Selling Incandescent Light Bulbs As Heating Devices 557
Csiko writes "The European Union has banned by law trading of incandescent light bulbs due to their bad efficiency/ecology (most of the energy is transformed into heat). A company is now trying to bypass this restriction by offering their incandescent light bulb products as a heating device (article in German) instead of a light device. Still, their 'heat balls' give light as well as heating. So — every law can be bypassed if you have some creativity!"
So? (Score:4, Insightful)
What's wrong with that, it's not as if they're being misleading. That "wasted" energy has to go somewhere and if it's being used to heat up your home in the winter, then it's hardly "wasted."
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
True on the technicalities, but seriously? Electric radiant heat is terribly inefficient, and more often than not you'll be putting the heat source literally at the ceiling.
Or hell, I dunno. Maybe you guys have fond memories of clustering underneath the bare bulb in your bedroom for warmth when you ran out of heating oil or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Electric space heaters aren't actually illegal though, even in the EU, though their use is restricted in some kinds of buildings due to fire-hazard concern.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Electric radiant heat is terribly inefficient
Er, where does the wasted energy go?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It goes into magnetic energy and heat generated in the power lines and transformers along the miles and miles between the point of production (usually a coal plant far outside of town or even clear across the state) and the point of use (your livingroom, for example). The rule of thumb I have seen is that over half of produced energy is wasted in this way. Contrast this with natural gas or even heating oil, which requires a pretty light energy burden to travel to your home and it's efficiency is determine
Nope (Score:5, Informative)
The rule of thumb I have seen is that over half of produced energy is wasted in this way.
Most of the loss is within the power station. Where the heat energy is converted to electricity. Only 35-60% of the energy produced is converted to electricity int the first place (depending on generation system).
Transmission is relatively efficient in comparison.
Course in some countries (like Finland or Denmark), they distribute the "waste" heat produced by power plants and people use that in industrial processes, space heating, hot water production etc. So they have (relatively) close to 100% efficiency.
Re: (Score:2)
It heats the coolants at the power station. But maybe your power station uses that heat to heat cities, like in some cold places in Europe.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why, it disappears into the 74th dimension where the ether's infinite free energy resides. You should go there some day - it's neat not being bound by the laws of thermo-whatsit.
Re:So? (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, but knocking over a domino and randomly getting the same output as a thermonuclear bomb will really ruin your day.
Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)
It's 100% efficient at the home, but the power plants that generate are limited by the laws of thermodynamics to converting only around 30% - 40% of the energy into electricity.
Obligatory wikipedia link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_Engine#Efficiency [wikipedia.org]
...and? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is true of anything. If it uses electricity, the plant efficiency is the same.
However that doesn't imply wastefulness, it would well be a hydro, solar or nuclear plant. Also in some areas, natural gas isn't available. Where my parents live you heat your house using electricity. There just isn't natural gas hookups to be had.
Electrical radiant is not at all an inefficient way to heat your house. The original poster didn't know what he was talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
What the below people said, and add to this: if you have high quality energy like electricity that can run a heat pump, it can move more watts of heat energy than it uses. In other words, the carnot curve also works backwards, not just forwards.
However if the radiant heat source is close to you, you don't need to heat the entire apartment as much, so space heating can still save energy even when it is electric.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really?
I still remember fondly 1/2KW incadescent quartz bulb reflector heaters we used to use during my childhood and student years. I would not call them terribly inefficient. They had about half of the efficiency of a modern convector or the _SAME_ efficiency as a modern fan heater. The fan heaters are still selling and they are noisy, ugly and they as you say "warm up the ceiling"
Re: (Score:2)
They would fuck up the day night cycle of many animals. Since there are bulbs available that don't give out _any_ light, legislation will be adapted quickly to close all such moronic loopholes.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure if the law really does all that much harm, though I admit it doesn't do a whole lot of good either.
I mean, I'm as much against incandescent bulbs as the next guy. I'm trying to get rid of all incandescent and halogen lighting in my home, but CFLs aren't always the best choice either, and while there are a lot of really awesome LED ideas around, good, practical LED lights are still rare and often expensive. I know it's the way of the future and all, but the light in my toilet isn't on all that m
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No no no... in the case of this product the wasted energy is turned to a yellowish light.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. One of the few incandescents that I have in use currently is the lamp for my turtle. The main purpose is actually heat for that one!
The only others that I still have in use are the ones in the staircase leading to my flat (using that for maybe two minutes a day, probably less), and a few connected to dimmers (those dimmers for CFLs are mighty expensive, so are dimmable CFLs).
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that they are horribly inefficient at BOTH tasks, thats why they are being banned. They create so much heat just to create light, but they don't create enough heat to justify their cost as a heating device. Ever tried heating a room with just the incandescant bulb? A few minutes in a space heater would do better, or you could turn on a heat lamp, or any other means of heating a room are currently more efficient than these bulbs.
It's like if they banned cars, and every dealership in the world
Re: (Score:2)
Typically they will be used in conjuction with another heat source. This means that the other heat source, say a natural gas furnace, would burn less fuel to heat the house due to temperature controls and the heat output from the light bulbs.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for nannying me, federal government. I switched to all fluorescent lighting in my house without you forcing me to. I don't s
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
haha. Yeah, that's what i thought. I actually switch out my CFLs to incandescent lightbulbs in the winter in my study because it is warmer. The study is a pretty small room and the lamp is close to me so it works out alright. I don't know about using heat balls in a large space though :p
You'd save money by turning up the heat (or insulating your house.) Electric resistance heat is ridiculously expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Electric resistance heat is ridiculously expensive.
That depends on where you live. I've heard that in some countries, electric heating can be cheaper than gas.
Cheap electricity usid for heating in Norway (Score:3, Interesting)
Power from hydro-electric plants have traditionally been quite inexpensive here in Norway, it is only over the last 10 years or so that we've gotten to the point where other forms of heating (particularly heat pumps) have started to become really attractive.
(BTW, since we have no domestic gas grid, we instead sell all our North Sea gas to Britain, Germany, Holland and other EU countries.)
We need some form of home heating maybe 8-9 months a year, so it made perfect sense to me to leave more or less all elect
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It depends, entirely, on where you live. There are, at the very least, some isolated locations in the US where electric heat is, actually, cheaper than gas/oil/etc. Specifically, there is at least one area in Upstate New York where a co-op generates all of the electricity locally. Because it's a co-op, they're not trying to maximize profits and sell the power at cost.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Edison bulbs are older but still superior tech to CFLs, since they eliminate mercury poisoning, dim turnons (waiting 3-4 minutes until I can see my book),
3-4 minutes before you can see your book? Maybe it's time to replace that bulb after 20 years. Modern CFLs are quite a bit better than that.
premature heat-death from enclosed fixtures
I think you have that backwards. If heat death is an issue, that a good reason to move from incandescents to CFLs, because they're quite a bit cooler. I've had fittings that would quickly destroy any incandescent bulb, but would work fine with CFLs.
and high cost (about ten times more).
10 times? Do you think your 30-cent incandescents will last as long as a CFL?
I get it that you don't like CFLs much, and I'
Re:So? (Score:5, Interesting)
That depends entirely on the relative costs of energy sources and how they are applied. However, as heating appliances go, incandescent bulbs are not exactly optimal for that use.
I can attest, though, that an incandescent desk lamp placed near my keyboard satisfies my lighting needs as well as keeps my fingers above freezing even when the main heat is turned way down. Generally having heat only where it is needed is more efficient than large-area heating, even if the energy source itself is more costly.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In other words, space heating. Me, I use a few servers running BOINC to warm my feet. That way, even though resistive heating is much less efficient than using electricity to run a heat engine, or burning fuel on-site, at least the electricity is being put to good use before it dries my socks. Now if only I could get the fans to run quieter... given the air temperature is pretty low to start they shouldn't need to be on full blast... overly conservative SMBIOS, feh, by the time these things wore out via
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They really don't though.
A good heat pump would have an effective efficiency of 230% or so - delivering 230 watts of heat for every 100 watts of electricity. Incandescent bulbs are still a poor choice in general if you want heat regardless of the situation.
My comment was that an incandescent bulb a few inches over my hands - which are the only things that need heat - is better than a space heater. The efficiency here comes from the focus of energy where it's needed, not the source. (For example, LED lightin
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
He's resisting that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed.
Heat pumps are more efficient specifically because they don't "make" heat They extract the heat from outside and bring it inside. So instead of just 100% efficiency, you have ~300% efficiency.... for every 1 watthour of electricity used, you gain the heat equivalent of 3 watthours.
DISAGREE on CFLs being better.
Edison bulbs are older but still superior tech to CFLs, since they eliminate mercury poisoning, dim turnons (waiting 3-4 minutes until I can see my book), premature heat-death from enclosed f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Insightful? Utter bullshit. No way are incandescents superior to CFLs.
How you've managed to consider CFLs an inferior technology given the above is beyond me.
If you can't get locally made CFLs, that is not a problem with the technology, it's a problem with your location.
Re:So? (Score:5, Interesting)
haha. Yeah, that's what i thought. I actually switch out my CFLs to incandescent lightbulbs in the winter in my study because it is warmer. The study is a pretty small room and the lamp is close to me so it works out alright. I don't know about using heat balls in a large space though :p
I have a cabin in upstate NY. It is heated from a wood burning stove. I do the same thing. In the summer, I 'light' the cabin by opening up skylights and CFL bulbs. In the winter, with the much shorter days and VERY cold weather, the incandescent bulbs provide heat and are actually much more efficient than my wood stove.
The electricity comes from a hydroelectric source, which heats my home. Which beats my local natural gas furnace or wood stove in terms of efficiency, emissions, and saves me from cutting down any hardwoods on my property.
It's not enough to heat my entire house, but any time I meet the following conditions, it is the best solution:
1. If temperatures are below 60F and I'd light my wood stove or furnace.
2. If I require light.
Under those two conditions, Incandescent bulbs are more efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
In the winter, with the much shorter days and VERY cold weather, the incandescent bulbs provide heat and are actually much more efficient than my wood stove.
Switch to a high powered video card and monitor ... Higher power output, plus built in circulation fan.
Re: (Score:2)
Switch to a high powered video card and monitor ... Higher power output, plus built in circulation fan.
I don't have a computer in my cabin.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually your wood-burning stove has zero CO2 emission. Where do you think the CO2 that is being released came from?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>regarding carbon-impact of burning hardwoods.
I answered that too. Trees DON'T sequester carbon. They eventually die, the bacteria/fungi eat them, and the carbon is released back to the atmosphere.
I also pointed-out it makes more sense to burn a renewable source like trees, which are carbon neutral like ethanol plants, rather than burn oil or coal.
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong? Well from a certain point of view they are way cheaper than these new fangled light source that cost an arm and a leg and who are barely better than these heat generating light sources. In short: if you let a consumer choose between a cheap energy consuming ligthning device and an ecological costly one they will go to the cheap one. The progressive rate on electricity doesn't work so well:
- The eco friendly person will pay less
- The good old light bul user will pay more
- the eco friendly perso
Re: (Score:2)
Or to keep the snow off the traffic lights. Wasn't there a /. article on the new traffic LEDs that get packed with snow and the drivers don't see the light? I think a girl was killed in the incident mentioned on /..
Re: (Score:2)
And, as far as I am aware, none of these uses are affected by the EU law.
Easy Bake Ovens (Score:5, Funny)
This is not news to anyone who's ever owned an Easy Bake Oven.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is not news to anyone who's ever owned an Easy Bake Oven.
As an expert chef with the Easy-Bake oven handed down to me by my mother, I can attest to Sonny's comment as fact.
Re:Easy Bake Ovens (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
They're going to replace them all with space heaters... That'll be the safest option.
ez bake oven (Score:3, Informative)
and lava lamps (Score:3, Informative)
The heating effect is important here too.
Because I've always wanted a reason to say this.. (Score:3, Funny)
Inefficient heating device (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it just me? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I guess you either live somewhere that's warm (Score:2)
I don't know where you buy your CFLs from, but the ones I have come on like any normal incandescent light build does.
I guess you either live somewhere that's warm all the year round or you heat your rooms 24 hours a day. In winter mornings my room temperature is about 5 degrees C and it takes a minute for the CFLs to reach normal brightness. My wife insists that we keep the stairway light on all night so that the stairs are well lit, so I am not exactly sure we save any energy.
Re: (Score:2)
My wife insists that we keep the stairway light on all night so that the stairs are well lit, so I am not exactly sure we save any energy.
I bought a cheap LED light (£1) too see if it was any good. It's not, except as a nightlight, but that's a job it does very well.
It uses 0.5W, so even if it were left on day and night for a whole year it would only cost £60 in electricity. A CFL would cost over £1000, a 40W incandescent almost £5000.
Re: (Score:2)
Oops... I worked out the price in pence, then wrote that it was pounds. I thought it seemed a bit expensive. But you've worked out the cost for seven years.
24h*365 = 8760h
8760h*0.0005kW = 4.38kWh.
£0.14/kWh * 4.38kWh = £0.61.
(The 9W CFL would be £11, the 40W incandescent £50.)
5 C? Seriously? You have a tent with stairs? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know where you buy your CFLs from, but the ones I have come on like any normal incandescent light build does.
I guess you either live somewhere that's warm all the year round or you heat your rooms 24 hours a day. In winter mornings my room temperature is about 5 degrees C and it takes a minute for the CFLs to reach normal brightness. My wife insists that we keep the stairway light on all night so that the stairs are well lit, so I am not exactly sure we save any energy.
Wait, you really let your house interior get down to 5C (that's 41F to most of us in the USA)!?!?!
Oh, I get it, you live in a tent. How did you find one with stairs?
Seriously, put some insulation in the walls and roof before you complain that modern lamps don't work in your house, or move from the freezer to a modern house.
Re: (Score:2)
Or do other people similarly dislike CFCs? In the cold they take several minutes to come on. The light they give off is harsh. And, at least where I am,
Where is that? The 1980s? There are plenty of CFLs that give "warm" light. And modern ones don't take minutes to come on either (although it does get a bit worse with age).
Even so, CFLs aren't the solution. LED lights use even less energy, and you can do ridiculously cool stuff with them. The big downside is that you need special dimmers, though.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And, at least where I am, I have a hell of a time trying to get rid of them when they die
Just do what 99.9% of everyone else does. They go in the trash where they can be sent to a landfill, the mercury can leach out and into the soil where it will enter into the food chain.
You save the planet by eventually storing all that evil mercury in your organs.
Ok, once again... (Score:3, Interesting)
CFLs result in lower lifetime mercury emissions than incandescents. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
And you can't dim them. Yes Yes I know that if you order a special fixture from Uzbekistan and a special bulb from Mauritania and the phase of the moon is correct, it'll work for a couple hours, but I mean "can't" as in compared to old fashioned bulbs.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Laws should go about it differently (Score:2)
It is hard to compete with a 50 cent Incandescent bulb in any country.
Raising prices or banning the cheap bulb will just make poor people poorer.
With LED or CFL bulbs costing between $5-$50, GE, Phillips and friends will be the ONLY winners with those laws.
(Note: CFL under $5 tend to give headaches, make colours look awful and last about as long as regular bulbs)
Solution: Make every household own and use at least one "good" non-Incandescent bulb per house and more if the house is worth lots of $$.
As the pri
Re: (Score:2)
Also what happens if they develop a much better Incandescent bulb that is almost on-par with substitutes?
They count as energy saving and are allowed. I actually have one for a room where we have a dimmer switch, it is a halogen bulb inside an normal one!
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, screw letting the market decide, lets force these fuckers to comply.
First we're going to MAKE people buy a bulb. I'll be damned if the government makes me buy a light bulb.
Then we're going to REQUIRE a house inspection. No liberties lost there. I can understand why some states inspect cars, but houses? Not without some suspicion that it's unfit to live in. As it stands now, no one comes in my house without a search warrant. Except those who want to play tag with my 12gauge.
You may not have meant
Ok, a couple things (Score:3, Insightful)
The EU probably doesn't care (Score:2)
I doubt many people are going to start buying these instead of fluorescent bulbs. One major advantage of incandescents was the price. These "heat bulbs" are for sale at EUR 1.70 ($2.28), plus shipping costs. They will appeal to some people but the vast majority will continue to buy bulbs from supermarkets, which means they'll be buying CFLs, which means these regulations will have achieved their goal (reduction in power demand, rather than complete elimination of incandescents).
Market Forces are better than silly laws anyway... (Score:4, Insightful)
The European union has banned by law trading of incandescent light bulbs due to their bad efficiency/ecology reasons (most of the energy is transformed into heat).
If these items are generally better, in terms of energy consumption, and are likewise sold at a reasonable price, they OUGHT to make sense to buy. (Or make cents, as it were.) If they don't then people should be free to wait until they do.
On the inverse, if there's a law requiring they be the only kind of bulb, then they can be built without concern for energy savings, and sold at any price. After all, the law says you have to have them, so why not profit from the artificial demand.
Oh, and by the way, all that artificial demand is damaging the economy, which will likely lead to war, which is about the least 'green' thing imaginable. Why is it that we love to talk long term about climate change and human behavior, but can't seem to do so about economics? I'm astounded mostly because while the former is a natural phenomenon that could be influenced by humanity, the latter is entirely human and will cease to exist when we do.
Just astounding.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there's the obvious question: are externalities being properly priced into the prices of both kinds of light bulbs?
Or put another way, on the one hand governments subsidize the cost of electricity and on the other they want people to still use the more energy-efficient light bulbs... The net result is counter-regulation to offset the existing regulation.
The answer, of course, is no (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual, the price of incandescent light bulbs does not include the negative externalities their use implies. And also, people typically don't look at the life-cycle cost of the things they buy, just the up-front price. So the market, as is so frequently the case, is broken, and requires government help to get fixed.
We use heatballs here... (Score:5, Insightful)
We live in a rural area. We aren't on city water, we have a well. About 3 or 4 times a year it gets cold enough that we turn on a light in the pump house to help raise the temperature to protect our already well insulated pipes. This is a very effective solution for us and safer than using a space heater. The space heater costs a lot more than a lightbulb and isn't considered 'safe to leave unattended.' We also have chickens. We have a heatlamp in there, and they can move in/out of it's light to control their own temp (don't want them cooked... yet...)
Do we NEED more fucking regulations? Give me a break.
Luckily for you (Score:3)
Incandescents easy/safe/inexpensive source of heat (Score:2)
for various crafts / hobbies --- e.g., every heat box design I've seen for curing epoxy when making a fiberglass-laminate (archery) bow uses a bank of ###-watt light bulbs.
Actually, this is a good idea... (Score:2)
This isn't 'bypassing' the law. Many incandescent bulbs are used as inexpensive low-power heating devices for small outdoor enclosures where a small amount of heat is required to control interior humidity. Try buying a 50-watt electric heater for a few dollars. The light produced in the process is just a fringe benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
More efficient devices are actually sold for that purpose, they are ceramic-encased and have a longer lifespan then the typical light bulb.
The same is being done with sweetleaf/stevia (Score:4, Insightful)
Although it is not approved by the FDA as an ingredient in foods [to replace HFCS and/or Aspartame] Stevia is being sold as a dietary supplement and more recently as a sweetener that may be added to foods by the end user. Sweetleaf, a sweetener as natural as sugar simply can't get the approval that high fructose corn syrup and aspartame have been able to acquire. So, instead, it is sold as "something else."
Hmmm Incandescent vs CFL (Score:2)
I have 2 incandescents and 2 cfl's in the bathroom.
I flick the switch here is the result.
CFL: Up to 60 seconds of absolutely dim, sick light from the CFL's (these are less than 6 months old). You can see the coil inside the dim pastic bubl-- then finally a bit 'bluish' light becomes too bright to look at directly without being dazzled.
INC: Instant "warm" bright light floods the bathroom.
The lights are on in the bathroom less than 7 hours a week. This is a particularly bad place for CFL's. CFL's are okay
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First, the lifespans of CFL are based on on/off cycles, not time on. I haven't seen anyone who's in any way informed claim that CFL are good for places like bathrooms. In fact, other than a refrigerator, I can't think of many places where it would be worse to use a CFL. If you're putting a CLF into a bathroom, (or a refrigerator) you're using it in the worst way possible. Yes, it will suck for that. Those are places where we should be using incandescents. Use CFLs properly, and they last a dam
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What's sad is that the newer incandescents may only use 25% of the energy but the laws are based on the technology- not on the energy consumption and they ignore the mercury poisoning aspects.
Lie repeated often are still lies. The law in this case is based upon watts per lumen. If there were incandescents that used 25% of the energy, they would be legal. Also the mercury released to the environment from an incandescent is worse than the exposure from a CFL. [popularmechanics.com]
You may now go back to being a crybaby.
CFL's are dirt cheap these days (Score:5, Insightful)
at Costco and Home Depot they run just over $1 per bulb. with the energy savings you have to be crazy to keep on looking for incandescent bulbs
This law is totally unnecessary (Score:2)
CFLs, which are actually superior to incandescents by most measures will be used naturally in almost all areas except those few where incandescents are truely superior ( such as heating - I've seen them used for instance to heat a box housing baby chicks - a use for which a cfl would not do ). The law would have that person buy a heater and a cfl bulb at greater expense to do both jobs.
Laws simply can not mandate true efficiency. They can only EVER a) redirect resources and/or b) decrease efficiency.
CFLs do not fit in fixtures (Score:3, Interesting)
I have lots of ceiling fixtures of the "dome" style, and CFLs are too long to fit inside them. I have wall fixtures (e.g. over bathroom mirrors) and CFLs extend below the glass shade, leading to a very annoying glare. I'd like to switch to LEDs,but there are no products on the market which both have 360 illumination and the lumen output of a 60 or 75W incandescent.
Personally, I vote for a massive increase in the cost of electricity, and let both consumers and businesses decide what type and how much light they want.
yeh but at least it's a dry heat.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This ban could be shourt sighted. (Score:5, Informative)
Making lighting more efficient could increase energy use, not decrease it [economist.com]
But precedent suggests that this will serve merely to increase the demand for light. The consequence may not be just more light for the same amount of energy, but an actual increase in energy consumption, rather than the decrease hoped for by those promoting new forms of lighting.
check the answer from the paper's author in this week Economist. they clearly state that the journalist misunderstood the conclusions...
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that makes sense form a supply and demand point of view... but common sense says: how much light do I need in my apartment...
If all the rooms are lit to a reasonable level I am not going to go out a buy more lights and plug them in!
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that makes sense form a supply and demand point of view... but common sense says: how much light do I need in my apartment...
If all the rooms are lit to a reasonable level I am not going to go out a buy more lights and plug them in!
I go out of my way to turn off my incandescent lights. I use them in a few fixtures where they look better, or are required.
CFLs? I don't feel the pressure. Getting out of bed to turn off the lights downstairs isn't going to save me much cash.
Re:I hate the new bulbs. (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop buying the cheapest shitty bulbs you can find.
I'm buying what are considered decent CFLs (Score:3)
You assumption is wrong. I'm not buying crappy lights.
I can't help but notice it takes three bulbs to light a room when two used to do the job nicely. I think that's going to nullify much of the energy saving goals over time. I wonder how many people have added a new lamp or two in the house after converting to new bulbs?
Re:I'm buying what are considered decent CFLs (Score:5, Insightful)
Bad light colour, low light output and short lifetimes are all exact symptoms of buying bad lights.
Re: (Score:2)
When we look at the packaging and there's no warm up time listed, then why would we bother buying one expensive bulb over a cheap bulb.
I know that when I buy a BMW I'm going to get a better product than a kia, even without looking at the specs. But when I compare brands of lightbulbs they all look the same to me. (and everyone else) So why the hell would I bother buying the more expensive ones JUST because they're more expensive. People aren't going to conduct their on trials on lightbulbs to figure out
Re: (Score:2)
Stop buying the cheapest shitty bulbs you can find.
Change your name from "goaway" to "goawaywalmart" and we'll see how it turns out.
And don't forget Greshams law that the bad always drives out the good. We might be able to spend days researching on the internet to special order "good" bulbs from ... somewhere ... but the other 99.99999% of humanity is stuck with walmart.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"I care about the planet as much as the next guy"
In oher words, you don't give a shit?
Re: (Score:2)
You can get CFLs in two colour temperatures: daylight and warm white; the second being very close to the colour of traditional incandescents. They take a moment to heat up but considering most lights are on for longer than a few seconds that is not really an issue to me.
Waste disposal I totally agree with: that is a real issue. Where I live (Hong Kong) I have yet to find a way to properly dispose of this kind of chemical waste. Indeed I have resorted to just dumping them, together with batteries, in the tr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes! CFLs suck! Which is why we should all be transitioning to LED lighting. There are finally some high-quality solutions on the market, which despite their high pricetags will save 2-3x the purchase price in energy over their 10-year life. I now have five of the CREE LR6 recessed fixtures [creelighting.com] in my house and they are incredible--bright light, very nice color (with active color adjustment, no less), instant-on, and 10-20 year life. And they only use about 7 watts to match a 60-watt incandescent.
I also ha
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you should try a 40w (200w equivaent) CFL, but make sure it's at least 4000K for the colour temperature. I don't know why everyone doesn't use this colour temperature - it's far better than the dingy yellow/orange we're accustomed to.
Your second option is to get a halogen floodlight. Mine is at 1KW and it's brilliant. I aim it up at the ceiling and get a reasonably bright living room. You won't ever want to go back to 20w CFL after that! Colour temp is not perfect though, so I'm thinking of switching
Re: (Score:2)
you're crazy
when my son was born and we had a full time baby sitter we started burning out the incandescent every month. i started buying the CFL's and after 2 years they never burned out even when being used most of the day.
my wife never noticed any change in color
God, this is tiresome (Score:5, Informative)
Right, because lots of people want the freedom to waste all kinds of money and generate a lot more pollution. The only reason the government needs to get involved in the first place is because the sticker price on an incandescent was lower than that of a CFL - the lifecycle cost of the CFL was considerably less. And we're getting to the point, because of economies of scale, that even the sticker price on a CFL is not much more than an incandescent... which wouldn't have happened if the gov't hadn't kicked off demand. Not to mention that incandescents aren't even banned - they've just instituted performance standards for light bulbs, and many specialty types of incandescents have been exempted from that.
The government has the right to regulate light bulbs because the use of electricity has very significant negative externalities, which no one is paying for. So could we please stop with the "OMFG teh socialists are coming for our light bulbs! Man the battlements!" crap already?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just checked; I have two Phillips bulbs and three GE ones, they're all too dim to read by, for long enough that it's irritating. I timed the GE ones and they were approaching comfortable brightness after a minute.
GE model FL12GLS/T2/827