|
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
|
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 10:52*am, Molly Brown wrote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Joe |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 12:23*pm, Joe wrote:
On Jan 20, 10:52*am, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Joe and this part was noteworthy "Anxious to see what ratepayers got for their money, state utility regulators have devoted millions of dollars in the past three years for evaluation reports and field studies." Mark |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
In article
, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...595565026.html I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
In article
, Joe wrote: Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. Not as many as you think. Californians have a laid-back attitude about things. We live by the "manana"* mantra. Must be the weather that lulls us in to a false sense of security. We aren't prepared for earthquakes, either. Years ago, before cell phones, I read a story in an aviation rag about accident preparedness. The author quipped "a California pilot's idea of an emergency survival kit is two dimes for a pay phone." *Spanish for "tomorrow," coupled with the understanding that tomorrow never comes. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/20/2011 12:42 PM, Smitty Two wrote:
In article , Molly wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...595565026.html I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. LED's require a set directional DC voltage. I think that's going to be the big price drawback. Great for flashlights with batteries but $100 LED bulb with built in AC to DC converter is not worth it. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
Joe wrote:
On Jan 20, 10:52 am, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Possibly because we've been using florescent lightbulbs for over 100 years without any controversy over Mercury. Actually, the use of CFLs actually REDUCES Mercury contamination (in general). The extra power required to generate the difference between incandescent and CFLs means more coal has to be burnt. The Mercury generated by burning the extra coal is greater than that in the CFLs. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 12:42*pm, Smitty Two wrote:
In article , *Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. Well, I have been using CFL's for 20 years. Not exclusively, but now they are dirt cheap. Some burn out right away, and I hate Feit brand.. They have more parts and have more problems. They burn out quicker the more you turn them on and off. I got lights constantly on in the house. I got CFL's and LED's. I got LED's all over outside. I'm going to do some updating, and found the new CREE with high output. I always use the CREE warm white when possible. I cannot stand blue light. Blue light is harsh and scatters too much. I saw the new LED style but have not come across it yet. The new LED light is almost like a CFL. Its got a large outer bulb with florescent material. Inside are a number of UV LED's which illuminate the outer bulb. Here is the new CREE dulux and you can easily get 900 Lumen s or more..... http://ledsupply.com/creexpg-ww315.php greg |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 1:47*pm, zek wrote:
On Jan 20, 12:42*pm, Smitty Two wrote: In article , *Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556.... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. Well, I have been using CFL's for 20 years. Not exclusively, but now they are dirt cheap. Some burn out right away, and I hate Feit brand.. They have more parts and have more problems. They burn out quicker the more you turn them on and off. I got lights constantly on in the house. I got CFL's and LED's. I got LED's all over outside. I'm going to do some updating, and found the new CREE with high output. I always use the CREE warm white when possible. I cannot stand blue light. Blue light is harsh and scatters too much. I saw the new LED style but have not come across it yet. The new LED light is almost like a CFL. Its got a large outer bulb with florescent material. Inside are a number of UV LED's which illuminate the outer bulb. Here is the new CREE dulux and you can easily get 900 Lumen s or more.....http://ledsupply.com/creexpg-ww315.php greg Oh yes, it could also be said, LED's burn out quicker than expected. When they are run too hot they will go bad. How many LED's do you see out on bus tail lights. The sun generates huge amounts of heat damaging them. greg |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 11:42*am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article , *Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. If they can bring the cost down then I am on board in a heartbeat. The CFL's have proven to be a lot of hype but very little on delivery. They are touted to last much longer but my experince thus far has proven that claim to be a total lie. If anything, the life span for the CFL's have thus far been about 10%-15% shorter than incadecents but cost 4 times as much. If they are saving anything on usage it is more than offset by the cost of purchase and replacement. As for the LED's, I am not about to pay 10 times more for them only to see the same results. Sign me SOLD because I have replaced nearly every light in the house with CFL's and SCREWED because I feel like I was the one screwed in instead of the lightbulb. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
"Frank" wrote in message ... On 1/20/2011 12:42 PM, Smitty Two wrote: In article , Molly wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...595565026.html I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. LED's require a set directional DC voltage. I think that's going to be the big price drawback. Great for flashlights with batteries but $100 LED bulb with built in AC to DC converter is not worth it. I build my own LED night lights to illuminate our halls and bath rooms for rising during the night. Plug into wall outlets. A diode in series changes the AC to 1/2 wave DC. Leave them on 24 hours a day. Works great. WW |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM HeyBub spake thus:
Joe wrote: On Jan 20, 10:52 am, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Possibly because we've been using florescent lightbulbs for over 100 years without any controversy over Mercury. Actually, the use of CFLs actually REDUCES Mercury contamination (in general). The extra power required to generate the difference between incandescent and CFLs means more coal has to be burnt. The Mercury generated by burning the extra coal is greater than that in the CFLs. Well, that's Don Klipstein's argument, which I sorta buy since he made it and not you. But that still begs the question of what really happens to all that mercury from old CFLs. Believe me, I see busted twirly bulbs all over the place. And just because we've had a totally blasé attitude toward busted regular fluorescent tubes and the resulting release of mercury doesn't mean that nothing bad ever came of it. Can you say "cumulative toxin"? (And just curious: why did you capitalize Mercury? You're not of German descent, are you?) -- Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet: To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign that he is not going to hear any rebuttals. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/20/2011 9:42 AM Smitty Two spake thus:
In article , Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...595565026.html I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. They may have solved those problems, but what hasn't been solved is the LED's inherent power inefficiency as the devices get scaled up from cell-phone size. It's pretty much a brick-wall problem at this point. http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconduct...ds-dark-secret -- Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet: To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign that he is not going to hear any rebuttals. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
"Joe" wrote in message ... And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? I've seen discussion of that issue in the news media, repeatedly. It is also kind of hard to miss when our local hardware store collects CFLs for proper disposal along with dead batteries. Anyone who hasn't seen this issue discussed in the news media is perhaps making an effort to see only what they want to see. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=7431198 http://www.popularmechanics.com/home...s/news/4217864 http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2010/nov/...bul-ar-297958/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23694819...s-environment/ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...ag=mncol;lst;3 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know...ght-bulb/3743/ |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
"Smitty Two" wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/20/2011 1:19 PM, HeyBub wrote:
Joe wrote: On Jan 20, 10:52 am, Molly wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Possibly because we've been using florescent lightbulbs for over 100 years without any controversy over Mercury. Actually, the use of CFLs actually REDUCES Mercury contamination (in general). The extra power required to generate the difference between incandescent and CFLs means more coal has to be burnt. The Mercury generated by burning the extra coal is greater than that in the CFLs. What annoys me as a chemist is the general public thinks mercury in all forms is toxic. If so, we'd all be dead from the mercury we handled as kids or the fillings in our teeth or the Mercurochrome we used to use on cuts. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
DGDevin wrote: "Smitty Two" wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. I've been using almost entirely CFLs for probably 8 years now, and I'm generally happy with them. They cut electricity consumption significantly, and unlike some folks, I have no issues with short CFL life spans, even in a few enclosed fixtures. When I moved to my current house in mid 2004 I replaced just about all the incandescents (except closets) with CFLs, now at the start of 2011 I've replaced 1 (one) CFL, and that was the victim of accidentally being left on a half wave dimmer overnight. As affordable LED lamps have been appearing in the stores I've periodically experimented with them a bit, but so far I haven't found any that would be suitable replacements for most of my home lighting. I do have a couple LED down lights in one bathroom that work ok, but if there was a female in the house using that bathroom they would banned since the light distribution and color temperature aren't "makeup grade". I'm afraid that for LED lighting to go "mainstream" lighting fixtures need to be redesigned. While CFL technology with it's omnidirectional output was adaptable to replace omnidirectional incandescents, LEDs are directional and simply don't work well in current fixture designs. Stage / studio lighting had this redesign and as noted are now gaining popularity for both power and A/C load reduction. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM HeyBub spake thus: Joe wrote: On Jan 20, 10:52 am, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Possibly because we've been using florescent lightbulbs for over 100 years without any controversy over Mercury. Actually, the use of CFLs actually REDUCES Mercury contamination (in general). The extra power required to generate the difference between incandescent and CFLs means more coal has to be burnt. The Mercury generated by burning the extra coal is greater than that in the CFLs. Well, that's Don Klipstein's argument, which I sorta buy since he made it and not you. But that still begs the question of what really happens to all that mercury from old CFLs. Believe me, I see busted twirly bulbs all over the place. And just because we've had a totally blasé attitude toward busted regular fluorescent tubes and the resulting release of mercury doesn't mean that nothing bad ever came of it. Don't think so. If we've made the collective decision to live with the hazards of coal-fired power plants, any overall reduction in the amount of you-know-what has to be a plus. Most would consider a process to convert 90% the mercury from a power plant into Fulminate of Mercury and scatter it around the streets of Detroit to be meritorious. Can you say "cumulative toxin"? Yes, but not five times real fast. (And just curious: why did you capitalize Mercury? You're not of German descent, are you?) I also capitalized Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Cobalt-thorium-G because I was taught in an earlier time to capitalize primary elements. Times have, however, changed along with the rules for capitalization. Thanks for pointing out my eccentricity and causing me to check. I'll refrain from it in future so as not to horrify those who are a product of a more recent education. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
DGDevin wrote:
"Joe" wrote in message ... And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? I've seen discussion of that issue in the news media, repeatedly. It is also kind of hard to miss when our local hardware store collects CFLs for proper disposal along with dead batteries. Anyone who hasn't seen this issue discussed in the news media is perhaps making an effort to see only what they want to see. And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/20/2011 1:47 PM HeyBub spake thus:
DGDevin wrote: "Joe" wrote in message ... And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? I've seen discussion of that issue in the news media, repeatedly. It is also kind of hard to miss when our local hardware store collects CFLs for proper disposal along with dead batteries. Anyone who hasn't seen this issue discussed in the news media is perhaps making an effort to see only what they want to see. And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. Since you're so obviously of the "don't worry about that stuff--it won't hurt you! It's just a bunch of namby-pamby enviros agitatin' folks!" persuasion, why do you even bother to argue that CFL usage is good because it reduces overall mercury emission by reducing coal burning? Why would you even care about this? By your lights, we might just as well go on using inefficient incandescents. -- Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet: To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign that he is not going to hear any rebuttals. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/20/2011 3:04 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM HeyBub spake thus: Joe wrote: On Jan 20, 10:52 am, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Possibly because we've been using florescent lightbulbs for over 100 years without any controversy over Mercury. Actually, the use of CFLs actually REDUCES Mercury contamination (in general). The extra power required to generate the difference between incandescent and CFLs means more coal has to be burnt. The Mercury generated by burning the extra coal is greater than that in the CFLs. Well, that's Don Klipstein's argument, which I sorta buy since he made it and not you. But that still begs the question of what really happens to all that mercury from old CFLs. Believe me, I see busted twirly bulbs all over the place. And just because we've had a totally blasé attitude toward busted regular fluorescent tubes and the resulting release of mercury doesn't mean that nothing bad ever came of it. Can you say "cumulative toxin"? Which relates directly to how dangerous the mercury is from a broken bulb. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007...ehugger_14.php What airborne mercury there is dissipates rapidly, there being no long term chronic exposure to mercury. Even so, much remains bound up in the fragments. Don't vacuum. My general impression is that mercury content of CFLs is falling. NVision (HD) claims 2.2mg to 3.3mg. I imagine others are following suit. http://www.nvisioncfl.com/mercury.as...20in%20C FLs? Jeff |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. When famed American WWII combat photographer W. Eugene Smith began publishing photos documenting the effect of mercury poisoning on the people of the Japanese fishing village of Minamata, the company responsible for the poisoning (by dumping industrial waste) came up with the solution of sending goons to savagely beat Smith--that being a cost-effective way of discouraging bad publicity. And of course there were plenty of folks like you who just didn't want to hear about it, "normal" people who were busy giving their lives purpose by buying things from companies that like to keep costs down by pumping toxic waste into the sea or wherever rather than disposing of it safely. So thousands of people were blinded, paralyzed, deformed and killed--it's shame, but what business is that of a happy consumer? Eventually medical science, politics and the law caught up with the Chisso corporation, and they had to pay almost $90 million in compensation to their victims and clean up the mess they had made for over three decades. But they're still in business, and today one in six American children born has already been exposed to dangerously high levels of mercury in the womb thanks to seafood contaminated by mercury, tuna in particular. But what the hell, you're not going to have any kids at your age, come to think of it you don't have that many years left yourself. Life is dangerous, and if one of America's favorite foods isn't safe for pregnant women to eat, how is that your problem? Damn eco-crusaders, always bitching about something you'd rather not think about, why can't they leave "normal" people alone? |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
David Nebenzahl wrote:
And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. Since you're so obviously of the "don't worry about that stuff--it won't hurt you! It's just a bunch of namby-pamby enviros agitatin' folks!" persuasion, why do you even bother to argue that CFL usage is good because it reduces overall mercury emission by reducing coal burning? Why would you even care about this? By your lights, we might just as well go on using inefficient incandescents. Where did I say that CFL usage is good? I don't CARE whether CFL usage is good, bad, or smokes a cigar. I was merely trying to illustrate the silliness of the hand-wringing and chin-quivering crowd by pointing out we've been using florescenet lights for over a century with nary a peep out of those who are now hopping up and down. As for using "inefficient incandescents," I don't care whether someone uses legacy bulbs either. If pressed, I'd say let the market decide. If anything, I'm opposed to the government mandating things that should be a market decision: such as CFLs or CAFE standards. I also feel the same way about child-proof caps; I want my children to have all the same opportunities I had. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
DGDevin wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. When famed American WWII combat photographer W. Eugene Smith began publishing photos documenting the effect of mercury poisoning on the people of the Japanese fishing village of Minamata, the company responsible for the poisoning (by dumping industrial waste) came up with the solution of sending goons to savagely beat Smith--that being a cost-effective way of discouraging bad publicity. And of course there were plenty of folks like you who just didn't want to hear about it, "normal" people who were busy giving their lives purpose by buying things from companies that like to keep costs down by pumping toxic waste into the sea or wherever rather than disposing of it safely. So thousands of people were blinded, paralyzed, deformed and killed--it's shame, but what business is that of a happy consumer? Eventually medical science, politics and the law caught up with the Chisso corporation, and they had to pay almost $90 million in compensation to their victims and clean up the mess they had made for over three decades. But they're still in business, and today one in six American children born has already been exposed to dangerously high levels of mercury in the womb thanks to seafood contaminated by mercury, tuna in particular. But what the hell, you're not going to have any kids at your age, come to think of it you don't have that many years left yourself. Life is dangerous, and if one of America's favorite foods isn't safe for pregnant women to eat, how is that your problem? Damn eco-crusaders, always bitching about something you'd rather not think about, why can't they leave "normal" people alone? Heh! Did I say ANYTHING about mercury being absolutely safe, or that I wanted it added to a baby's formula? My disgust has nothing to do with mercury, tuna, or the Japanese. Read it again. My beef is with the "true believers" who pester the rest of us to death and insist on imposing their lifestyle choices. Soon we'll all be forced to eat arugula three times a day even though our president as said it is too expensive. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:43:59 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote: David Nebenzahl wrote: On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM HeyBub spake thus: Joe wrote: On Jan 20, 10:52 am, Molly Brown wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...57603389059556... Can't help but wonder how many Left Coasters are hoarding incandescent light bulbs. And why is the lamestream media ignoring the mercury content of the fluorescents? Typical of social engineering solutions, solve one problem and create two or more that are worse. Possibly because we've been using florescent lightbulbs for over 100 years without any controversy over Mercury. Actually, the use of CFLs actually REDUCES Mercury contamination (in general). The extra power required to generate the difference between incandescent and CFLs means more coal has to be burnt. The Mercury generated by burning the extra coal is greater than that in the CFLs. Well, that's Don Klipstein's argument, which I sorta buy since he made it and not you. But that still begs the question of what really happens to all that mercury from old CFLs. Believe me, I see busted twirly bulbs all over the place. And just because we've had a totally blasé attitude toward busted regular fluorescent tubes and the resulting release of mercury doesn't mean that nothing bad ever came of it. Don't think so. If we've made the collective decision to live with the hazards of coal-fired power plants, any overall reduction in the amount of you-know-what has to be a plus. Most would consider a process to convert 90% the mercury from a power plant into Fulminate of Mercury and scatter it around the streets of Detroit to be meritorious. Can you say "cumulative toxin"? Yes, but not five times real fast. (And just curious: why did you capitalize Mercury? You're not of German descent, are you?) I also capitalized Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Cobalt-thorium-G because I was taught in an earlier time to capitalize primary elements. Times have, however, changed along with the rules for capitalization. Thanks for pointing out my eccentricity and causing me to check. I'll refrain from it in future so as not to horrify those who are a product of a more recent education. That really changed? I remember when the lower case G changed. I learned it with a straight line going down and then it changed to a curly line. Or maybe it was the other way? Well, no one writes anymore so I guess it makes no difference, but it puzzled me at the time. I think Oxygen deserves to be upper case though. While most elements are critical for something (Carbon comes to mind), where would we be without good old Oxygen? That makes it more important than most things that get the Honor of capitalization. As for CFLs, my anecdotal evidence is that they do not last as long as advertised. I did just read a big article in the newspaper about needing to recycle CFLs, so the attempt to get the word out is working. There was also a whole section on how to clean up after a broken bulb. That thing was so scary that, in spite of being a good old lefty, I want to run out and hoard some incandescents. It began with "open the windows and leave the room for 5-10 minutes, taking any pets with you. Turn off central heat or A/C". Here, it was obviously referring to this from the EPA: http://epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html I mean really, do I want these things in my house? |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:30:39 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote: David Nebenzahl wrote: And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. Since you're so obviously of the "don't worry about that stuff--it won't hurt you! It's just a bunch of namby-pamby enviros agitatin' folks!" persuasion, why do you even bother to argue that CFL usage is good because it reduces overall mercury emission by reducing coal burning? Why would you even care about this? By your lights, we might just as well go on using inefficient incandescents. Where did I say that CFL usage is good? I don't CARE whether CFL usage is good, bad, or smokes a cigar. I was merely trying to illustrate the silliness of the hand-wringing and chin-quivering crowd by pointing out we've been using florescenet lights for over a century with nary a peep out of those who are now hopping up and down. As for using "inefficient incandescents," I don't care whether someone uses legacy bulbs either. If pressed, I'd say let the market decide. If anything, I'm opposed to the government mandating things that should be a market decision: such as CFLs or CAFE standards. I also feel the same way about child-proof caps; I want my children to have all the same opportunities I had. Sometimes things that affect all of us shouldn't be left to the choices of individuals - or the market. That's why we have a government run by people that we go vote for. Well, actually the government is run by the wealthy and corporate power but at least in theory it's ours. Corporations have no morals and only care about its bottom line. I don't trust them to make decisions for me. The market for incandescents does not price the cost of using the bulb into the cost of buying them. Lots of folks don't consider the total cost of ownership. And those who rent or otherwise don't pay directly for their power may not care that it's actually more expensive to buy incandescents even though it's better for us as a society, country, and world, that we use less energy. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:37:38 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote: DGDevin wrote: "HeyBub" wrote in message m... And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. When famed American WWII combat photographer W. Eugene Smith began publishing photos documenting the effect of mercury poisoning on the people of the Japanese fishing village of Minamata, the company responsible for the poisoning (by dumping industrial waste) came up with the solution of sending goons to savagely beat Smith--that being a cost-effective way of discouraging bad publicity. And of course there were plenty of folks like you who just didn't want to hear about it, "normal" people who were busy giving their lives purpose by buying things from companies that like to keep costs down by pumping toxic waste into the sea or wherever rather than disposing of it safely. So thousands of people were blinded, paralyzed, deformed and killed--it's shame, but what business is that of a happy consumer? Eventually medical science, politics and the law caught up with the Chisso corporation, and they had to pay almost $90 million in compensation to their victims and clean up the mess they had made for over three decades. But they're still in business, and today one in six American children born has already been exposed to dangerously high levels of mercury in the womb thanks to seafood contaminated by mercury, tuna in particular. But what the hell, you're not going to have any kids at your age, come to think of it you don't have that many years left yourself. Life is dangerous, and if one of America's favorite foods isn't safe for pregnant women to eat, how is that your problem? Damn eco-crusaders, always bitching about something you'd rather not think about, why can't they leave "normal" people alone? Heh! Did I say ANYTHING about mercury being absolutely safe, or that I wanted it added to a baby's formula? My disgust has nothing to do with mercury, tuna, or the Japanese. Read it again. My beef is with the "true believers" who pester the rest of us to death and insist on imposing their lifestyle choices. Soon we'll all be forced to eat arugula three times a day even though our president as said it is too expensive. Straw man argument. Soon you will not be forced to eat arugula so fine job of killing the straw man. Throwing absurdities up to mock serious issues doesn't work. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
The market for incandescents does not price the cost of using the bulb into the cost of buying them. Lots of folks don't consider the total cost of ownership. And those who rent or otherwise don't pay directly for their power may not care that it's actually more expensive to buy incandescents even though it's better for us as a society, country, and world, that we use less energy.- Hide quoted text - - Is the full life environmental cycle cost of producing and disposing of CFLs priced into their sales price? NO.... Mark |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 3:45*pm, "DGDevin" wrote:
"Smitty Two" *wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. *The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. *Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. In my experience, a CFL will last 1 1/2 years outside in terrible conditions, IF you leave it on continuously like I did. I love not having to change inside or out lamps so often, and I enjoy the savings. I'm using these cheap DC to DC converters on my LED's. Big trouble, I have to go around and figure on what kind of filter I need to add on about10. My house is a giant transmitter. My FM radio reception is horrible. I got carrier buzz all over the spectrum. I just found this out recently while driving my car. greg |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 3:45*pm, "DGDevin" wrote:
"Smitty Two" *wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. *The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. *Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. Try this again since OGGLE screwd up again. I get about 12000 hours from a CFL left constantly on outside, and that includes summertime very high heat inside a closed bell. The more you turn them on the faster they will go bad. I have had some go bad at the very beginning. There are so many manufacturers its hard to stay with old reliable. I got a big problem with my LED's, my house transmits for a block. My FM reception is horrible. I need to install many filters on the DC current converters. greg |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 21, 12:44*pm, zek wrote:
On Jan 20, 3:45*pm, "DGDevin" wrote: "Smitty Two" *wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. *The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. *Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. Try this again since OGGLE screwd up again. I get about 12000 hours from a CFL left constantly on outside, and that includes summertime very high heat inside a closed bell. The more you turn them on the faster they will go bad. I have had some go bad at the very beginning. There are so many manufacturers its hard to stay with old reliable. I got a big problem with my LED's, my house transmits for a block. My FM reception is horrible. I need to install many filters on the DC current converters. greg I wanted to add, I have maybe 3 in the house I leave on all the time. Partly for my kittys, and partly, it saves flicking the switch. My LED's inside are on all the time, and are attached to a battery backup. There are some in bathroom and kitchen under cabinet. Will add some more when I finish basement. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
zek wrote: On Jan 21, 12:44 pm, wrote: On Jan 20, 3:45 pm, wrote: "Smitty Two" wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. Try this again since OGGLE screwd up again. I get about 12000 hours from a CFL left constantly on outside, and that includes summertime very high heat inside a closed bell. The more you turn them on the faster they will go bad. I have had some go bad at the very beginning. There are so many manufacturers its hard to stay with old reliable. I got a big problem with my LED's, my house transmits for a block. My FM reception is horrible. I need to install many filters on the DC current converters. greg I wanted to add, I have maybe 3 in the house I leave on all the time. Partly for my kittys, and partly, it saves flicking the switch. My LED's inside are on all the time, and are attached to a battery backup. There are some in bathroom and kitchen under cabinet. Will add some more when I finish basement. Hi, I bought half dozen LED bulbs a year ago for testing. One inside garage, one outside on a patio light pole, one in my study/ One outside did not last long, a few moonths, one in the garage there after. 3rd one is still working. In our area street lights in new neighborhood is all LED lighting some with solar panel. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:36:51 -0800 (PST), Mark
wrote: The market for incandescents does not price the cost of using the bulb into the cost of buying them. Lots of folks don't consider the total cost of ownership. And those who rent or otherwise don't pay directly for their power may not care that it's actually more expensive to buy incandescents even though it's better for us as a society, country, and world, that we use less energy.- Hide quoted text - - Is the full life environmental cycle cost of producing and disposing of CFLs priced into their sales price? NO.... Mark It is not figured into their sale price, nor into the published operating costs. An incandescent bulb requires a lot less energy and materials to manufacture, and creates a lot less garbage when it is finished. IF the CFL lamps lasted as long as they are perported to last, they might be worth while - but by and large they are NOT. I've got quite a few in use because we are told it's the "right" thing to do. I'm sure not fully convinced, judging from my experience with the overpriced crap. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 20, 8:30*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
David Nebenzahl wrote: And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. Since you're so obviously of the "don't worry about that stuff--it won't hurt you! It's just a bunch of namby-pamby enviros agitatin' folks!" persuasion, why do you even bother to argue that CFL usage is good because it reduces overall mercury emission by reducing coal burning? Why would you even care about this? By your lights, we might just as well go on using inefficient incandescents. Where did I say that CFL usage is good? I don't CARE whether CFL usage is good, bad, or smokes a cigar. I was merely trying to illustrate the silliness of the hand-wringing and chin-quivering crowd by pointing out we've been using florescenet lights for over a century with nary a peep out of those who are now hopping up and down. As for using "inefficient incandescents," I don't care whether someone uses legacy bulbs either. If pressed, I'd say let the market decide. If anything, I'm opposed to the government mandating things that should be a market decision: such as CFLs or CAFE standards. I also feel the same way about child-proof caps; I want my children to have all the same opportunities I had. Ah but the Government has decided that we must be protected from ourselves and that we are way too stupid to figure out what is or isn't good for us. I can't wait until these government BURRO-CRAPS decide that I am using too many sheets of toilet paper and want to come wipe my ass for me. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 21, 8:10*am, dgk wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:30:39 -0600, "HeyBub" wrote: David Nebenzahl wrote: And avoiding the histrionics of those screech about mercury with the preamble "Thy Doom is Nigh!" I don't begrudge the nay-sayers; such crusades give their otherwise meaningless lives a purpose. I just wish they'd dial back the decibel level and quit pestering normal folk. Since you're so obviously of the "don't worry about that stuff--it won't hurt you! It's just a bunch of namby-pamby enviros agitatin' folks!" persuasion, why do you even bother to argue that CFL usage is good because it reduces overall mercury emission by reducing coal burning? Why would you even care about this? By your lights, we might just as well go on using inefficient incandescents. Where did I say that CFL usage is good? I don't CARE whether CFL usage is good, bad, or smokes a cigar. I was merely trying to illustrate the silliness of the hand-wringing and chin-quivering crowd by pointing out we've been using florescenet lights for over a century with nary a peep out of those who are now hopping up and down. As for using "inefficient incandescents," I don't care whether someone uses legacy bulbs either. If pressed, I'd say let the market decide. If anything, I'm opposed to the government mandating things that should be a market decision: such as CFLs or CAFE standards. I also feel the same way about child-proof caps; I want my children to have all the same opportunities I had. Sometimes things that affect all of us shouldn't be left to the choices of individuals - or the market. That's why we have a government run by people that we go vote for. NO that is NOT what we have the government for, that is a total fabrication of those who think they should be in control of others. Well, actually the government is run by the wealthy and corporate power but at least in theory it's ours. Corporations have no morals and only care about its bottom line. I don't trust them to make decisions for me. And you think the government Burro-Craps (Jackasses who **** on us all) should make those decisions for you? The market for incandescents does not price the cost of using the bulb into the cost of buying them. Lots of folks don't consider the total cost of ownership. And those who rent or otherwise don't pay directly for their power may not care that it's actually more expensive to buy incandescents even though it's better for us as a society, country, and world, that we use less energy. If I decide that I am willing to pay the cost of using, that should be my choice not yours and not the governments. Rather it is "better for society" as a whole is a very debatable issue. If in fact you primary concern is what is best for "society" or the "world" in general, then rather we use CFL's or incandescents should be the least of your worries, there are far larger fish to fry. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On 1/21/2011 9:20 AM zek spake thus:
I'm using these cheap DC to DC converters on my LED's. Big trouble, I have to go around and figure on what kind of filter I need to add on about10. My house is a giant transmitter. My FM radio reception is horrible. I got carrier buzz all over the spectrum. I just found this out recently while driving my car. What on earth are you talking about? DC-to-DC converters? Why? Do you run your house on 12 volt batteries? And are your radio reception problems due to RFI from your inverters? It must be *really* bad if you're getting interference on FM! I'm curious about your situation. -- Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet: To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign that he is not going to hear any rebuttals. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, LimitingEnergy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
On Jan 21, 1:01*pm, Tony Hwang wrote:
zek wrote: On Jan 21, 12:44 pm, *wrote: On Jan 20, 3:45 pm, *wrote: "Smitty Two" *wrote in message ... I'm siding with other soothsayers predicting an LED revolution. The latest issue of Digi-Key's "Tech Zone" trade journal is devoted to LED lights. Colors are getting much better, the elusive triac dimming puzzle has been solved, etc. I'm just waiting for the price to drop a little more before I start replacing our CFLs with LEDs. *The CFLs saved us a pile of money on our electric bill although I have been disappointed in how short a lifespan some of them have--LED lighting will take care of that. *Our neighbor who owns a nightclub has gone with LED lighting including for stage lighting, it not only saves him money on his power bill but the lights run a lot cooler so he doesn't have to keep the air conditioning cranked all the time, saving more money. Try this again since OGGLE screwd up again. I get about 12000 hours from a CFL left constantly on outside, and that includes summertime very high heat inside a closed bell. The more you turn them on the faster they will go bad. I have had some go bad at the very beginning. There are so many manufacturers its hard to stay with old reliable. I got a big problem with my LED's, my house transmits for a block. My FM reception is horrible. I need to install many filters on the DC current converters. greg I wanted to add, I have maybe 3 in the house I leave on all the time. Partly for my kittys, and partly, it saves flicking the switch. My LED's inside are on all the time, and are attached to a battery backup. There are some in bathroom and kitchen under cabinet. Will add some more when I finish basement. Hi, I bought half dozen LED bulbs a year ago for testing. One inside garage, one outside on a patio light pole, one in my study/ One outside did not last long, a few moonths, one in the garage there after. 3rd one is still working. In our area street lights in new neighborhood is all LED lighting some with solar panel. I count 14 I have around the house. I run the interiors at 50-100 milliwatt and they will last a looong time. I'm pushing at 3 watts two to spot my trees. People will start to get smart and light only the area they want lit. With lens is easy. Its not usually necessary to light the whole room. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
dgk wrote:
Heh! Did I say ANYTHING about mercury being absolutely safe, or that I wanted it added to a baby's formula? My disgust has nothing to do with mercury, tuna, or the Japanese. Read it again. My beef is with the "true believers" who pester the rest of us to death and insist on imposing their lifestyle choices. Soon we'll all be forced to eat arugula three times a day even though our president as said it is too expensive. Straw man argument. Soon you will not be forced to eat arugula so fine job of killing the straw man. Throwing absurdities up to mock serious issues doesn't work. No, one of the tests of logic is to take the proposition to the logical extreme. That this extreme only exposes the presenter to ridicule and scorn is merely a plus. A supreme court justice said, just yesterday, that if a certain course of reasoning were to be adopted, "we are not just throwing a monkey wrench into the gears of government contracting; we're throwing the whole monkey." There is no better way to discredit a proposition than to make fun of it. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... There is no better way to discredit a proposition than to make fun of it. Especially if mockery is all you have. |
Compact Fluorescent Lamps Burn Out Faster Than Expected, Limiting Energy Savings in California's Efficiency Program
DGDevin wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... There is no better way to discredit a proposition than to make fun of it. Especially if mockery is all you have. Often that's all you need. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter