; and 4) a standard or "modified" light spectrum (e.g.., GE's "Reveal"). Within this group, incandescent lamps that are specifically **EXCLUDED** include the following: appliance black light bug coloured infrared left-hand thread (used where lamps may be stolen) marine/marine signal mine service plant light reflector rough service / shatter-resistant / vibration service sign silver bowl showcase 3-way traffic signal G & T shape AB, BA, CA, F, G16-1/2, G-25, G30, S and M-14 Cheers, Paul |
fluorescent tube differences was Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 00:00:30 GMT, James Sweet
wrote: Jim Thompson wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 23:00:11 GMT, James Sweet wrote: Can someone please explain what T8, T12, etc. are and what are the differences? I have plenty of old T12 40W tubes, fixtures, ballasts, etc. I've had several people recommend updating the ballasts and tubes but are the keystones the same? Length of tubes? nate T = Tubular The number is the diameter in 8ths of inches. Another number in the full designation is usually the nominal wattage, but sometimes the length in inches. Examples: F40T12/CW Fluorescent, 40 Watts, 1.5" diameter, Cool White halophosphate phosphor F32T8/850 Fluorescent, 32 Watts, 1" diameter, 80+ CRI 5000K trichromatic phosphor F96T12/D/HO Fluorescent, 96" length, 1.5" diameter, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, High Output (800mA) and a really rare bird... F48PG17/D Fluorescent, 48" length, 2-1/8" diameter Power Groove dimpled tube, Daylight halophosphate phosphor, VHO (1500mA) T8 and T12 use the same sockets and have the same lengths. High Output (HO) and Very High Output (VHO) are also available, those use RDC rather than bipin end caps and are slightly shorter to accommodate the larger sockets. Fixture lengths are the same for all those. Not all ballasts are created equally. The wattage stamped on the tube is the nominal rating. The actual power is determined by the ballast, which is a constant-current source. The low energy retrofit tubes such as the 34W T12 accomplish this by changing the gas fill to have a lower voltage drop, so with the same current, the wattage is lower. I accidentally bought 34W T12 and they were slightly long and wouldn't fit my old T12 fixtures :-( ...Jim Thompson Sounds like you have HO or VHO fixtures with RDC sockets. Look at the ballast to make sure you get the right tubes, HO and VHO are physically but not electrically interchangeable. How do I tell? The fixtures are 15 years old. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | | | | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave | | | | Due to excessive spam, googlegroups, UAR & AIOE are blocked! | |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:54:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: Here in Arizona's mild winters even regular fluorescents tubes flicker in my garage. ...Jim Thompson Hi Jim: If it's an inexpensive shop light from a big box retailer (the ones with the notoriously crappy magnetic ballasts), replace it with a good quality T8 fixture. Lithonia offers inexpensive T8 channel and wrap fixtures that operate down to 0F. You should be able to pick one up for about $20.00. See: http://www.acuitybrandslighting.com/...cent-Wraps.pdf For cold weather applications, stick with a standard 32-watt T8, as opposed to the 25, 28 or 30-watt energy savers -- GE, Osram Sylvania or Philips. Cheers, Paul |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
In article ,
says... On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:57:54 -0400, krw wrote: Strawman. Not all electricity comes from not need come from coal. Roughly half of all electricity generated and about 60 per cent of what is generated by electrical utilities. Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri...a/epat1p1.html When was the last one built? When will the next be built? IOW, another asinine argument from a leftist weenie. -- Keith |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 21:19:58 -0400, krw wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:57:54 -0400, krw wrote: Strawman. Not all electricity comes from not need come from coal. Roughly half of all electricity generated and about 60 per cent of what is generated by electrical utilities. Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri...a/epat1p1.html When was the last one built? When will the next be built? IOW, another asinine argument from a leftist weenie. Since you asked so nicely, according to the latest DOE report (February 18, 2008), as of September 20, 2007, there were 28 coal-fired power plants under construction (14,885 MW), 6 more nearing construction (1,859 MW) and 13 more that had received construction permits (6,422 MW). There were a further 67 plants (42,394 MW) that had been announced, but had not as of that time been issued permits. Cheers, Paul |
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb
Cold start CFL floods are available at 1000Bulbs.com
They also carry dimmable and decorative CFLs. The upside to this government action is that you're going to see major improvements in incandescent technology in the coming years. GE and Sylvania aren't about to close up their light bulb business and say "oh well." The immediate downside is that the CFL manufacturers are going to have to get their act together REAL fast. Their defective rate out-of-the-box is really bad. Plus, their actual versus projected life is, well, pure fiction. And even though the mercury is a fraction of what it costs to burn coal for the same lumen/life span, none of the numbers make sense if the bulbs don't actually last as long as the projections. This is the price we pay when we change technologies--a shake out of the good from the bad. As for ethanol in gas---it's an oxygenate to reduce pollution. It's in there to replace MTBE which is REALLY bad stuff. As soon as you come up with a less expensive alternative, lets us know. In the meantime, I'll choose less pollution over slightly increased cost (increased cost being a relative term--because if you count in the medical costs due to increased pollution, the ethanol is actually cheaper) any day of the week. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter