Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

You're right about the Halogen. What I'm planning is to go totally renewable.

I'm trying to find a lamp that uses whale oil.

Reply to
HeyBub
Loading thread data ...

Surely you're not thinking of SONY!

After what the bastards did with their root-kit DRM scheme.

Reply to
HeyBub

"Need" is not the determining factor, "want" is.

It's not a mistake - it's called 'freedom.'

Reply to
HeyBub

Forever. The market is not always right, but it is right far more often than any other technique.

If you disapprove of someone buying an SUV or an incandescent light bulb or pampering a pet, then YOU are the one with the problem, not the SUV owner.

Reply to
HeyBub

The Nanny Geniuses in D.C. just passed legislation that, in addition to putting some serious "hurt" on our domestic car and light truck industry, kills off those outmoded, wasteful and environmentally DEVASTATING electric lamps we've all come to know and love.

Say "goodbye" to the venerable 100w and 75w, cheap, light bulb. (Thomas Alva Edison will surely turn over in his grave).

Stock-up and horde 'em now, folks. They'll be worth a LOT in 10-15 years on the black market.

I just switched all my exterior entryways and garage "eyebrow" fixtures to CF lamps. I am considering switching BACK the one beside the front door.

I rarely use exterior lighting. Mostly, I switch-on the front porch light when there is someone at the door - a rare occurrence.

On those occasions, I want IMMEDIATE light.

However, right now, it is 12F outside and that curly, compact fluorescent lamp outside, by the front door, doesn't provide usable light worth a damn for a minute or two.

With no apologies to anyone, I believe that switching to CF lamps won't, over the LONG "haul", provide a bit of "relief" to our ever-increasing energy consumption. Although that implies that our ever-increasing energy consumption needs relief, I am adamantly UNconvinced of that in any case.

The Energy Bill provided for NO new energy.

All the windmills, solar panels, methane plants and CF bulbs in the world cannot, and never will, provide for our energy needs. Conservation alone is NOT the answer, even IF there were a problem. We have adequate stores of fossil fuels to keep our grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren cool or warm and productive. Whether we can overcome all the hand-wringing, crybaby, do-gooders that think they're saving something by declaring wide swaths of our land "off limits" to fossil fuel harvesting is another matter.

We learned how to do it cleanly, neatly and with minimal environmental impact YEARS ago. But that's not good enough now. We simply CAN'T do it because of some PERCEIVED, detrimental environmental impact. That's B.S.

How about slashing the "red tape" and getting a few, new nuclear power generating stations on-line within ten years?

We should drill for oil and gas in ANWR (Alaska National Wildlife Refuge)?

Why do you think Seward talked Congress into buying Alaska?

Do you think he would have ever believed that there'd come a day when vast miles of it would be virtually off-limits to any resource harvesting?

Despite incessant impediments from environmentalists, the Tans-Alaska Pipeline was finally built. But, Shazam! The devastation to the environment and wildlife it was predicted to cause never happened. They were WRONG. They're wrong now.

CF bulbs and set-back thermostats are NOT the final solution, even if there was a problem. Heck, such measures aren't even a viable stop-gap.

We need more energy. Let's go get it. -Jim Redelfs

Reply to
Jim Redelfs

Look at this as an opportunity, not a problem.

One could invent a bulb heater that kept the CFL at operating temperature even when "off." I bet one could be made available for, oh, $35.00.

Find a market and fill it, I always say.

As a stop-gap, use Halogen or Sodium or Neon. Filaments are so quaint.

Reply to
HeyBub

I agree with the lighting outside. Until a better light comes along, I'm sticking with incandescent for fast light, but I've switched a couple of night lights already with good results. They last longer too, a bit plus.

OTOH, I'm all for changing over now. The quality of light is now good, not the greenish color it once was. I see no reason not to save my money and use something that operates cheaper. To do otherwise is kind of dumb. I'm looking forward to the LED lights in our future.

Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

And say "Hello" to additional mercury compounds (from fluorescent tubes) seeping into our soils.

Reply to
Phisherman

My experience with CFL's has not been very good either and I agree that the govt banning incandescent bulbs is the wrong approach. And the advice to use halogen, sodium or neon makes no sense. How is JR supposed to screw a sodium light into a simple outside decorative door light fixture? Plus, I'm not sure what the legislation passed actually says, but I'd consider a halogen to be a type of incandescent bulb, as it relies on a simple hot filament that uses about the same amount of energy.

There are some apps where CFL's work well. There are others where they do not. I've put them in my garage and can put up with the slow light up time. I tried them in the kitchen with some FEIT indoor floods. First, they won't even fit because of the wider neck, so I had to buy an extender. Then they take a good couple mins to reach any reasonable brightness. Come into the kitchen at night and you can barely see for 2 mins. And then, despite the claims of how long they last, I've had 3 now fail after about 3 months of normal use. And yes, they are installed in and rated for the ceiling cans they are intended for.

So, I pay a lot more for them, yet they last a fraction of the time of a cheap incandescent. And they have a warning on them about containing mercury and to dispose of properly. Which means in the majority of cases, they are going straight into the landfill with the rest of the trash.

If the govt wanted to do something positive to get people to use them, they should require that manufacturers spec out the time they take to get to say 70% brightness. And stop pretending that they can be used anywhere.

Reply to
trader4

Fact is you can find CF's that don't take a minute to get usable light. Some are nearly instant on. The only filament lamps I use at all are maybe a couple I haven't bothered to change that I leave on for 5-10 minutes at a time only.

I find it grating to read posts which make fun of federal lawmakers. I wouldn't want to spend more than 10 minutes of every year sitting in the halls of congress. I know it's a madhouse, but walk a mile in their shoes before you paint them all with the same brush.

Believe it or not, letting people do what they damn well please doesn't work in this country.

Reply to
Dan_Musicant

Incandesants should be history, they are effectivly heaters that put out light, for every 100 watts consumed you get 92-94 watts of heat, real smart to use in summer when you run your AC to cool your home. CFLs will get better in cold starting, my cfl floods are bad needing 2 minutes at 25f to get bright, but that will change and color rendition is on par with incandesants. A ratings test at Popular Mechanics even put one brand better in rendition.

A quote from ComEd Ill. " If every home nationaly would replace one light bulb with CFLs this simple action would save more than $600 million in energy costs annualy and remove the equivalent amount of green house gases from the atmosphere that is created by 800,000 cars". And if 95% of incandesants were replaced utility companies would not need to upgrade power supplies for maybe 15 years saving everyone more.

And you say ""hurt" on our domestic car and light truck industry" Have you seen the new 20-21 mpg in CITY hybrid 4wd full size Chevys, and the 34mpg in CITY Ford SUV, what a better way to revive the industry by putting out a better Hybrid system that neither Toyota, Honda, or anyone else has, we should not be driving 12 mpg 4wd SUVs where nobody ever needs the 4wd option.

Reply to
ransley

You must be in the 15% that thinks congress is doing a good job. Let the market decide. I use CFL's not to save the planet but because in the long run, I save money.

Reply to
Frank

I've often found that being a cheap bastard and being ecologically correct are two subsets of the population with significant overlap.

If nothing else, the philosophy of using equipment until it is well and truly no longer usable and no longer repairable before purchasing a replacement is one of the best things you can possibly do for the environment.

nate

(cheap bastard)

Reply to
Nate Nagel

Consumer Reports and Popular Mechanics magazine recently revieved CFLs with color rendition and start up times, I think Popular mechanics rated HDs brand very well, at the top , every year here ComEd subsides CFLs in Nov so you only pay 1$ a bulb I got quit a few. In can lights there are some special retrofits that work well but Halogens I agree are best.

Reply to
ransley

You said "Let the market decide". That's pretty funny, although you didn't mean it to be funny. "The market" includes millions of fools who have absolutely NO need for the special mechanical characteristics of SUVs, but they bought them anyway because advertising told them to. "The market" made some pretty lousy decisions.

In your next message, you will say that "the market" will correct this mistake. Don't count on it.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

I could also say that people have "no need" to waste energy going to Disneyland or any amusement park. And no need to waste gas driving to beaches to enjoy themselves in the summer. And no need to waste energy flying somewhere on vacation. So, let's condemn them and a thousand other things too, just like SUV's.

Reply to
trader4

I could also say that people have "no need" to waste energy going to Disneyland or any amusement park. And no need to waste gas driving to beaches to enjoy themselves in the summer. And no need to waste energy flying somewhere on vacation. So, let's condemn them and a thousand other things too, just like SUV's.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Your analogies are pretty weak. You were fully aware of that when you wrote them.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

I switched over almost every light in my house to CFL last spring. There were a few that were just unworkable, such as the candelabra in the dining room that had "electric candles. I just unscrew most of the lamps in that rather than using the dimmer. Results? My electric consumption compared to the previous year averaged 14.1% lower. The power company added to that by rewarding me 10% off my bill for the acheivement.

I'll be even happier when the price of LED's drops. That will happen as demand increases. a few years ago, CFL's were $15-20 each. Now I'm buying them for under $2.

Reply to
salty

Not if the old piece of equipment is an energy hog. When I bought my primary home, it had a 30 year old deep freezer in the basement. I paid someone $75 to haul it away. When it was operating, the OUTSIDE of the unit was cold!

I'll be turning off my perfectly good CRT Sony TV in a couple of months, and replacing it with an LCD Sony. Boo-Hoo! I'm Soooo sad to be doing that!

Reply to
salty

you have to figure out the break-even point for yourself of doing something like that. More fuel efficient cars are often touted as a necessity (our own Congress seems to agree with that) but if you figure in the energy cost of making a new car, you'd still have to drive your new car quite a few miles a year for many years to realize a "savings" over just maintaining your old one.

Economic considerations often (but not always) lead you to the same conclusions as considering energy use.

nate

Reply to
Nate Nagel

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.