http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/cleaning-broken-cfl

Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
the enviro wackos can have them

On 03/14/2014 05:26 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:
http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/cleaning-broken-cfl

Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
the enviro wackos can have them




That was part of the reason I was against them but decided to go with
them any way for several reasons.


1) I have /never/ broken one.


2) I have broken a few of those fluorescent tubes and have been using
them for over 40 years. Back then no one knew of all the hazards and we
all seemed to keep on living somehow. One of those tubes sure can
produce a lot more pollution than those CFLs


Anyone my age probably played with mercury with our hands when we were
kids and exposed ourselves to more mercury than one of those CFL's


That said I am not sure if I'd use one in an area where food is prepared.

| Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
| the enviro wackos can have them

I don't think it was "enviro wackos" who pushed
CFL. It was just fuzzy thinking and irrrational obsession
with reducing wattage. (Why is there no campaign to
make people mindful about the waste of leaving lights
on unnecessarily?)

In addition to containing mercury and throwing an ugly
light, CFLs are designed to be left on, used for things like
outdoor night lighting. They burn out faster when switched
on and off.

I've had a repeated experience that leads me to think
people are using CFLs simply because most people don't
think things through: I work on a customer's house and have
occasion to deal with lights. I ask why they have CFLs in
their dimmer-equipped recessed lights. On several occasions
I've got the same answer. They say that the electric company
came by for an "energy audit" and replaced all of their bulbs,
leaving them with a pile of CFLs. The customer didn't bother
to think about what they were allowing to be done. They got
a bunch of free bulbs and the electric company people seemed
to know what they were talking about. They've been led to
believe that CFLs are the future and that incandescents are
no longer available. (I'm curious how all this money ended up
being wasted through electric companies. I'm guessing they're
burning through huge "energy efficiency" federal grants paid
for by taxpayers. And how did the federal grants happen?
No doubt a handful of enterprising congressmen, friends of
utility companies, who saw a chance to send a payout to their
friends while appearing to be "cutting edge" thinkers "preparing
for the future".

I was buying up incandescents for *very* cheap at Home
Depot before they phased out. There were few other people
grabbing them. Most apparently thought they no longer existed.
Recently I needed to find a replacement for 100w work lights
and found a very nice solution: There are now bulbs that
look like incandescent and fit like incandescent, but with a
small halogen bulb inside instead of a filament. 70w is supposed
to be equivalent to 100w incandescent. It's an attractive light,
reasonably priced, and works in existing clamp lights. (I can still
buy 150w and 300w incandescent bulbs, but they've become
absurdly expensive.)

philoÂ* writes:

On 03/14/2014 05:26 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:
http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/cleaning-broken-cfl

Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
the enviro wackos can have them

That was part of the reason I was against them but decided to go with
them any way for several reasons.

1) I have /never/ broken one.

Me either. And I wouldn't panic if I did.
Really small amount of mercury in there.

2) I have broken a few of those fluorescent tubes and have been using
them for over 40 years. Back then no one knew of all the hazards and
we all seemed to keep on living somehow. One of those tubes sure can
produce a lot more pollution than those CFLs

Anyone my age probably played with mercury with our hands when we were
kids and exposed ourselves to more mercury than one of those CFL's

Yep, remember the mercury disappearing as I watched.

That said I am not sure if I'd use one in an area where food is
prepared.

You don't need to eat mercury to absorb it.
Lots of times, the people all worked up about CFLs are strongly
in favor of burning coal. Burning coal puts mercury in the air.

--
Dan Espen

On 3/14/2014 8:32 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 05:26 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:
http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/cleaning-broken-cfl


1) I have /never/ broken one.


I dropped one at my parents bathroom, last year.
I was going to the cellar for the dust pan and
broom, but Mom got there before me -- with the
vacuum cleaner. Dad and I joked about we're all
going to die of mercury.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:00:32 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:

| Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
| the enviro wackos can have them

I don't think it was "enviro wackos" who pushed
CFL. It was just fuzzy thinking and irrrational obsession
with reducing wattage. (Why is there no campaign to
make people mindful about the waste of leaving lights
on unnecessarily?)

In addition to containing mercury and throwing an ugly
light, CFLs are designed to be left on, used for things like
outdoor night lighting. They burn out faster when switched
on and off.

I've had a repeated experience that leads me to think
people are using CFLs simply because most people don't
think things through: I work on a customer's house and have
occasion to deal with lights. I ask why they have CFLs in
their dimmer-equipped recessed lights. On several occasions
I've got the same answer. They say that the electric company
came by for an "energy audit" and replaced all of their bulbs,
leaving them with a pile of CFLs. The customer didn't bother
to think about what they were allowing to be done. They got
a bunch of free bulbs and the electric company people seemed
to know what they were talking about. They've been led to
believe that CFLs are the future and that incandescents are
no longer available. (I'm curious how all this money ended up
being wasted through electric companies. I'm guessing they're
burning through huge "energy efficiency" federal grants paid
for by taxpayers. And how did the federal grants happen?
No doubt a handful of enterprising congressmen, friends of
utility companies, who saw a chance to send a payout to their
friends while appearing to be "cutting edge" thinkers "preparing
for the future".

I was buying up incandescents for *very* cheap at Home
Depot before they phased out. There were few other people
grabbing them. Most apparently thought they no longer existed.
Recently I needed to find a replacement for 100w work lights
and found a very nice solution: There are now bulbs that
look like incandescent and fit like incandescent, but with a
small halogen bulb inside instead of a filament. 70w is supposed
to be equivalent to 100w incandescent. It's an attractive light,
reasonably priced, and works in existing clamp lights. (I can still
buy 150w and 300w incandescent bulbs, but they've become
absurdly expensive.)


I love my CFLs. They clearly are far more efficient and you choose the
type for the purpose. Home Despot has a nice demo area where the
different kinds (daylight, cool white, etc) are housed and you can see
what kind you want.

I didn't think they would last as long as advertised though, and when
I put one in a ceiling fan fixture I wrote the day and the supposed
life span. I replaced it sometime in February of 2014 and noticed what
I had written. It was installed on 1/12/2002, and was supposed to last
five years. It did way better than five years, and wasn't even
supposed to go in a ceiling fan fixture because the vibration isn't
good for a bulb.

But I did just buy the 16 pack of 60 watt incandescents at Home Despot
for something like $4. I have several fixtures that just won't work
correctly with the CFLs so I have to use the incancescents.

I haven't broken a CFL yet, but as a kid I also played with the
mercury from broken thermometers and am still here, so I'm not
terribly worried. I do return the dead ones to the recycle boxes in
the stores.

| I didn't think they would last as long as advertised though, and when
| I put one in a ceiling fan fixture I wrote the day and the supposed
| life span. I replaced it sometime in February of 2014 and noticed what
| I had written. It was installed on 1/12/2002, and was supposed to last
| five years. It did way better than five years, and wasn't even
| supposed to go in a ceiling fan fixture because the vibration isn't
| good for a bulb.
|

I've never used them, but in talking to people who do
I find that short life is the most common complaint. They
seem to be variable.

| I haven't broken a CFL yet, but as a kid I also played with the
| mercury from broken thermometers and am still here, so I'm not
| terribly worried.

I used to have a sizable chemistry lab myself. I also
used to ride my bike behind the DDT mosquito spray truck
because the cloud was fun. The fact that "I'm still here"
doesn't make mercury or DDT safe. Over the years the
concern about mercury has increased. I read awhile back
that there's no longer any level considered safe for children
to be exposed to. With CFLs it just seems such a shame
because the toxicity was entirely avoidable. But economics
always wins out over common sense.

On 03/14/2014 08:31 AM, dgk wrote:
X

I love my CFLs. They clearly are far more efficient and you choose the
type for the purpose. Home Despot has a nice demo area where the
different kinds (daylight, cool white, etc) are housed and you can see
what kind you want.

I didn't think they would last as long as advertised though, and when
I put one in a ceiling fan fixture I wrote the day and the supposed
life span. I replaced it sometime in February of 2014 and noticed what
I had written. It was installed on 1/12/2002, and was supposed to last
five years. It did way better than five years, and wasn't even
supposed to go in a ceiling fan fixture because the vibration isn't
good for a bulb.

But I did just buy the 16 pack of 60 watt incandescents at Home Despot
for something like $4. I have several fixtures that just won't work
correctly with the CFLs so I have to use the incancescents.

I haven't broken a CFL yet, but as a kid I also played with the
mercury from broken thermometers and am still here, so I'm not
terribly worried. I do return the dead ones to the recycle boxes in
the stores.




I have a 19th century house that has a number of enclosed glass antique
globes and for fear of heat damage limited the bulbs to 60 watts. I
hated the very dim light though.


I deiced to try CFL's that were 100 watt equivalent (I think 23 actual
watts) When I first turned them on I thought they were even worse then
the original 60 watt bulbs but after a short time they "warmed up" and
gave excellent light...much better than the 60 watt incandescent.

"Mayayana" writes:

| Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
| the enviro wackos can have them

I don't think it was "enviro wackos" who pushed
CFL. It was just fuzzy thinking and irrrational obsession
with reducing wattage.

Yep, you have to be wacko to want to pay less for your
electricity and change your bulbs less often...

(Why is there no campaign to
make people mindful about the waste of leaving lights
on unnecessarily?)

Uh, there is a campaign like that.
Besides turning off lights when you don't need them is just common
sense. Do you need the government to spend money to tell you that?

In addition to containing mercury and throwing an ugly
light, CFLs are designed to be left on, used for things like
outdoor night lighting. They burn out faster when switched
on and off.

No they don't.

As I've recounted here before, my driveway lamp accepts 3
small base lights. The lights go on when it gets dark,
goes off when the sun comes up.
For years I had to replace all 3 after
an average of a year. That's one incandescent going bad
every 4 months.

I replaced the incandescents with CFLs years ago.
At least 5 years ago, maybe more. They all still operate.

That's at least 5 years vs. 4 months, bulb turned off every day.

I've had a repeated experience that leads me to think
people are using CFLs simply because most people don't
think things through: I work on a customer's house and have
occasion to deal with lights. I ask why they have CFLs in
their dimmer-equipped recessed lights. On several occasions
I've got the same answer. They say that the electric company
came by for an "energy audit" and replaced all of their bulbs,
leaving them with a pile of CFLs. The customer didn't bother
to think about what they were allowing to be done. They got
a bunch of free bulbs and the electric company people seemed
to know what they were talking about. They've been led to
believe that CFLs are the future and that incandescents are
no longer available. (I'm curious how all this money ended up
being wasted through electric companies. I'm guessing they're
burning through huge "energy efficiency" federal grants paid
for by taxpayers. And how did the federal grants happen?
No doubt a handful of enterprising congressmen, friends of
utility companies, who saw a chance to send a payout to their
friends while appearing to be "cutting edge" thinkers "preparing
for the future".

CFLs in dimmers aren't ideal, but they work. I've seen them.

I was buying up incandescents for *very* cheap at Home
Depot before they phased out. There were few other people
grabbing them. Most apparently thought they no longer existed.
Recently I needed to find a replacement for 100w work lights
and found a very nice solution: There are now bulbs that
look like incandescent and fit like incandescent, but with a
small halogen bulb inside instead of a filament.

Halogen bulbs have a filament:

A halogen lamp, also known as a tungsten halogen, quartz-halogen or
quartz iodine lamp, is an incandescent lamp that has a small amount of
a halogen such as iodine or bromine added.

70w is supposed to be equivalent to 100w incandescent. It's an
attractive light, reasonably priced, and works in existing clamp
lights. (I can still buy 150w and 300w incandescent bulbs, but they've
become absurdly expensive.)

Conserving electricity is part of a rational national security policy.
By using less electricity, we are less dependent on foreign sources of
oil.

Everywhere I've used CFLs I get better light.

The drawback to Halogen is the heat.

--
Dan Espen

"Dan.Espen" wrote in message
...
Yep, you have to be wacko to want to pay less for your
electricity and change your bulbs less often...

I have incandescents here that have been working for over 20
years and never have had a failure of any kind.

CFLs rank right there with man made global warming.

"Mayayana" writes:

| I didn't think they would last as long as advertised though, and when
| I put one in a ceiling fan fixture I wrote the day and the supposed
| life span. I replaced it sometime in February of 2014 and noticed what
| I had written. It was installed on 1/12/2002, and was supposed to last
| five years. It did way better than five years, and wasn't even
| supposed to go in a ceiling fan fixture because the vibration isn't
| good for a bulb.
|

I've never used them, but in talking to people who do
I find that short life is the most common complaint. They
seem to be variable.

| I haven't broken a CFL yet, but as a kid I also played with the
| mercury from broken thermometers and am still here, so I'm not
| terribly worried.

I used to have a sizable chemistry lab myself. I also
used to ride my bike behind the DDT mosquito spray truck
because the cloud was fun. The fact that "I'm still here"
doesn't make mercury or DDT safe. Over the years the
concern about mercury has increased. I read awhile back
that there's no longer any level considered safe for children
to be exposed to. With CFLs it just seems such a shame
because the toxicity was entirely avoidable. But economics
always wins out over common sense.

CFLs without mercury?

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?...r_cfls_mercury

Mercury is an essential element in the operation of fluorescent
lighting; it allows the bulbs to be an efficient light source.

If you're really worried:

http://tinyurl.com/kzxs8a8

ArmorLite: A CFL Bulb Without The Risk of Toxic Mercury Exposure

--
Dan Espen

On 3/14/2014 9:00 AM, Mayayana wrote:
Recently I needed to find a replacement for 100w work lights
and found a very nice solution: There are now bulbs that
look like incandescent and fit like incandescent, but with a
small halogen bulb inside instead of a filament.

For the record, halogen bulbs _are_ incandescent. i.e. they heat a
resistive filament with electrical current causing it to glow. They simply
change the materials and design a bit to survive operating at a higher
temperature where 'normal' incandescent bulbs would rapidly fail.

On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"Dan.Espen" wrote in message
...
Yep, you have to be wacko to want to pay less for your
electricity and change your bulbs less often...

I have incandescents here that have been working for over 20
years and never have had a failure of any kind.


other than the filament of course,,,but that's just minor

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 07:32:37 -0500, philo* wrote:


Anyone my age probably played with mercury with our hands when we were
kids and exposed ourselves to more mercury than one of those CFL's

I did. My father was a dentist and he brought home some of it for me
to play with. Some of it got absorbed into my skin, maybe, or stuck in
my fingerprints and washed off, but not too much, and I never did make a
swtich or anything with it, so 60 years later, I still have most of it.
2 or 3 thimbles full.

What can I do with it that would be fun or useful?

And should I see a plastic surgeon or a regular surgeon to get my sixth
finger cut off? It started growing when I got the mercury but now it
gets in the way.

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:58:15 -0500, philo* wrote:



I deiced to try CFL's that were 100 watt equivalent (I think 23 actual
watts) When I first turned them on I thought they were even worse then
the original 60 watt bulbs but after a short time they "warmed up" and
gave excellent light...much better than the 60 watt incandescent.

Not sure when you did this, but newer ones, the cheapest ones HD has,
warm up almost immediately. I still have some older ones. You could
move the ones you have to places where warm-up time matters less.

On 3/14/2014 1:40 PM, micky wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 07:32:37 -0500, philo wrote:


Anyone my age probably played with mercury with our hands when we were
kids and exposed ourselves to more mercury than one of those CFL's

I did. My father was a dentist and he brought home some of it for me
to play with. Some of it got absorbed into my skin, maybe, or stuck in
my fingerprints and washed off, but not too much, and I never did make a
swtich or anything with it, so 60 years later, I still have most of it.
2 or 3 thimbles full.

What can I do with it that would be fun or useful?

And should I see a plastic surgeon or a regular surgeon to get my sixth
finger cut off? It started growing when I got the mercury but now it
gets in the way.


Now you're being silly. you need it. We used to make pennies into dimes
by rubbing them with mercury. That is what the sixth finger is for,
keeps the rest of them clean.

Mukry didnt hert my brane either.

"philo " wrote in message
...
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"Dan.Espen" wrote in message
...
Yep, you have to be wacko to want to pay less for your
electricity and change your bulbs less often...

I have incandescents here that have been working for over 20
years and never have had a failure of any kind.


other than the filament of course,,,but that's just minor
--
Same ones: I have incandescents here that have been working for over 20
years and never have had a failure of any kind.

None repeat NONE have ever failed.


Light fantastic: World's oldest lightbulb still burning bright after 109
years
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lightbulb.html

On 03/14/2014 12:45 PM, micky wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:58:15 -0500, philo wrote:



I deiced to try CFL's that were 100 watt equivalent (I think 23 actual
watts) When I first turned them on I thought they were even worse then
the original 60 watt bulbs but after a short time they "warmed up" and
gave excellent light...much better than the 60 watt incandescent.

Not sure when you did this, but newer ones, the cheapest ones HD has,
warm up almost immediately. I still have some older ones. You could
move the ones you have to places where warm-up time matters less.



Yes. I do have a few different types and the warmup time is fine.

I just did not know about it when I first started using them.

On 03/14/2014 11:26 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:



None repeat NONE have ever failed.



Nothing like running them on 80 volts, nice warm , orange glow...and the
bulbs last for years

| Recently I needed to find a replacement for 100w work lights
| and found a very nice solution: There are now bulbs that
| look like incandescent and fit like incandescent, but with a
| small halogen bulb inside instead of a filament.
|
| For the record, halogen bulbs _are_ incandescent. i.e. they heat a
| resistive filament with electrical current causing it to glow.

OK. What I meant was that they're now making bulbs
the same size and threads as traditional incandescent,
but if you look inside you can see that they've actually
mounted a small halogen bulb inside, glass and all. In other
words, the bulb is actually an adaptor for a halogen bulb.

micky wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 07:32:37 -0500, philo wrote:


Anyone my age probably played with mercury with our hands when we
were kids and exposed ourselves to more mercury than one of those
CFL's

I did. My father was a dentist and he brought home some of it for me
to play with. Some of it got absorbed into my skin, maybe, or stuck in
my fingerprints and washed off, but not too much, and I never did
make a swtich or anything with it, so 60 years later, I still have
most of it. 2 or 3 thimbles full.

What can I do with it that would be fun or useful?

And should I see a plastic surgeon or a regular surgeon to get my
sixth finger cut off? It started growing when I got the mercury but
now it gets in the way.

I wish it was that simple. I could use a new thumb.

Dan.Espen wrote:
Halogen bulbs have a filament:

A halogen lamp, also known as a tungsten halogen, quartz-halogen or
quartz iodine lamp, is an incandescent lamp that has a small amount
of a halogen such as iodine or bromine added.

70w is supposed to be equivalent to 100w incandescent. It's
an attractive light, reasonably priced, and works in existing
clamp lights. (I can still buy 150w and 300w incandescent bulbs, but
they've become absurdly expensive.)

Conserving electricity is part of a rational national security policy.
By using less electricity, we are less dependent on foreign sources of
oil.

Everywhere I've used CFLs I get better light.

The drawback to Halogen is the heat.

And they don't like being dimmed.

philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 11:26 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:



None repeat NONE have ever failed.



Nothing like running them on 80 volts, nice warm , orange glow...and
the bulbs last for years

And are way more inefficient.

"philo " wrote in message
...
On 03/14/2014 11:26 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:



None repeat NONE have ever failed.



Nothing like running them on 80 volts, nice warm , orange glow...and the
bulbs last for years
--
Why would you do that? Can you not afford your beloved CFLs?

On 03/15/2014 04:12 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"philo " wrote in message
...
On 03/14/2014 11:26 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:



None repeat NONE have ever failed.




The only way to get a light bulb to last 20 years is to regularly change
the vacuum inside. Most people are negligent with regards to the proper
maintenance of a light bulb.

Not draining the old vacuum and putting in a new, fresh vacuum is like
never changing the oil on your car.


It's nice to see intelligent people here like Buford who does things right.

"philo " wrote in message
...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lightbulb.html

"philo " wrote in message
...

http://i.imgur.com/bWGp3ct.jpg

On 3/15/2014 6:25 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/15/2014 04:12 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"philo " wrote in message
...
On 03/14/2014 11:26 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:



None repeat NONE have ever failed.

The only way to get a light bulb to last 20 years is to regularly change
the vacuum inside. Most people are negligent with regards to the proper
maintenance of a light bulb.

Not draining the old vacuum and putting in a new, fresh vacuum is like
never changing the oil on your car.

It's nice to see intelligent people here like Buford who does things right.

The really old light bulbs had an indicator
that changed color when the vacuum was getting
low. And, the filaments had to be retungstinated.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

| The drawback to Halogen is the heat.
|
| And they don't like being dimmed.
|

I've never found that. Dimmers are bad for CFL, unless
you get a CFL specifically designed for it. I've never seen
a halogen bulb affected by dimmers. I have them in sconces
in one room that gets an average of probably 2-3 hours
use daily. They haven't been replaced since the room was
renovated about 12 years ago. Another room gets used
a bit more -- typically 3-4 hours daily -- and has 3 track lights.
Those lights are 5-6 years old and still haven't been replaced.
The kitchen has a sconce with the light left on from dark to
bedtime. That bulb seems to go about every 3 years. All are
always on dimmers and rarely set to full power.

The heat issue *is* relevant. I wouldn't use halogens in
recessed lighting, or in any other fixture that's not spaced
away from the wall or ceiling. (Cracked insulation on wires
resulting from heat caused by ceiling-mounted lights is a
big problem in old houses.)

"Bob F" writes:

Dan.Espen wrote:
Halogen bulbs have a filament:

A halogen lamp, also known as a tungsten halogen, quartz-halogen or
quartz iodine lamp, is an incandescent lamp that has a small amount
of a halogen such as iodine or bromine added.

70w is supposed to be equivalent to 100w incandescent. It's
an attractive light, reasonably priced, and works in existing
clamp lights. (I can still buy 150w and 300w incandescent bulbs, but
they've become absurdly expensive.)

Conserving electricity is part of a rational national security policy.
By using less electricity, we are less dependent on foreign sources of
oil.

Everywhere I've used CFLs I get better light.

The drawback to Halogen is the heat.

And they don't like being dimmed.

Odd, my under the cabinet halogens never complained.

Plus, the dimmer works perfectly.

--
Dan Espen

On 03/15/2014 05:27 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"philo " wrote in message
...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lightbulb.html




That article is total BS

I read about it ten years ago and it was only 99 years old


sheesh!

On 03/15/2014 06:53 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 3/15/2014 6:25 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/15/2014 04:12 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"philo " wrote in message
...
On 03/14/2014 11:26 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 10:15 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:



None repeat NONE have ever failed.

The only way to get a light bulb to last 20 years is to regularly change
the vacuum inside. Most people are negligent with regards to the proper
maintenance of a light bulb.

Not draining the old vacuum and putting in a new, fresh vacuum is like
never changing the oil on your car.

It's nice to see intelligent people here like Buford who does things
right.

The really old light bulbs had an indicator
that changed color when the vacuum was getting
low. And, the filaments had to be retungstinated.





yep...here is a photo of my test instrument:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.n...21786576_o.jpg

On 03/15/2014 08:29 AM, Mayayana wrote:
The heat issue*is* relevant. I wouldn't use halogens in
recessed lighting, or in any other fixture that's not spaced
away from the wall or ceiling.

So a 100 watt halogen puts out more BTUs than a regular 100 watt incandescent bulb?

On 03/15/2014 06:27 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:

"philo " wrote in message
...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lightbulb.html


Is that bulb UL listed?
What would happen if the place burned down because of that illegal bulb?
Would the insurance company refuse to pay the claim?

On 3/14/2014 8:32 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/14/2014 05:26 AM, BurfordTJustice wrote:
http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/cleaning-broken-cfl

Never ever will there be one in my house, work place etc.
the enviro wackos can have them




That was part of the reason I was against them but decided to go with
them any way for several reasons.


1) I have /never/ broken one.


2) I have broken a few of those fluorescent tubes and have been using
them for over 40 years. Back then no one knew of all the hazards and we
all seemed to keep on living somehow. One of those tubes sure can
produce a lot more pollution than those CFLs


Anyone my age probably played with mercury with our hands when we were
kids and exposed ourselves to more mercury than one of those CFL's


That said I am not sure if I'd use one in an area where food is prepared.

When this came up several months ago (I'd asked about using a CFL in a
range hood), someone suggested a shatterproof CFL bulb. I found one at
Home Depot. It's a curly CFL inside of a bulb shaped enclosure that has
some sort of rubberized coating. I don't know if it is actually
shatterproof since it cost too much money to test. But I think that the
rubberized enclosure would keep the evil spirits inside if it did break.
(Actual bulb is a bit of a pain because it's really slow to light up).

On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 16:01:58 -0400, Lee B
wrote:

That said I am not sure if I'd use one in an area where food is prepared.

When this came up several months ago (I'd asked about using a CFL in a
range hood), someone suggested a shatterproof CFL bulb. I found one at
Home Depot. It's a curly CFL inside of a bulb shaped enclosure that has
some sort of rubberized coating. I don't know if it is actually
shatterproof since it cost too much money to test. But I think that the
rubberized enclosure would keep the evil spirits inside if it did break.
(Actual bulb is a bit of a pain because it's really slow to light up).

Standard incandescent bulbs for appliances have not been banned, as
for as I know. IIRC those were excluded.

"Jon" wrote in message
...
| On 03/15/2014 08:29 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| The heat issue*is* relevant. I wouldn't use halogens in
| recessed lighting, or in any other fixture that's not spaced
| away from the wall or ceiling.
|
| So a 100 watt halogen puts out more BTUs than a regular 100 watt
incandescent bulb?

Generally the halogen would be lower wattage, but
they do seem to be much hotter. I don't have figures
on it.

On 03/15/2014 07:16 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Jon" wrote in message
...
| On 03/15/2014 08:29 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| The heat issue*is* relevant. I wouldn't use halogens in
| recessed lighting, or in any other fixture that's not spaced
| away from the wall or ceiling.
|
| So a 100 watt halogen puts out more BTUs than a regular 100 watt
incandescent bulb?

Generally the halogen would be lower wattage, but
they do seem to be much hotter. I don't have figures
on it.



Both halogen and regular incandescent 100 watt bulbs would output 341 BTU/hr.

On 3/15/2014 8:07 PM, Stormin 0ren wrote:
| The heat issue*is* relevant. I wouldn't use halogens in
| recessed lighting, or in any other fixture that's not spaced
| away from the wall or ceiling.
|
| So a 100 watt halogen puts out more BTUs than a regular 100 watt
incandescent bulb?

Generally the halogen would be lower wattage, but
they do seem to be much hotter. I don't have figures
on it.



Both halogen and regular incandescent 100 watt bulbs would output 341
BTU/hr.

Might be higher temperature?

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

| | So a 100 watt halogen puts out more BTUs than a regular 100 watt
| incandescent bulb?
|
| Generally the halogen would be lower wattage, but
| they do seem to be much hotter. I don't have figures
| on it.
|
|
|
| Both halogen and regular incandescent 100 watt bulbs would output 341
| BTU/hr.
|
| Might be higher temperature?
|

It's misleading terminology. Watts and BTUs are
both just measures of energy. BTUs are often used
to express heat output, but a BTU is actually just
a measure of energy. He's just translating one term
to the other. It doesn't measure heat output,
or light output for that matter, just as a toaster
doesn't put out the same heat or light as a ceiling
fan/light fixture at the same power draw.

Here's a quote from Wikipedia:

"Halogen lamps get hotter than regular incandescent lamps because the heat
is concentrated on a smaller envelope surface, and because the surface is
closer to the filament. This high temperature is essential to their
operation. Because the halogen lamp operates at very high temperatures, it
can pose fire and burn hazards. In Australia, numerous house fires each year
are attributed to ceiling-mounted halogen downlights."

Halogen bulbs seem to be notably more efficient
than tradition incandescent. The 100w equivalents
I use are 72w, for example. But that's just efficiency
in converting energy to light. There's still 90%+-
energy that's wasted, presumably as heat. So a halogen
bulb might actually produce slightly less heat than a
traditional incandescent bulb, but they're tiny by
comparison. I remember when they first came out
there were a lot of problems with fires because "floor
sconces" were popular at the time -- 5'-6' high standing
lamps with a halogen bulb, pointing at the ceiling. There
were cases where curtains touched the bulbs and
quickly lit on fire.