| The bill did _not_ "ban" incandescent bulbs, it set minimum efficiency | standards.
So you are saying that in 10 years, I can still buy incandescent bulbs for the few places I actually need them?
| Yes, plenty of enclosed CFLs work outside in the winter. If you live in | an area of extreme cold, there's always HID. A 39W metal halide lamp | produces much more light than a 150W incandescent, and lasts 6-10 times | as long. I use exclusively CFLs in all my outdoor fixtures, it only gets | down to about 15F at the lowest here, so the plain exposed spiral type | work fine. Since these are on from dusk till dawn, the savings are | substantial and I get 2+ years out of a bulb. Even the vilified mercury | vapor lamp so common in yard lights and street lighting of the past is | more than twice as efficient as incandescent.
But none of them produce the quality of light that incandescent does, which is needed is _some_ places.
| Within this group, incandescent lamps that are specifically | **EXCLUDED** include the following: | | appliance | black light
I use 6 cfl floods and and 8 regular cfls outside on sensors at -10f last winter, cfls light ok, but the floods are not good for 5 minute on sensors, I use HDs bulbs, if lights are to be left on they are fine, but the colder it gets the longer it takes to get bright, the enclosed floods are the worst, I have the regular cfls unshielded and all survived rain and snow.
f you post to =A0|
ASAP. =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0|
Incandesants will never go away they are cheap and are better in many aplications like above a stove, in a oven, frige, for lower than -15f, work lights , -15f exterior lights, and where instant on is needed, industry, and in the winter work lights. Actualy an Incandesant bulb is a heater that has a byproduct of 4-6% of very good light! The smart thing to do would be just tax them and give a big rebate to flourescents, and not wait till 2012
Hi Phil,
I can't predict what will happen five or ten years from now, but I would say most likely "yes". GE is busy developing a new generation of HEI incandescents that will be initially twice as efficient as what is available now and ultimately four times so (roughly the same efficacy as a CFL but at a lower initial cost).
See:
te:
f you post to =A0|
ASAP. =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0|
Go read a review a Popular Mechanics Mag, its old but its there, For facial color the HD bulb beat Incandesant. New warm white cfls are advancing fast.
Hi Phil,
I'm not sure what wattage lamp you use, but if its light output exceeds 2,600 lumens, it falls outside this legislation. For example, a 150-watt Osram Sylvania A21 incandescent is rated at 2,780 lumens (clear) and 2,640 lumens (soft white).
Cheers, Paul
In article , David Starr wrote: andesants should have limited use in todays world
I've converted two of my Maglites to LEDs. They're 'drop proof' too.
T8's were designed in Europe to retrofit into T12 fittings and provide energy savings. That doesn't work with the control gear used on US 120V mains, where I believe you require different control gear for the T8's and T12's of the same length.
That's how our first energy saving retrofit worked. In 1978, Thorn Lighting produced a 100W tube to retrofit into 125W 8' fittings. It used krypton rather than argon base gas fill. It just predated the move to T8 tri-phosphor tubes, which were used for all the shorter tube retrofits which followed on.
Who knows, a new technology may have come along and no one may be making them due to lack of a market.
| Incandesants will never go away they are cheap and are better in many | aplications like above a stove, in a oven, frige, for lower than -15f, | work lights , -15f exterior lights, and where instant on is needed, | industry, and in the winter work lights. Actualy an Incandesant bulb | is a heater that has a byproduct of 4-6% of very good light! The smart | thing to do would be just tax them and give a big rebate to | flourescents, and not wait till 2012
LEDs should work fine in a refrigerator. They can scatter them around front and back, and on each shelf. That would solve the "light blocked by the old milk" problem.
I do like the idea of taxing the incandescent bulbs. But I also like the idea of taxing cheap imports.
In alt.engineering.electrical Paul M. Eldridge wrote: | On 21 Jun 2008 03:04:34 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote: | |>In alt.engineering.electrical dpb wrote: |>
|>| The bill did _not_ "ban" incandescent bulbs, it set minimum efficiency |>| standards. |>
|>So you are saying that in 10 years, I can still buy incandescent bulbs for |>the few places I actually need them? | | Hi Phil, | | I can't predict what will happen five or ten years from now, but I | would say most likely "yes". GE is busy developing a new generation | of HEI incandescents that will be initially twice as efficient as what | is available now and ultimately four times so (roughly the same | efficacy as a CFL but at a lower initial cost). | | See: |
In alt.engineering.electrical ransley wrote: | On Jun 20, 10:07?pm, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote: |> In alt.engineering.electrical James Sweet wrote: |>
|> | Yes, plenty of enclosed CFLs work outside in the winter. If you live in |> | an area of extreme cold, there's always HID. A 39W metal halide lamp |> | produces much more light than a 150W incandescent, and lasts 6-10 times |> | as long. I use exclusively CFLs in all my outdoor fixtures, it only gets |> | down to about 15F at the lowest here, so the plain exposed spiral type |> | work fine. Since these are on from dusk till dawn, the savings are |> | substantial and I get 2+ years out of a bulb. Even the vilified mercury |> | vapor lamp so common in yard lights and street lighting of the past is |> | more than twice as efficient as incandescent. |>
|> But none of them produce the quality of light that incandescent does, which |> is needed is _some_ places. |>
|> -- |> |WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. ?Due to ignorance | |> | ? ? ? ? by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. ?If you post to ?| |> | ? ? ? ? Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. ? ? ? ?| |> | Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) | | | Go read a review a Popular Mechanics Mag, its old but its there, For | facial color the HD bulb beat Incandesant. New warm white cfls are | advancing fast.
The article doesn't seem to be there. Searching for "HD bulb" found 0 articles.
BTW, I'm not talking about facial color. I'm talking about continuity of the visible spectrum. That is, how well the light emits energy at all wavelengths within the visible light range.
In alt.engineering.electrical Paul M. Eldridge wrote: | On 21 Jun 2008 03:14:30 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote: | |>In alt.engineering.electrical Paul M. Eldridge wrote: |>
|>| Within this group, incandescent lamps that are specifically |>| **EXCLUDED** include the following: |>| |>| appliance |>| black light | bug |>| coloured |>| infrared |>| left-hand thread (used where lamps may be stolen) |>| marine/marine signal |>| mine service |>| plant light |>| reflector |>| rough service / shatter-resistant / vibration service |>| sign |>| silver bowl |>| showcase |>| 3-way |>| traffic signal | G & T shape |>| AB, BA, CA, F, G16-1/2, G-25, G30, S and M-14 |>
|>What about ophidian lights? I've always used the standard base ones for this. |>I suppose I could substitute a plant light or a small infrared. |>
|>I was going to switch to low-voltage lamps for task lights, anyway, so I guess |>for the most part this doesn't really affect me. |>
|>We need a law that taxes or just outright bans importation of cheap CFLs. | | Hi Phil, | | I'm not sure what wattage lamp you use, but if its light output | exceeds 2,600 lumens, it falls outside this legislation. For example, | a 150-watt Osram Sylvania A21 incandescent is rated at 2,780 lumens | (clear) and 2,640 lumens (soft white).
So just run this on one of this half-wave rectifying dimmers to cut the power in half and you have a nice warm 40 watt light that uses 75 watts.
Hi Phil,
Philips uses the approach you describe with their forthcoming line-voltage EcoBoost products (apologies for the length of the links provided below); I don't know if GE will do likewise, but it's certainly possible the first generation of HEI lamps will employ similar technology.
See:
See:
GE's new HIR Plus lamps might provide us with some clues.
See:
Cheers, Paul
Hi Phil,
Alternatively, if you don't require that much light, you could simply opt for a halogen lamp of a lesser wattage; e.g., a 40-watt Halogená ES provides the same amount of light as a conventional 60-watt incandescent and lasts up to four times longer.
If you're still contemplating a low-voltage solution, Philip's IRC MR16 are some of the best available.
See:
In article , snipped-for-privacy@trashmail.net (James Sweet) writes: | | | > | > Here in Arizona's mild winters even regular fluorescents tubes flicker | > in my garage. | > | > ...Jim Thompson | | | They're probably those crappy 34W energy saver tubes with magnetic | ballasts that usually don't drive them harder than about 25W. Those were | a hack from the 70s energy crisis and hardly work in a drafty room | indoors.
I thought the 34W F40T12 energy miser tubes became common as a result of the 1992 EPACT that also brought us the horrible 60W F96T12 tubes. This was the law that was popularly described as banning (yes, I know, there's that word again) cool white tubes.
I remember having a lot of trouble with short lives on the "compatible"
34W F40 tubes until I replaced the ballasts with dual-rated 40W/34W ones. The 60W F96T12 tubes were just so dreary that I went for the much more expensive improved color rendering 75W products that were exempt from the requirements. These provided *almost* as much light as the original 75W F96T12/CW tubes, so slightly less efficiency at a much higher price.In the past few years I've noticed that the commodity F40 and F96 tubes at the home centers are once again 40W and 75W respectively, so I assume they all now qualify for the good color rendering (or other) exemption from the requirements. (Or are they lying about the wattage?)
Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com
You are missing the point. If I buy gas from a Shell station and Shell has decided to adulterate the fuel with a compound (ethanol) that saves Shell money and returns less BTU energy content to the consumer. Shell oil is receiving a direct benefit by immediate increased profit and later by selling more of the adulterated product so that consumers can continue on their crippled journey. I don't care what Shell paid for a barrel of oil on the market, that is not the point. It is a flagrant rip off, a criminal act that the Florida government is complicit with. If the public fails to realize this, they are very ignorant, and perhaps deserve what they get from their government and corporations who run the government.
Imagine if you went the store to buy a pound of hamburger, but the butcher decides that to increase his bottom line, he will take away about 2 ounces of beef and substitutes two ounces of wet sawdust. Would you be "OK" with that? That is exactly what is happening here in Florida and elsewhere with the gasoline.
A UK friend and I have discussed this at length and I've sent him some
4' T8 lamps to play with. As I recall, we concluded that US T8 lamps are electrically different than the UK lamps. They're 230mA and over here they all use electronic ballasts. I have some 40W choke ballasts from over there but I haven't tried running a T8 with one yet.PolyTech Forum 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.