Bob Mannix wrote:
"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:58:12 -0700, nafuk
wrote:

Something has to be done,
Ah, the rallying cry of the Iron Age Restoration Society. If all the
passengers on the Titanic had been issued with teaspoons and told to
use them to bale after it hit the iceberg "something would have been
done". It would of course have had no effect whatsoever on the final
outcome nor would it have delayed it by any measurable amount.

Changing light bulbs has the same order of magnitude of impact as
issuing teaspoons on the Titanic would have. If the population of
the UK was entirely eliminated next Wednesday it would have no
measurable effect on the progress or otherwise of climate change. You
don't solve a problem by ignoring its causes and instead playing
around with stealth taxes in the margins with pious mutterings of
"every bit helps" or "everyone must do their bit" to rally the
ignorati.

If "something has to be done" then that something must involve
massive population reduction worldwide and I don't see any of the
greenygroups being brave enough to campaign for that. There is
nothing more hypocritical than green evangelists with children.

You reactionary old fart! Hooray! There is only one "solution" to the effect
we are having on the ecosystem. As you say, that is for 50% of the world's
population to die (at random).

Its happening. Eco catastrophe.


The developed countries' demand for fossil
fuel will collapse and food shortages in the underdeveloped areas will
cease. Anything less is tinkering really. How anyone can imagine that
banning our incandescent lights is going to have any effect alongside the
industrialisation of China and India is bonkers!


Indeed.
MegaDeath is what we need, and Nature will ensure we get it.

tim..... wrote:
"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"tim....." writes:
wrote in message
...
On 28 Sep,
nafuk wrote:

For me, the change to CFLs is not an inconvenience at all
I just changed as bulbs were replaced. I haven't had a GLS lamp for over
5
years, possibly 10.
This doesn't work if you are renting a place for a year.

Why should I spend 100 pounds on light bulbs that
the next tenant is going to get the benefit of?
Take them with you and put the originals back.

and if the new house has no need for 16*E14 candle bulbs? :-(

tim



Do what my previous owners did, and take the light fittings as well.

OG wrote:
"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-09-28 08:58:12 +0100, nafuk said:

On 27 Sep, 21:47, Lobster wrote:
I note that it's been announced today that incandescent lightbulbs are
to be phased out over the next couple of
years:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm

I'm not unduly perturbed (as most of my home is fitted with CFLs anyway)
except that the kitchen and bathroom are fitted with low voltage halogen
downlighters.

Presumably these will go the same way as conventional lightbulbs, won't
they? If so, is there an alternative 'bulb' I'll be able to use, or
will I need to replace the fittings? (and therefore my ceilings :-( )

David
Something has to be done, unless you do not believe in climate change,
or that the tons of particulates and gases we pour into the
environment have no effect on health. Australia has already banned old
style light bulbs.
This is certainly not "the thing"

There is no need to save energy anyway. Heat energy from light bulbs
is distributed into the building, not wasted.


In summer the heat energy certainly IS wasted,

And in the rest of the year dumping 80 watts of heat per100w bulb in the top
20 cm of a room is not 'effective use of electricity for heating'.

Makes the room above pretty cosy tho.

Underfloor heating...;-)

Derek Geldard wrote:

I trained as an engineer, and for me what I find most disheartening
about this country is that a useless tosser of a bloke like that is
making technical decisions.

I don't know whether or not it's a fundamental tenet of democracy that
people who are completely unqualified make the decisions or it's just
the way we do it. I don't even imagine the way he got the job had
anything to do with democracy, who voted to give him it?

DG


Me 2.

The qualifications for being an engineer - a ruthless dedication to the
truth since nature doesn't understand lies, and what we do has to work
with Nature, is in direct opposition to what a politician needs in order
to survive and prosper.

Its an extension of the Peter principle. Ths that can, do. Those that
can't, teach, Those that can't teach, preach. And those that can't
preach get elected.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On 1 Oct 2007 09:24:01 GMT, Huge wrote:

Why we tolerate these arseholes, I have no idea.

Possibly beacuse if we didn't we could well end up with a military junta,
see Burma...

It only differs in degree from what we have now.
Not in principle.

On 2007-10-02 12:13:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher said:

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On 1 Oct 2007 09:24:01 GMT, Huge wrote:

Why we tolerate these arseholes, I have no idea.

Possibly beacuse if we didn't we could well end up with a military
junta, see Burma...

It only differs in degree from what we have now.
Not in principle.

Don't let Chairman Brown hear you say that....

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Indeed.
MegaDeath is what we need, and Nature will ensure we get it.


Just for a moment i thought you meant www.megadeth.com ...

Andy

In message , Stuart Noble
writes
Si wrote:
In message , Stuart Noble
writes
Si wrote:
In message , Stuart Noble
writes

At this time of year and at the equivalent sun cycle in spring, I
find it very difficult to drive with the sun to my right when
passing trees. My eyes are adjusting like mad to compensate.

Can't say I've experienced that, but the underpass thing is
spooky, and I've only noticed it this year (mainly on the northern
approach to the Blackwall Tunnel). I'm pretty sure they've
changed the lighting
They do seem to have increased the lighting in the south tunnel.


Nothing wrong with the tunnel, it's the bloody underpass shortly
before it that concerns me. Perfectly fine at night but an accident
waiting to happen in sunlight.
I'll be aware of what you've said next time I go through (may not be
for a week or two) & come back to you.


Needs to be sunny, and probably needs to be early evening, a set of
circumstances that may not occur for a while :-)

Aaah well, if you drive south through the BT in the early evening 'rush'
hour you should expect the worst of all possible experiences.

--
Si

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:22:20 GMT, "clot" wrote:

wrote:
On 28 Sep, 00:48, "clot" wrote:
wrote:
On 27 Sep, 23:14, Derek Geldard wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:49:39 -0700, wrote:
Lobster wrote:

I note that it's been announced today that incandescent
lightbulbs are to be phased out over the next couple of years:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm

Isnt it nice to have our actions dictated by people with a less
than full understanding of the subject.

The English language is not sufficient to express my shear
undiluted loathing and total and absolute lack of respect for the
individual concerned.

Well, it's less than optimal, that's for sure. If CFLs were
actually better than incandescent lamps, consumers would already
have switched. The fact that they haven't indicates that despite
the propaganda, the shortcomings of CFLs are well known.

I make extensive use of CFLs in my own home, and have yet to find a
truly adequate replacement for incandescents. The CRIs are too low,
the switch-on time for spot-lamp replacements is too long, dimmable
versions are expensive and don't dim to the orange cast of colour
that I prefer in the late evening (I don't want daylight equivalent
at 11pm).

Here Here...

I use low energy bulbs where appropriate, but the light is gloomy and
I can't read by it in my bedside lamp. So I have to turn on two
additional lights to do so... where's the saving now??

It also casts the rooms in this murky tinted gloom and is extremely
depressing and as I live in a period property and all my light
fittings are period, the bulbs look damn ugly and out of character.

It is a stupid and futile effort, but I make a point of buying
additional 'candle' bulbs each week to stock up. I tend to use 40w and
a max of 60w bulbs only and in side lights, so my footprint is pretty
small anyway. But I agree about floodlighting of buildings - and,
Health and Safety now dictate that any area potentially accessible by
the Public (legitimately or not) MUST be well lit all through hours of
darkness. Have you notice Pub car parks, Farms, Nursing homes,
Playgrounds etc, all super floodlit these days???

I HATE THIS COUNTRY!

MG

wrote:

Isnt it nice to have our actions dictated by people with a less than
full understanding of the subject.

I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a response.

My small voice in the wilderness isn't likely to have any effect but if
enough people do likewise it might do some good, as least it's not likely
to make the situation any worse.

--
Mike Clarke

"Mike Clarke" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Isnt it nice to have our actions dictated by people with a less than
full understanding of the subject.

I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a
response.

My small voice in the wilderness isn't likely to have any effect but if
enough people do likewise it might do some good, as least it's not likely
to make the situation any worse.

Just remind your MP that Lupus suffers can be harmed by fluorescent lighting
so he had better make sure any rules take that into account.

On 2007-10-04 21:14:15 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"Mike Clarke" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Isnt it nice to have our actions dictated by people with a less than
full understanding of the subject.

I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a response.

My small voice in the wilderness isn't likely to have any effect but if
enough people do likewise it might do some good, as least it's not likely
to make the situation any worse.

Just remind your MP that Lupus suffers can be harmed by fluorescent
lighting so he had better make sure any rules take that into account.

Quite. Ask him to write to the minister for health as well.

In article , Andy Hall writes
On 2007-10-04 21:14:15 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"Mike Clarke" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Isnt it nice to have our actions dictated by people with a less than
full understanding of the subject.

I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a response.

My small voice in the wilderness isn't likely to have any effect but if
enough people do likewise it might do some good, as least it's not likely
to make the situation any worse.

Just remind your MP that Lupus suffers can be harmed by fluorescent
lighting so he had better make sure any rules take that into account.

Quite. Ask him to write to the minister for health as well.

And ask him for evidence that every local authority has the appropriate
arrangements to allow people to dispose of CFLs without them going to
landfill (and by the way ask him to get a cost for provision of
recycling facilities for CFLs in every borough...)


--
John Alexander,

Remove NOSPAM if replying by e-mail

John wrote:

And ask him for evidence that every local authority has the appropriate
arrangements to allow people to dispose of CFLs without them going to
landfill (and by the way ask him to get a cost for provision of
recycling facilities for CFLs in every borough...)

That was among the points I raised. But to have even the slightest hope of
any result we need lots of MP's to be made aware of these issues. Now if
the relevant government minister got as many messages as have been posted
about CFLs in this group then perhaps he might just possibly give the
matter some more serious consideration.

--
Mike Clarke

On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:58:17 +0100, Mike Clarke
wrote:


I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a response.

Don't bother, the govmint has no choice in the matter as it is an EU
Directive forcing this. The fact the Directive was written by
Philips and Osram and allows for the new "efficient" xenon filament
bulbs patented by Philips and Osram and coming on the market soon
which are a staggering 10% better than normal incandescent and 10 -
20 times the cost is immaterial. I'm sure the Urocrats were also not
influenced by the 66% tax they put on CFL's entering the EU and it
didn't have any effect upon their thinking.

My small voice in the wilderness isn't likely to have any effect but if
enough people do likewise it might do some good, as least it's not likely
to make the situation any worse.

20 million people can complain, it won't turn a hair on a Urocrats
pate. It isn't as if we elect them.

--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:38:01 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:58:17 +0100, Mike Clarke
wrote:


I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a response.

Don't bother, the govmint has no choice in the matter as it is an EU
Directive forcing this. The fact the Directive was written by
Philips and Osram and allows for the new "efficient" xenon filament
bulbs patented by Philips and Osram and coming on the market soon
which are a staggering 10% better than normal incandescent and 10 -
20 times the cost is immaterial. I'm sure the Urocrats were also not
influenced by the 66% tax they put on CFL's entering the EU and it
didn't have any effect upon their thinking.

My small voice in the wilderness isn't likely to have any effect but if
enough people do likewise it might do some good, as least it's not likely
to make the situation any worse.

20 million people can complain, it won't turn a hair on a Urocrats
pate. It isn't as if we elect them.

Thank You Peter.

I've saved your posting into my "Tubes" folder.

That will scare them.

DG

In article .com,
nafuk writes:
Something has to be done, unless you do not believe in climate change,
or that the tons of particulates and gases we pour into the
environment have no effect on health. Australia has already banned old
style light bulbs.

Well, I don't buy most of those, but I believe it's
important to reduce energy usage because we've run
out of the resources, and are becoming horribly
vulnerable to having our energy controlled by other
countries. On a more global scale, I think this will
be a cause for another world war and/or global recession.
These will result in a serious drop in quality of life
for most people in the West, and possibly the collapse
of some of Western civilisation as we know it, as it
will be unlikely to adapt in the time scales involved.

For me, the change to CFLs is not an inconvenience at all compared to

Agreed. I don't think I've had any GLS lamps in the
house for at least 15 years, and very few filament
lamps of other types. Almost everything is fluorescent.

that of people in pourer countries who are experiencing drought and or
flooding which is destroying there food sources and starving them. Are
people really saying they would rather be able to dim a light than
help stabalise the climate and possibly save some lives?

I don't believe we have that control over the climate.
I'd be much more concerned about the other issues I
mention above.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 2007-10-04 22:38:01 +0100, Peter Parry said:

On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:58:17 +0100, Mike Clarke
wrote:


I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a response.

Don't bother, the govmint has no choice in the matter as it is an EU
Directive forcing this.

Referendum?

20 million people can complain, it won't turn a hair on a Urocrats
pate. It isn't as if we elect them.

Is a Urocrat a civil servant who ****es all over you?

"Mike Clarke" wrote in message
...
John wrote:

And ask him for evidence that every local authority has the appropriate
arrangements to allow people to dispose of CFLs without them going to
landfill (and by the way ask him to get a cost for provision of
recycling facilities for CFLs in every borough...)

That was among the points I raised. But to have even the slightest hope of
any result we need lots of MP's to be made aware of these issues. Now if
the relevant government minister got as many messages as have been posted
about CFLs in this group then perhaps he might just possibly give the
matter some more serious consideration.

--
Mike Clarke

The 'secret' is to bury the *****ds in paperwork!
A letter to an MP should be noted by him/her, and then copied by him/her to
a Minister or the Ministers PPS (Parliamentary Private Secretary). Probably
three people involved, not much record-keeping.
A letter to an MP and copied to the responsible Minister gets the MP
involved, the Minister involved, his Ministerial office, his PPS and
generates cross-correspondence between the parties, Probably a dozen people
involved. Enclosures are entered on files, Internal Memos are generated
and 'loose minutes' exchanged between the MP and the Ministry.
A letter to an MP and copied to the responsible Minister (say Energy) and
another Minister (say Health) gets the MP involved, both Ministers
involved, their Ministerial offices,their PPS and generates
cross-correspondence between the _all_ parties, Probably three dozen people
involved. Files, Letters in-out of Registries .... it becomes not much fun
for the (political) ministers and their (theoretically) impartial staff.
Hopefully, you can see where this is going ... a letter to an MP is
important, but a letter copied to every Ministry you think might be involved
generates much more 'noise' and activity. {Even if it only gets a 'the
Minister' is unable to assist ... response]

--


Brian

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:47:01 GMT, Lobster
wrote:

I note that it's been announced today that incandescent lightbulbs are
to be phased out over the next couple of years:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/105w-525w-equiv-Compact-Fluorescent-Bulb-5500k-CFL_W0QQitemZ260138395431QQihZ016QQcategoryZ3860QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

CFLs are "too dim" are they !?!

In message , Andy Dingley
writes
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:47:01 GMT, Lobster
wrote:

I note that it's been announced today that incandescent lightbulbs are
to be phased out over the next couple of years:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/105w-525w-equi...-Bulb-5500k-CF
L_W0QQitemZ260138395431QQihZ016QQcategoryZ3860QQr dZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQc
mdZViewItem

CFLs are "too dim" are they !?!

they're a damned sight more expensive than the bulbs from Germany I
referenced

--
Si

In article ,
Andy Dingley writes:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:47:01 GMT, Lobster
wrote:

I note that it's been announced today that incandescent lightbulbs are
to be phased out over the next couple of years:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/105w-525w-equiv-Compact-Fluorescent-Bulb-5500k-CFL_W0QQitemZ260138395431QQihZ016QQcategoryZ3860QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

CFLs are "too dim" are they !?!

It's going to be nearer 300W equiv, unless you can find a
500W softtone long life bulb.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article Mike Clarke wrote:

I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a
response.

Well I eventually got a reply from the Minister. Naturally my email won't
have any effect on the government's actions but the reply did provide a few
interesting bits of information in the following quotes:

"On 27 September the Secretary of State announced a voluntary initiative led
by the major retailers and energy suppliers that will see inefficient
incandescent light bulbs phased out"

.... so commercial bodies persuaded the government to support their money
earning scheme, which is voluntary so the government don't get the blame
for imposing it.

"The initiative has the strong backing of the major light bulb
manufacturers"

.... well, there's no surprise there.

"Since they were first introduced in the 1980's CFLs have been developed to
match the quality and use of existing inefficient bulbs"

.... so they've swallowed the claims of the manufactures, like 11W CFL (600
lumen when new) = 60W GLS tungsten (700 lumen).

There was one piece of information which at least confirms that halogens
won't be affected (yet)...

"Retailers will not stop selling bulbs where no efficient alternative
currently exists and householders should not need to change their existing
light fittings ... I would like to reassure your constituent that we shall
not be phasing out bulbs where no efficient alternative exists"

.... so it looks like things like G4 and G9 halogen capsules should still be
around for a while then. But I wouldn't be too sure about the future of
GU10's though.

I'd raised the issue of mercury content and disposal, quoting
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268747,00.html as an example of the
extreme measures people might be faced with. The reply contained a couple
of interesting points:

"... there has been a substantial decline in the mercury content of CFLs
over the last 30 years from around 100mg per bulb in the 1970's to around
4mg per bulb today... Industry is working to further reduce mercury
levels ... there are already new products on the market with a content of
less than 2 mg per bulb. Secondly, over the lifetime of both types of bulb
CFLs actually produce less mercury. This is due to the fact that mercury is
emitted from power stations during electricity generation and CFLs are more
energy efficient"

.... and, on the subject of disposal of breakages ...

"... care should be taken ... and the debris swept up and placed in a
plastic bag. The area should then be wiped with a damp cloth which should
then be placed in the plastic bag and sealed. The bag can be discarded with
the normal refuse."

.... so even if it is (or will be) illegal to chuck a CFL in the bin you can
do so if you break it first.

--
Mike Clarke

On 11 Nov, 18:05, Mike Clarke wrote:
In article Mike Clarke wrote:
I emailed my MP pointing out the limitations of CFLs and highlighting the
problems which will arise in situations where it's not practicable to use
them as direct replacements for filament bulbs. He appears to be
sympathetic to the problem and has asked the Energy Minister to a
response.

Well I eventually got a reply from the Minister. Naturally my email won't
have any effect on the government's actions but the reply did provide a few
interesting bits of information in the following quotes:

"On 27 September the Secretary of State announced a voluntary initiative led
by the major retailers and energy suppliers that will see inefficient
incandescent light bulbs phased out"

I'd raised the issue of mercury content and disposal, quoting
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268747,00.html as an example of the
extreme measures people might be faced with. The reply contained a couple
of interesting points:
snip
Secondly, over the lifetime of both types of bulb
CFLs actually produce less mercury. This is due to the fact that mercury is
emitted from power stations during electricity generation and CFLs are more
energy efficient"

That is a misrepresentation of the truth: it is only definitely true
if the all the power is generated from coal. It certainly is
definitely not true for hydroelectric, tidal, wave-power and wind
power; and almost certainly not true for nuclear, and probably not
true for oil and gas fired power stations. The minister should know
better.

Sid

On 2007-11-11 18:05:12 +0000, Mike Clarke said:

... so it looks like things like G4 and G9 halogen capsules should still be
around for a while then. But I wouldn't be too sure about the future of
GU10's though.



Excellent.

So where do I find fittings using G4 and G9?

In article 4737577f@qaanaaq Andy Hall wrote:

So where do I find fittings using G4 and G9?

There's an abundance of them around in the shops, usually with lots of thin
spindly arms with little 10W or 20W halogen 12V capsules at the end, e.g.
Argos 0021993, 4324304 and 4323659. We've been looking for a central
fitting for the living room (don't want downlighters or reflector spots)
and would normally prefer something simpler with good old fashioned bulbs
but if that means having to end up with CFLs poking out the end of the
fittings then 12V halogens might be the way to go. There seems to be a
distinct shortage of fittings designed to look right with CFLs.

--
Mike Clarke

In article ,
Mike Clarke writes:
In article 4737577f@qaanaaq Andy Hall wrote:

So where do I find fittings using G4 and G9?

There's an abundance of them around in the shops, usually with lots of thin
spindly arms with little 10W or 20W halogen 12V capsules at the end, e.g.
Argos 0021993, 4324304 and 4323659. We've been looking for a central
fitting for the living room (don't want downlighters or reflector spots)
and would normally prefer something simpler with good old fashioned bulbs
but if that means having to end up with CFLs poking out the end of the
fittings then 12V halogens might be the way to go. There seems to be a

G9 are mains halogen capsules, in 25W or 40W IIRC.

distinct shortage of fittings designed to look right with CFLs.

I tend not to like fittings where the bulb is visible at all.
There's a distinct shortage of fittings I like, so I tend to
make my own, and as such, they're designed to take CFL's.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article Andrew Gabriel wrote:

I tend not to like fittings where the bulb is visible at all.
There's a distinct shortage of fittings I like

My sentiments too. Many ceiling fittings seem to be designed as over
elaborate and distracting ornamental "features" instead of a good
unobtrusive source of illumination.

--
Mike Clarke