|
Posted by Jeff on May 1, 2008, 5:40 am
krw wrote:
> jeff@spam_me_not.com says...
>> krw wrote:
>>> jeff@spam_me_not.com says...
>>>> Dennis M wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dennis M wrote:
>>>>>>> Klipstein) wrote:
>>>>>>>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What's this bs about a ban? I've not kept up with the messages.
>>>>>>>> A recently enacted piece of USA Federal legislation bans manufacture,
>>>>>>>> sale and importation of certain incandescent lamps, starting in 2012.
>>>>>>> Some (Republican) congresswoman introduced a bill last week to scale back
>>>>>>> on that legislation and force Uncle Sam to keep its big nose out of
>>>>>>> people's lightbulbs. I hope it goes through.
>>>>>> Why don't you just buy a couple cases of incandescants and keep them
>>>>>> with your 8 tracks. You seem to have missed the spiraling energy costs
>>>>>> and don't seem to care about waste. Well, it's been a great 7 1/2 years
>>>>>> for you hasn't it?
>>>>> Why don't you eat me, smartass. I use CFL bulbs in my home where they're
>>>>> warranted, I just want the option to use incandescents in certain
>>>>> situations also.
>>>> You still have that option. Specialty and low wattage lamps are exempt.
>>>> There's few places where an edison base lamp couldn't be replaced with
>>>> one of the CFLs satisfactorily. It pays to not buy the cheap discount
>>>> store CFLs. And as Don pointed out, you can buy the new halogens, which
>>>> will certainly fall in price.
>>> I'm not about to use CFLs anywhere I spend any time.
>> And, why not?
>
> Primarily because I can't stand the light and they're too slow to
> turn on where I don't care about the light.
>
>> I'm not about
>>> to replace all my fixtures either.
>> Why would you have to?
>
> CFLs aren't for many fixtures. They do get hot and the electronics
> doesn't like it. You have a lot to learn, my boy.
Not as much as you.
There's other alternatives (at a higher cost) for the heat hell holes
you mention. Personally, I've never liked or used recessed lighting.
Most of them are big leaks in a homes thermal envelope, but you haven't
impressed me as caring much about conservation, just consumption.
>
>> A case of bulbs here, and a case
>>> there...
>>>
>>>> I'd still like to use R12, but the switchover did close the ozone
>>>> hole. Remember that?
>>> Oh, good grief!
>> I suppose you are still questioning evolution? And global warming?
>
> Don't be an ass.
Don't be a flunky.
>
>>>> Sometimes you have to do something because it has a far greater benefit.
>>> Someimes you just have to be a good little sheep, eh Komrad?
>> Look whose calling who a sheep?
>
> You *are* a perfect example of a sheep, who likes it when the man
> from Washington bends you over. I bet you really love those 1.6gal
> toilets.
You've been listening to way too much wingnut radio/tv. Such is right
wing opinion in that it is all opinion and no facts. Just insult anyone
who disagrees. Don't let reality get in the way.
BTW, I have an old fashioned toilet because I live in an old house, but
have no objection to the new design toilets. The new ones work, as
opposed to the first generation.
You'd have thought that congress would have thought up
> something larger, given their needs.
>
>> Sometimes it pays not to be a sheep and blindly believe all that horse
>> manure W has been dishing out for the last 7 years. I'd say lemming is a
>> more appropriate term.
>
> Don't be an idiot. I know it's hard work to think, but try it
> anyway.
You seem to think we can just keep living the way we do now. I'm sure
the Mayans felt the same way as they gobbled up all the available resources.
>
>> The tungsten light bulb has been around almost 100 years.
>
> The planet has been around a tad longer than that and is still
> useful.
>
>> There's
>> nothing else we use that comes anywhere near being as inefficient.
>
> Now, don't add lies to your list of sins, junior.
Name a common appliance that is less efficient. The only thing in the
same ballpark is the common loudspeaker, but their drain on the grid is
minor.
>
>> The
>> common light bulb rings in at about 5%. It doesn't have great color
>> rendition unless corrected in which case it has a shorter life or is
>> even less efficient, it runs up the heat load in summer, it has a
>> terrible lifespan... The only real advantage it has is that it is cheap.
>> But not cheap when you consider the lifespan or the energy it uses.
>
> Tungsten lights have far better color rendition than most CFLs.
It's hard to call 2800K, good color rendition.
> Halogens (which I use almost exclusively), even better.
A few hundred degrees hotter.
>
There are excellent color balanced CFLs available, suitable for
viewing and judging color balance in photography. Much better than the
short lived photo floods. Certainly better than the common incandescent
or your halogens.
>> But hey, if you guys love your 100 year old design 100 Watt bulbs. I
>> don't happen to have your emotional attachment.
>
> If that's your best argument, hang up your spurs, kid.
I don't understand your problem. No one is taking away your specialty
halogen lights. All we are talking about is the old edison based lamps
which should join the trash bin of obsolete technology.
>> Jeff
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have a sneaking suspicion the majority of Americans do
>>>>> too.
>>> Sheep? Evidently...
>>>
> obviously
>
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap