Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(


I heard something about it on TV news yesterday along the lines of "From
1 January 2009, retailers will no longer be replenishing their stocks of
100W tungsten bulbs".

To put it another way, "When they're gone, they're gone!"

On 6 Jan, 11:03, wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

Do what everyone else is doing - replace them with multiple 50W
downlighters, much better for the environment!

A friend of mine has just had 20 of those put in her kitchen!

T

wrote in message
...
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(


You can still get them if you try.

http://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/pro...100w-bc-pearl/

wrote:

Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs

In which case you'd better stock up with lots of 60w bulbs at the same time
before they get withdrawn as well :-(

--
Mike Clarke

On 6 Jan, 13:03, Owain wrote:
wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Remember that throwing out a perfectly good fitting (to landfill
probably) and replacing it with another that probably needs 120W or 180W
to provide the same light output is good for the environment^W lighting
manufacturers

Actually, I think many people will go out and buy 300W free-standing
halogen uplighters, then wonder why their electricity bills have gone
up. I expect the number of house fires caused by such lamps will also
increase.

If CFLs were so good, they should be able to compete in a free market,
and not need government intervention to force their use. The country
seems to have moved to using LCD televisions without needing
government prodding.

Sid

On Jan 6, 5:03*am, wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

Do what is smart, use 25w cfls. Why anyone still buys those energy
wasting dinosours for lamps and most aplications is dumb.

Did you know an incandesant bulb is actualy an electric heater
putting out light you can see as a byproduct. Think of it this way,
92-96 % of the energy consumed is radiated as heat, only 4-8% is light
you can see. And since you pay more for electricity per Btu its a
looser, especialy in summer with the AC on.

Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.

In article
,
wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.
"Everyone's a winner." (yeah yeah)

Tesco have a fantastic range. (Fantastic as in "bewildering" -- but
you're sure to find a bog standard bayonet 100W equivalent.)

john

On 6 Jan, 13:41, ransley wrote:
On Jan 6, 5:03*am, wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

*Do what is smart, use 25w cfls. Why anyone still buys those energy
wasting dinosours for lamps and most aplications is dumb.

*Did you know an incandesant bulb is actualy an electric heater
putting out light you can see as a byproduct. Think of it this way,
92-96 % of the energy consumed is radiated as heat, only 4-8% is light
you can see. And since you pay more for electricity per Btu its a
looser, especialy in summer with the AC on.

*Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. *Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.

In an office environment with multiple light sources I'm sure this
isn't a problem - but in my home where I typically have only a single
light in the middle of the ceiling the energy saving bulbs don't
produce anywhere near the same about of light.

Mark.

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:03:34 +0000, Owain wrote:

wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Remember that throwing out a perfectly good fitting (to landfill
probably) and replacing it with another that probably needs 120W or 180W
to provide the same light output is good for the environment^W lighting
manufacturers

.... never mind the manufacturing complexity of the "environmentally
friendly" ones, or the disposal issues, or the amount of plastic in
them, or that when an integrated one fails it's likely still got either a
good tube or good electronics and yet we still toss the whole lot...

but yeah, that's aside from the crap light output, slow start time,
lifespan reduction on short cycles, electrical noise issues etc. it never
ends :-)

There's still a monster 150W incandescent bulb in our garage which looks
like it might have been there for a good 30-40 years judging by the design
- Sadly its twin failed on us a few months back. (way too cold in there
for cfl's to work)

cheers

J.

wrote in message
...
On 6 Jan, 11:03, wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

Do what everyone else is doing - replace them with multiple 50W
downlighters, much better for the environment!

A friend of mine has just had 20 of those put in her kitchen!

A kilowatt is better for the environment?

On 6 Jan, 11:03, wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

One thing which hacks me off is that they are STILL selling dimmers
and PIR switches that can only be used with tungsten bulbs ...

wrote in message
...
On 6 Jan, 13:41, ransley wrote:
On Jan 6, 5:03 am, wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

Do what is smart, use 25w cfls. Why anyone still buys those energy
wasting dinosours for lamps and most aplications is dumb.

Did you know an incandesant bulb is actualy an electric heater
putting out light you can see as a byproduct. Think of it this way,
92-96 % of the energy consumed is radiated as heat, only 4-8% is light
you can see. And since you pay more for electricity per Btu its a
looser, especialy in summer with the AC on.

Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.

In an office environment with multiple light sources I'm sure this
isn't a problem - but in my home where I typically have only a single
light in the middle of the ceiling the energy saving bulbs don't
produce anywhere near the same about of light.

IMHO they are crap, I fitted 3 x 11W cfls, switched them on and whoa,
impressive.
A few weeks later, switch them on and struggle to find a chair in the
darkness.
After that, even when they're warmed-up they've lost boatloads of light
compared to new ones.

In article ,
ransley wrote:

Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.

Motion sensors?

I've just replaced a fixed outdoor light with one of these:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TL3500A.html

CFL. Instant start to full brightness. Works a treat. Very bright indeed.

Gordon

"jal" wrote in message
...
In article
,
wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.
"Everyone's a winner." (yeah yeah)

Tesco have a fantastic range. (Fantastic as in "bewildering" -- but
you're sure to find a bog standard bayonet 100W equivalent.)


Although a firm supporter of CLFs I do think that they are usually
over-optimistic in their 18w = 100w ratings). I'd go for at least 22w to
replace a 100w bulb and would go for 25W if available.

I used to reckon that each one saved about £60 in electricity costs over its
lifetime, but that's probably quite a bit more by now. I accept that there
may be some local heating benefit, but since nobody else puts electric
heaters close to the ceiling it's fair to say that if you need that heat,
that proportion (75%) of the electrical bill that would be better spent on a
heating system.

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:41:15 -0800 (PST), ransley
wrote:

On Jan 6, 5:03*am, wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Mark.

Do what is smart, use 25w cfls. Why anyone still buys those energy
wasting dinosours for lamps and most aplications is dumb.

Did you know an incandesant bulb is actualy an electric heater
putting out light you can see as a byproduct. Think of it this way,
92-96 % of the energy consumed is radiated as heat, only 4-8% is light
you can see. And since you pay more for electricity per Btu its a
looser, especialy in summer with the AC on.

Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.


Swan's invention.
Edison pinched the idea from him

Gordon Henderson wrote:
In article ,
ransley wrote:

Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.

Motion sensors?

I've just replaced a fixed outdoor light with one of these:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TL3500A.html

CFL. Instant start to full brightness. Works a treat. Very bright indeed.


"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:59:51 UTC, jal wrote:

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.

You're having a laugh.

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:59:51 UTC, jal wrote:

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.

You're having a laugh.


The manufacturers got me with that con too. 20W energy saving bulbs are
crap - at least in terms of amount and "quality" of light. I've also had
such bulbs fail after a few weeks, they are also temperamental in my
cold garage and workshop. Not impressed. So I've stocked up on 100 watt
incandescent bulbs and have enough to last for several years, or until
the manufacturers turn out a decent alternative at a reasonable price.

--
David in Normandy.
To e-mail you must include the password FROG on the
subject line, or it will be automatically deleted
by a filter and not reach my inbox.

In article ,
Bruce writes:
Gordon Henderson wrote:

I've just replaced a fixed outdoor light with one of these:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TL3500A.html

CFL. Instant start to full brightness. Works a treat. Very bright indeed.

"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.

It's probably nearer to 100W linear halogen in that application.
The large size of the light source and self-shadowing of the tube
severely impact the overall efficiency in reflector applications
like this, so you're probably looking at a 3:1 ratio.

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

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 18:19:54 UTC, David in Normandy
wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:59:51 UTC, jal wrote:

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.

You're having a laugh.


The manufacturers got me with that con too. 20W energy saving bulbs are
crap - at least in terms of amount and "quality" of light. I've also had
such bulbs fail after a few weeks, they are also temperamental in my
cold garage and workshop. Not impressed. So I've stocked up on 100 watt
incandescent bulbs and have enough to last for several years, or until
the manufacturers turn out a decent alternative at a reasonable price.

So have I.

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

On 6 Jan, 19:25, "Bob Eager" wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 18:19:54 UTC, David in Normandy



wrote:
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:59:51 UTC, jal wrote:

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.

You're having a laugh.

The manufacturers got me with that con too. 20W energy saving bulbs are
crap - at least in terms of amount and "quality" of light. I've also had
such bulbs fail after a few weeks, they are also temperamental in my
cold garage and workshop. Not impressed. So I've stocked up on 100 watt
incandescent bulbs and have enough to last for several years, or until
the manufacturers turn out a decent alternative at a reasonable price.

So have I.

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

Anyone know where you can still get 100W bulbs in the shops? I could
order some on the net,
but its a bit of a pain. I won't have chance to look around locally
until Saturday.
Somehow this 100W business escaped my attention. But I'll start
stockpiling
60W bulbs, getting a few each time I go to the supermarket !
Simon.

(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:
In article ,
Bruce writes:
Gordon Henderson wrote:

I've just replaced a fixed outdoor light with one of these:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TL3500A.html

CFL. Instant start to full brightness. Works a treat. Very bright indeed.

"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.

It's probably nearer to 100W linear halogen in that application.
The large size of the light source and self-shadowing of the tube
severely impact the overall efficiency in reflector applications
like this, so you're probably looking at a 3:1 ratio.


That's more like it.

I might even have been slightly more generous,
and allowed a claim of 4:1. But 8.3:1 ?

(300/36)

In article ,
Bruce wrote:
Gordon Henderson wrote:
In article ,
ransley wrote:

Every building I run I have cut electric consumption by 50%, just
from Cfls and T8s. Sure for down lights, motion sensors, work lights,
and a few aplications Edisons old invention is better. Buy quality
soft or warm white ones with a warranty.

Motion sensors?

I've just replaced a fixed outdoor light with one of these:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TL3500A.html

CFL. Instant start to full brightness. Works a treat. Very bright indeed.


"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.

Maybe, but I don't actually care. It does what I need it do do which is
light up a very dark area outside my house.

The only thing I have to compare it with is my father in law who has
some 250W halogen lights in the same (or what looks like the same)
enclosure. This appears brighter, but I know that's hardly a scientific
test, nor do I care. What I do know is that my unit runs at 35W, his
250W and it seems as light, if not more so to me.

But from my point of view - it's an outside light, PIR activated, timer,
constant-on facility, very bright, puts less money in the pockets of
the greedy power company shareholders. Job done

Gordon

sm_jamieson wrote:

Anyone know where you can still get 100W bulbs in the shops? I could
order some on the net,
but its a bit of a pain. I won't have chance to look around locally
until Saturday.
Somehow this 100W business escaped my attention. But I'll start
stockpiling
60W bulbs, getting a few each time I go to the supermarket !

Last time I was there, Makro had them in quantity - about £2 for 10 IIRC

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Gordon Henderson wrote:
In article ,
Bruce wrote:

"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.

Maybe, but I don't actually care.


It's your call.

"David in Normandy" wrote in message
...
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:59:51 UTC, jal wrote:

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.

You're having a laugh.


The manufacturers got me with that con too. 20W energy saving bulbs are
crap - at least in terms of amount and "quality" of light. I've also had
such bulbs fail after a few weeks, they are also temperamental in my cold
garage and workshop. Not impressed. So I've stocked up on 100 watt
incandescent bulbs and have enough to last for several years, or until the
manufacturers turn out a decent alternative at a reasonable price.

There already is.. 5ft tubes.

dennis@home wrote:

The manufacturers got me with that con too. 20W energy saving bulbs
are crap - at least in terms of amount and "quality" of light. I've
also had such bulbs fail after a few weeks, they are also
temperamental in my cold garage and workshop. Not impressed. So I've
stocked up on 100 watt incandescent bulbs and have enough to last for
several years, or until the manufacturers turn out a decent
alternative at a reasonable price.

There already is.. 5ft tubes.

Granted, for garage and workshop, I wouldn't want any inside my home though.
--
David in Normandy.
To e-mail you must include the password FROG on the
subject line, or it will be automatically deleted
by a filter and not reach my inbox.

Mike Clarke wrote:
wrote:

Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs

In which case you'd better stock up with lots of 60w bulbs at the same time
before they get withdrawn as well :-(

It aint that bad, OSRAM have started to do direct halogen replacements
for GLS bulbs, Sainsburys sell them. They consist of a halogen capsule
lamp inside a secondary bulb with a BC or ES cap. They take a little
less power, 42W for the same output as a 60W.

James

In message
,
sm_jamieson writes
Anyone know where you can still get 100W bulbs in the shops? I could
order some on the net,

I saw some in Wilkinsons the other day, but don't know whether they are
still replenishing stock when people buy them. They might not last long
if other shops have stopped stocking them.

--
Clive Page

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:36:45 -0800 (PST) wrote :
If CFLs were so good, they should be able to compete in a free
market, and not need government intervention to force their use.
The country seems to have moved to using LCD televisions without
needing government prodding.

A good few have moved to plasma sets too. Energy inefficient,
questions about durability but cheap sticker prices.

--
Tony Bryer, 'Software to build on' from Greentram
www.superbeam.co.uk www.superbeam.com www.greentram.com

In article ,
James Salisbury nntp.dsl.pipex.com writes:
It aint that bad, OSRAM have started to do direct halogen replacements
for GLS bulbs, Sainsburys sell them. They consist of a halogen capsule
lamp inside a secondary bulb with a BC or ES cap. They take a little
less power, 42W for the same output as a 60W.

They aren't the same light output (and don't claim to be).
Neither do they meet the proposed EU requirements on efficiency
to survive the EU ban.

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

In article ,
Bruce wrote:
Gordon Henderson wrote:
In article ,
Bruce wrote:

"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.

Maybe, but I don't actually care.

It's your call.

Yes it is, and I really don't understand what the fuss is about. I bought
it for 2 reasons - one to light up an otherwise dark area, and it does
that fantastically well, and 2 to put less money in the pockets of the
greedy power company shareholders, which is also does fantastically well.

Gordon

"jal" wrote in message
...
In article
,
wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

Am I missing something? Why don't you just replace them with "energy
saving" equivalents -- I think it's 20W to replace 100W tungsten.
"Everyone's a winner." (yeah yeah)

Because:

1) 20 W CFL does not replace a 100W
2) 20 W CFL's at a sensible price are hard to find.
3) CFL's have a very long "start up" time. If I want a bright bulb in a
room the chances are that I want it to come on instantly!
4) CFL's fade over time. Aa 100W equivalent when new, is a 60W equivalent
after 18 months

tim

"tim....." wrote:

2) 20 W CFL's at a sensible price are hard to find.


GE from ASDA or Tesco.

Very cheap, £1.03 to £1.43.

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:31:10 +0000, tim..... wrote:
3) CFL's have a very long "start up" time. If I want a bright bulb in a
room the chances are that I want it to come on instantly!

Well, they use less energy to run than incandescents, so why not
simply leave them on all the time?

4) CFL's fade over time. Aa 100W equivalent when new, is a 60W
equivalent after 18 months

Wear sunglasses in the house of ever-increasing transparency as time goes
on, thus maintaining an apparent constant level of brightness.

(it's been that sort of day today ;-)

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:22:22 +1100, Tony Bryer wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:36:45 -0800 (PST) wrote :
If CFLs were so good, they should be able to compete in a free
market, and not need government intervention to force their use.
The country seems to have moved to using LCD televisions without
needing government prodding.

A good few have moved to plasma sets too. Energy inefficient
questions about durability but cheap sticker prices.

But in the grand scheme of things surely you have to consider the bigger
picture (TV - picture - ho ho) and include the manufacturing
hit, particularly if replacing a set at a higher frequency than you would
with a CRT?

Gordon Henderson wrote:
In article ,
Bruce wrote:
Gordon Henderson wrote:
In article ,
Bruce wrote:
"Brightness is equivalent to about 300W incandescent lamp."

That's a lie, for a start.
Maybe, but I don't actually care.
It's your call.

Yes it is, and I really don't understand what the fuss is about. I bought
it for 2 reasons - one to light up an otherwise dark area, and it does
that fantastically well, and 2 to put less money in the pockets of the
greedy power company shareholders, which is also does fantastically well.

Why are power company shareholders greedy? (after all its probably you
pension they will one day be paying)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Jan 6, 11:48*am, Jethro wrote:
On 6 Jan, 11:03, wrote:

Has anyone else noticed the disapperance of 100w light bulbs from the
supermarkets and B&Q?
Aparrently for environmental reasons - but now I need to replace my
light fittings with ones that will take multiple 60w bulbs :-(

One thing which hacks me off is that they are STILL selling dimmers
and PIR switches that can only be used with tungsten bulbs ...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What a bunch of nonsense; this mandatory use of CFLs (compact
fluorescent or non incandescent bulbs) is, at least it is here. the
only rational use is maybe in outside lamp fixtures where 'wasted'
heat is dissipated to outdoors. But some CFLs for example do not work
well in low temps.

One poster to a group such as this remarked that "The few nanoseconds
that photons spend as light before that radiation strikes something
within the home and it becomes warmer, is inconsequential".

One could in fact heat a home with light bulbs. Warming an outside dog
kennel/shelter or preventing a car engine from freezing by means of a
light bulb a not uncommon practice! Have also seen regular bulbs and
sometimes incandescent heat lamps used to keep new born chicks warm
and alive.

Here we use electric heating during most of 10 months per year;
especially at night when lights tend to be on. So it doesn't matter if
the heat comes from say an electric heater or bunch of light bulbs.

There is even a type of heater advertised which comprises several heat
lamps in a fancy enclosure. It employs four 150 watt incandescent
bulbs, 600 watts which is approx. 2000 BTUs.

Yesterday needed to heat up the garage; the wall mounted 3000 watt
heater was a bit slow so added some heat heat by plugging in two 500
watt halogen lamps thus adding 1000 watts (another 3400 BTUs.)

Almost 100% of homes here (certainly all new construction, except for
a few that have heat pumps with electric heat as backup for low
temperatures) use hydro generated electric heating. Also many older
(30 to 50 years) homes originally equipped with oil fired furnaces
have replaced them with electric furnaces. No gas here except
delivered propane, which is expensive.

The use of expensive and in many case not yet proven reliability CFLs
seems, so far to be one of those do-gooder projects by politicians who
do not understand basic physics, but want to be seen as 'doing
something'!

If it ever starts to happen here, will lay in a stock of say 200 bulbs
in the 40, 60 and 100 watt common sizes. They presently cost 88 cents
plus 13 cents sales tax for a pack of four bulbs. Approx 25 cents Can.
or around say 15p, per bulb.

Have one CFL on the desk here that failed; took it apart out of
curiosity and found badly or unsoldered connections of a capacitor on
the small component board in the base. Previously the base had come
apart because the glue failed! Before that using tape to hold it
together not recommended cos it then sagged!

CFLs: Piffle and balderdash! Signed: Marley Scrooge!

On 7 Jan, 02:26, Jules
wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:22:22 +1100, Tony Bryer wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:36:45 -0800 (PST) *wrote :
If CFLs were so good, they should be able to compete in a free
market, and not need government intervention to force their use.
The country seems to have moved to using LCD televisions without
needing government prodding.

A good few have moved to plasma sets too. Energy inefficient
questions about durability but cheap sticker prices.

But in the grand scheme of things surely you have to consider the bigger
picture (TV - picture - ho ho) and include the manufacturing
hit, particularly if replacing a set at a higher frequency than you would
with a CRT?

Well, yes. There's also the feature that at large screen sizes, the
power needed to run the LCD backlight is not that far off the power
needed to run a CRT of the same screen diagonal.

However, the point I was trying to make is that if the buyers see a
net perceived benefit to the new technology, it'll be very popular. It
is self evident that domestic consumers, in the main, have not been
convinced of the net benefit of using CFLs - so government prodding
has been needed.

Standard fluorescent lamps have been around for a very long time, and
not displaced incandescent in general domestic use - garages,
workshops, and oddly enough, kitchens being the exception - so
something was deterring people from using them generally. That
'something' is not cost, as people have been quite happily forking out
large amounts of money for LCD and plasma TVs, and for new mobile
phones each fashion season. Over the period standard fluorescents have
been available, homes have sprouted dishwashers, washing machines,
microwaves, freezers, and home computers - so it is not as if people
are afraid of new technology, or lack the wish to spend money on new
things. I don't know the exact reason why people don't want CFLs, and
we could all speculate on the possible reasons, but the plain fact is
that people (in general) have been staying away from them in droves.
It has required government/EU intervention to incentivise people to
buy CFLs by restricting the easy availability of incandescents in the
form easiest to use.

The money used to encourage the use of CFLs would (in my opinion) have
been better spent on encouraging the replacement of electric resistive
element space heating with heat pumps, especially in new-builds.

Cheers,

Sid