View Full Version : Incandescent light bulbs to be banned?
wild_wild_wes
06-14-10, 22:52
On the Clark Howard radio show today, he said that the current incandescent light bulbs are soon to be banned, in favor of flourescents and LED equivalents. Is this true?
woodandsteel
06-14-10, 23:06
Sadly, it is true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Independence_and_Security_Act_of_2007
While I always hate the government banning anything, I don't understand why anyone would want to use Incandescents anymore.
woodandsteel
06-14-10, 23:21
The CFLs gives me headaches.
Actually, I was listening to the "Midnight trucking Report" on the radio. They were talking about this bill. They said that GE was supposedly coming out with a new lightbulb that was as efficient as CFLs.
I would like to test the LEDs that are out. But, they are expensive.
CF are cheaper in the long run. LED are even cheaper than CF in the long run. Incans just suck.
if CF give you a headache try some in the 10K range. Softer blue/white light instead of the Yellow some have. They are what I use and they are much better.
While I always hate the government banning anything, I don't understand why anyone would want to use Incandescents anymore.
I use regular ones in the lights outside my doors because I dont want to wait for the warm up time. I use CFL's for everything else
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-14-10, 23:31
While I always hate the government banning anything, I don't understand why anyone would want to use Incandescents anymore.
Either your vision is not right or you are not paying attention.
Forget phrases like "Off (or on) like a light". CFLs have come a long way but they still don't work right. LEDs may be better, but the color tone is so far off.
Have you tried to buy a 120W BR40 bulb at HomeDEpot or Lowes lately, they aren't there. I've gone mail order to get the bulbs we need. We have something like over 50 can lights (the lady who built the house was nuts) and my wife can sniff out any CFL that I try to stick in.
Either your vision is not right or you are not paying attention.
Forget phrases like "Off (or on) like a light". CFLs have come a long way but they still don't work right. LEDs may be better, but the color tone is so far off.
Have you tried to buy a 120W BR40 bulb at HomeDEpot or Lowes lately, they aren't there. I've gone mail order to get the bulbs we need. We have something like over 50 can lights (the lady who built the house was nuts) and my wife can sniff out any CFL that I try to stick in.
Mine turn right on when I flip the switch.
I use mainly 23 and 26 Watt CFLs and have no problems. I do have issues in one room with the smaller light bases. Those take a second to come on. I just haven't gotten around to replacing the light fixture yet. I get more light in my house with the CFLs because I can use a higher light output for lower Wattage. I am just waiting for LEDs to get a bit cheaper and I will be replacing everything with those.
I have 2 CFL flood lights in my back yard, they take about 2 mins to get to full brightness. They are pretty old so until they burn out I will deal with it.
dennisuello
06-15-10, 00:19
What's wrong with incandescent bulbs? I use lights responsibly, only on where I am, off when I leave the room. I don't light up my house like a Christmas tree. My eyes are sensitive to flickering lights, like low refresh rate on a CRT monitor would drive me nuts. I haven't seen a CFL that I liked and I'm not about to buy every single one on the market to try in my house just to find the model that's OK. It's not government's job to tell me which bulb I can and cannot use, or that my thermostat is set too high, or that my toilet flushes too much water.
LEDs look promising, but again I'm not about to buy a variety of them to try and find the one that suits my tastes. The cost is prohibitive for such experiments.
Anyone here concerned with the mercury content in the CFLs? At this point, I have about 50/50 incandescent to CFL in the house, but with younger kids, I've always been leery about using them. Break one CFL and you've contaminated your living space with mercury....that is unless the technology has recently changed and I'm behind the times. Also, what about disposing of these things?
Incandescent lights are inefficient, hot(because of how inefficient they are), and have short lifespans. No matter how responsible you are they are still inefficient when they are on.
As for the flickering:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=flickering-fallacy-cfl-bulb-headaches
You can take CFLs to any Home Depot to dispose of them.
Anyone here concerned with the mercury content in the CFLs? At this point, I have about 50/50 incandescent to CFL in the house, but with younger kids, I've always been leery about using them. Break one CFL and you've contaminated your living space with mercury....that is unless the technology has recently changed and I'm behind the times. Also, what about disposing of these things?
Nope. CFLs have something like 3Milligrams of Mercury in them.
If you have an old style thermostat or Thermometer you have about 200 times the mercury sitting in there that you do in a CF bulb. As for the Environmental impact of that Mercury, it has less in it than would be released by the running of a Incandescent bulb.
You can take CFLs to any Home Depot to dispose of them.
That is good to know, thanks!
Nope. CFLs have something like 3Milligrams of Mercury in them.
If you have an old style thermostat or Thermometer you have about 200 times the mercury sitting in there that you do in a CF bulb. As for the Environmental impact of that Mercury, it has less in it than would be released by the running of a Incandescent bulb.
Umm, I assume you mean less mercury released into the environment through the burning of coal?
Even still, from what I've read, isn't even that small amount dangerous? You seem to have researched this, and I'm not too well versed on heavy metals in the body. Thanks.
There was a video a while back of a congressman that was speaking out against the 2007 act on the floor of one of the houses. Essentially, he was scathing the new bulb design, among other things, that it was only made in China. I am sure a quick search on Youtube can find the speech.
ETA: Video can be found here. http://dukemedia.com/2008/06/24/i-love-this-ted-poe-guy-he-should-run-for-president/
While I always hate the government banning anything, I don't understand why anyone would want to use Incandescents anymore.
Because they give some of us headaches.
Because they give some of us headaches.
While you might get headaches, please show a study that shows CFLs cause it. With the amount of people against it, I am sure there will be many studies proving it.
ForTehNguyen
06-15-10, 08:58
when you suddenly start getting headaches after switching to CFL, I don't think you need a study to prove that. Basic troubleshooting.
Well I believe that the first CFLs had those flickering problems, as far as I know they do not exist anymore. Now anyone that went to school before CFLs had to deal with old florescent bulb lighting, yet somehow noone got headaches and everyone lived.
I think the people that do not use them are just cheap and will not be happy with anything that costs more than 50cents a bulb.
thopkins22
06-15-10, 09:22
Let's just go ahead and restrict electricity usage. The fact that light bulbs, incandescent or otherwise consume a relatively small amount of electricity compared to everything else in our houses be damned.
Perhaps the government should regulate my thermostat to prevent me from setting it below 75 degrees in the summer. Certainly I shouldn't be allowed to buy AR rifles or Glocks. And those damned non hybrid cars...well I think we all know about the cheap asses that won't buy those. How about all the paper in books? That's a serious environmental problem you know.
Freedom doesn't require genius to understand.
Come on people....:rolleyes:
dennisuello
06-15-10, 09:26
Well I believe that the first CFLs had those flickering problems, as far as I know they do not exist anymore. Now anyone that went to school before CFLs had to deal with old florescent bulb lighting, yet somehow noone got headaches and everyone lived.
I think the people that do not use them are just cheap and will not be happy with anything that costs more than 50cents a bulb.
people that don't want to use them, don't want the government to tell them what they can and cannot use. same way with any other choice I have, like what kind of car to drive. if I want to drive my truck that gets 12 mpg, I should be able to. i don't drive it every day and have a more economical car (miata) for when I just need to carry myself, but it won't get far into the desert when I need to carry my guns, targets and ammo and a person or two to go shooting.
i have about 40 canned lights with flood bulbs and 40 regular bulbs in the house (a rough count). at $10/bulb, it would cost me $800+tax to replace them all with CFLs. i haven't priced LEDs, but at $50/bulb, it would cost $4000+tax. You want to subsidize that for me?
parishioner
06-15-10, 09:50
Let's just go ahead and restrict electricity usage. The fact that light bulbs, incandescent or otherwise consume a relatively small amount of electricity compared to everything else in our houses be damned.
Perhaps the government should regulate my thermostat to prevent me from setting it below 75 degrees in the summer. Certainly I shouldn't be allowed to buy AR rifles or Glocks. And those damned non hybrid cars...well I think we all know about the cheap asses that won't buy those. How about all the paper in books? That's a serious environmental problem you know.
Freedom doesn't require genius to understand.
Come on people....:rolleyes:
Thank you.
I should be able to light my house up like clark griswold everyday with 10,000 incandescent bulbs if I want.
Another small encroachment.
When I had the condo I just bought remodeled, every light fixture, with the exception of what’s in the fridge, oven and microwave was converted to a CFL.
Every building the company I work for designs [Architect] uses only CFL's and HID fixtures.
If you use a CFL that has a standard lamp base and screws into any existing fixture, it will take time to heat up and come up to full brightness. However, if you used a fixture specifically designed with an electric or magnetic ballast, to use a double, triple of quad tube 2 pin CFL bulb the light will come on to full brightness immediately.
Based on rough calculations done by building efficiency software, replacing every bulb in a 2500sf bank branch with CFLs and HIDs reduces the buildings cooling load by a pretty drastic margin. Now, granted that a bank will have and be allowed a lot more lighting per SF that a residence so the difference might be a lot smaller in your home, but you will be surprised by how much heat a traditional bulb puts out.
As a small example, 2 of my cousins have condo’s in the same development, we all remodeled the interiors, though granted, I went the most nuts, after all, I am an Architect, and I do have connections lol. But my electric bill is usually about $20 less a month than their’s with the same size condo, and I have more light fixtures. I even leave lights on when not home at night for the dog lol.
CFL’s are the way to go, hands down.
FlyAndFight
06-15-10, 10:29
Well, there goes the "Easy Bake Oven"...
;)
awesome. saving the world, one sacrificial freedom at a time.
awesome. saving the world, one sacrificial freedom at a time.
This.
Not to mention it was the low price of incandescent bulbs driving down the price of CFL's at a more rapid pace. If it wasn't for those we would still be looking at $9 per bulb instead of a buck a bulb. Get rid of their lowest priced competition and we've seen the end of the tumbling prices on CFLs. Sounds like maybe someone in the CFL industry has gotten into the ear of a politician. I bet ANY manufacturer would like to eliminate their lowest priced competition by US law.... just imagine....
Among other problems, CFLs also work poorly with dimmer switches (yes, even the CFLs made for use with dimmer switches).
Add me to the list of people who prefer incans over CFLs.
Joe Mamma
Anyone here concerned with the mercury content in the CFLs? At this point, I have about 50/50 incandescent to CFL in the house, but with younger kids, I've always been leery about using them. Break one CFL and you've contaminated your living space with mercury....that is unless the technology has recently changed and I'm behind the times. Also, what about disposing of these things?
I read where a woman broke a CFL in her daughters bedroom. She called some one about it. They roped off the bedroom and it's going to cost her 2 grand in haz mat clean up.
I read where a woman broke a CFL in her daughters bedroom. She called some one about it. They roped off the bedroom and it's going to cost her 2 grand in haz mat clean up.
Then someone was trying to make some money.
Suggested cleanup for a broken CFL bulb.
1. Before Clean-up: Ventilate the Room
* Have people and pets leave the room, and don't let anyone walk through the breakage area on their way out.
* Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more.
* Shut off the central forced-air heating/air conditioning system, if you have one.
2. Clean-Up Steps for Hard Surfaces
* Carefully scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or cardboard and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag.
* Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
* Wipe the area clean with damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes and place them in the glass jar or plastic bag.
* Do not use a vacuum or broom to clean up the broken bulb on hard surfaces.
3. Clean-up Steps for Carpeting or Rug:
* Carefully pick up glass fragments and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag.
* Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
* If vacuuming is needed after all visible materials are removed, vacuum the area where the bulb was broken.
* Remove the vacuum bag (or empty and wipe the canister), and put the bag or vacuum debris in a sealed plastic bag.
This is all if a CFL shatters. Something that I have never seen happen. One that cracks or just breaks near the base isn't even an issue.
EDIT: OOOPS - forgot to read all of P. 2 before posting. Now I see Joe Mama's usual wisdom beat me to the punch. Care to set up a hoarder's club?
Anyone try a CFL with a dimmer switch?
-turn down the dimmer & the CFLs give off a buzzing sound more annoying than the background noise at the World Cup.
I'll be saving my soon-to-be banned bulbs for that purpose. Rest of the house has CFLs. Color sucks though.
EDIT: OOOPS - forgot to read all of P. 2 before posting. Now I see Joe Mama's usual wisdom beat me to the punch. Care to set up a hoarder's club?
Anyone try a CFL with a dimmer switch?
-turn down the dimmer & the CFLs give off a buzzing sound more annoying than the background noise at the World Cup.
I'll be saving my soon-to-be banned bulbs for that purpose. Rest of the house has CFLs. Color sucks though.
I can't stand yellow light. That is one reason I like CFLs more.
And you just need to get the correct bulbs for Dimmers.
dwhitehorne
06-15-10, 14:49
I would like to test the LEDs that are out. But, they are expensive.
I bought a screw in LED light bulb about 6 months ago just to try. The brightest one they had was 40 watts. Total waste of money. I was not impressed with the dim light. I have a couple of LED flashlights and love them. The LED light bulbs for the house need some more development. David
While you might get headaches, please show a study that shows CFLs cause it. With the amount of people against it, I am sure there will be many studies proving it.
I never claimed to have read any study's. My claim is from my own experience. But that is not really the point. The point is about freedom to choose not have it decided for me. Such an asinine thing to outlaw particular types of lights. I am sure that there are plenty of things in your life that I could think of a good reason to outlaw. But why would I do that, what would it really accomplish?
I think the people that do not use them are just cheap and will not be happy with anything that costs more than 50cents a bulb.
Given what I and many here spend on guns, ammo, holsters, kit, cars, bikes and watches and anything else that can be purchased, I don't think that many are that cheap. But hey what ever you want to believe.:rolleyes: Beyond all of that, so what if someone does want the cheapest? Are we or are we not supposed to live on the land of the free .
I like both, as each has their uses.
An outright ban is the pinnacle of boneheadedness.
wild_wild_wes
06-15-10, 22:09
While you might get headaches, please show a study that shows CFLs cause it. With the amount of people against it, I am sure there will be many studies proving it.
"Headaches"? Flourescents give me migraines. "I want to die" migraines.
I got them at work. I had the CFLs removed from my work area. No more migraines (thank God).
While I always hate the government banning anything, I don't understand why anyone would want to use Incandescents anymore.
I agree. The government is again sticking its nose where it doesnt belong. As for light sources, yeah get away from incandescents, but skip CFLs (mercury issues) as well and go straight to LEDs. But even then they arent a perfect replacement of incandescents. One problem with LEDs though is that they are very susceptible to minor voltage fluctuations. I know a bunch of property managers and building engineers that are pulling their hair out over LEDs that are blown by the most minute of voltage spikes that dont affect anything else. Then there is the problem of getting a truly white light from LEDs. But still I say they are the way to go.
When I had the condo I just bought remodeled, every light fixture, with the exception of what’s in the fridge, oven and microwave was converted to a CFL.
Every building the company I work for designs [Architect] uses only CFL's and HID fixtures.
If you use a CFL that has a standard lamp base and screws into any existing fixture, it will take time to heat up and come up to full brightness. However, if you used a fixture specifically designed with an electric or magnetic ballast, to use a double, triple of quad tube 2 pin CFL bulb the light will come on to full brightness immediately.
Based on rough calculations done by building efficiency software, replacing every bulb in a 2500sf bank branch with CFLs and HIDs reduces the buildings cooling load by a pretty drastic margin. Now, granted that a bank will have and be allowed a lot more lighting per SF that a residence so the difference might be a lot smaller in your home, but you will be surprised by how much heat a traditional bulb puts out.
As a small example, 2 of my cousins have condo’s in the same development, we all remodeled the interiors, though granted, I went the most nuts, after all, I am an Architect, and I do have connections lol. But my electric bill is usually about $20 less a month than their’s with the same size condo, and I have more light fixtures. I even leave lights on when not home at night for the dog lol.
CFL’s are the way to go, hands down.
Good points, but I still say LEDs are where its at once they can get the voltage issues solved. Oh BTW, PM incoming.
I like both, as each has their uses.
An outright ban is the pinnacle of boneheadedness.
Its a government operation after all. Did you expect something different?
The CFLs I have in my house don't flicker and most of them come on immediately, though it does take a minute for them to reach full strength. It is only about 1 min for them to be bright. Most of the ones I buy have some sort of coating so that the light they put out is similar to a normal incan bulb in color (that yellowish light). My open fixtures have the CFL that are enclosed in a bulb. My outside garage and porch lights do too (I leave them on all night -- much cheaper). My neighbors were surprised when I told him the outside lights are CFL as they look (color wise and physically with a bulb) like incan.
Well the Act does not actually ban incandescent lights, it simply requires 25% increase in efficiency.
I have been reading about fluorescent lights causing headaches. From what I have read most of the issues come from older lights with a 60hz fresh rate. I find it funny that the people claiming headaches from the lights on the internet are staring at a monitor with has a 60hz refresh rate and do not complain about getting a headache. The new CFLs have a refresh rate of 25,000-40,000, so anyone that had an issue with the lights might want to try a new electronic ballast light.
Well the Act does not actually ban incandescent lights, it simply requires 25% increase in efficiency.
I have been reading about fluorescent lights causing headaches. From what I have read most of the issues come from older lights with a 60hz fresh rate. I find it funny that the people claiming headaches from the lights on the internet are staring at a monitor with has a 60hz refresh rate and do not complain about getting a headache. The new CFLs have a refresh rate of 25,000-40,000, so anyone that had an issue with the lights might want to try a new electronic ballast light.
Again you miss the point. The law is not needed and is merely just another example of social control.
P.S.- I cant stare at my monitor for too long either.
Are you against it simply because it is a social control/government regulation? If it is because it is a real medical problem you can get a waiver from what I read to allow you to buy incandescent lights.
I find it funny that the people claiming headaches from the lights on the internet are staring at a monitor with has a 60hz refresh rate and do not complain about getting a headache.
Because nobody stares at a monitor running at 60hz. Only old crappy low end CRTs ever ran that slow. LCD screens don't have a refresh rate of the same sort. The PC driver software often claims it as 60hz with new LCD screens but that is just because the driver feels the need to tell you something so it just chooses the lowest number it knows about, 60hz. The LCD is a constant on type of thing. The dot stays on until you tell it to go off and does not need to be "refreshed" the same way a CRT was scanning at a given rate. (There is a speed that determines how fast an LCD can update the screen but that is not the same as refresh rate)
i have about 40 canned lights with flood bulbs and 40 regular bulbs in the house (a rough count). at $10/bulb, it would cost me $800+tax to replace them all with CFLs. i haven't priced LEDs, but at $50/bulb, it would cost $4000+tax. You want to subsidize that for me?
(let me preface this with saying that I am in no way in favor of a ban on incan lights)
Where did this $10 per CFL bulb come from? For standard 60w replacement (13-14w from most manufacturers) they are down to as low as 99 cents on sale when bought in 4 packs or other multi pack size. Not on sale, $1.50-$3 each.
In the ancient days CFL bulbs were $7-$12 or so, but not any more (at most stores).
Because nobody stares at a monitor running at 60hz. Only old crappy low end CRTs ever ran that slow. LCD screens don't have a refresh rate of the same sort. The PC driver software often claims it as 60hz with new LCD screens but that is just because the driver feels the need to tell you something so it just chooses the lowest number it knows about, 60hz. The LCD is a constant on type of thing. The dot stays on until you tell it to go off and does not need to be "refreshed" the same way a CRT was scanning at a given rate. (There is a speed that determines how fast an LCD can update the screen but that is not the same as refresh rate)
I am sure there are plenty of people with CRT monitors still. Most TVs also have a 60hz refresh rate, so unless you have a 120hz tv same thing applies.
I am sure there are plenty of people with CRT monitors still. Most TVs also have a 60hz refresh rate, so unless you have a 120hz tv same thing applies.
Most CRTs still in use run at higher than 60hz. Most of the last generation CRTs would run at 75-85hz on average. And I will admit I have not seen a CRT anywhere in use at anybody's house that I know of. Even the cheapskates now use LCDs.
Almost any TV you buy today is an LCD TV or other non CRT technology. Read what I said about LCDs. Your statement about TVs running at 60hz makes no sense. That 60hz is something TOTALLY DIFFERENT than the CRT refresh rate you were talking about.
The LCD TV "refresh rate" (60hz or 120hz or whatever) is also called the "response rate" and has nothing to do with the "refresh rate" on CRT based products. It has to do with how fast a given pixel can be switched. see http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/lcdtv/lcdtv-responsetime.shtml
And for the record, 60hz CRTs were awful and did provoke headaches and eye strain and stuff in many people, me included. The higher the resolution of the CRT screen, the higher the refresh rate you needed to avoid that problem. A 1900x1200 display needed around 80 or 85hz (depending on screen and person) to avoid the problem while a lower res screen was fine at 70hz or 75.
Not everyone has an LED tv. Personally I even have a CRT tv in my living room, it is a 57" HD and only 3 years old. The other tvs in my house are all regular crt tvs. Im sure if you take a poll most people will still have a CRT tv in their house.
Not everyone has an LED tv. Personally I even have a CRT tv in my living room, it is a 57" HD and only 3 years old. The other tvs in my house are all regular crt tvs. Im sure if you take a poll most people will still have a CRT tv in their house.
Please read what I post before replying.
I never once talked about LED TVs (which in reality are LCD TVs with LED backlighting). Nor did I claim that people no longer use CRT based TVs. I was talking about CRT computer monitors.
And your comments about 60hz and 120hz TV *strongly* implies you were talking about LCD TVs since those are terms used to talk about LCD TVs.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/129399/lcd_tvs_get_faster_refresh_rates.html
Most TV sets today refresh the picture either 50 times per second (50Hz) or 60 times per second (60Hz) depending where in the world you live (different regions use different color formatting.) That rate is fine for most images, but when it comes to fast moving shows like sports events the images can appear blurry on an LCD (liquid crystal display) TV. Doubling the rate at which images are displayed, to 100 or 120 frames per second, makes for a better, more high-definition picture.
Yes the article is from 2007 but most people do not throw away tvs every year.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/129399/lcd_tvs_get_faster_refresh_rates.html
Yes the article is from 2007 but most people do not throw away tvs every year.
You mentioned 60hz or 120hz TVs which implies LCD.
CRT based TVs in the US run at a scanrate of 60hz. But due to the interlaced nature of standard analog TV signals you actual get 30 frames per second.
LCD refresh rate is not the same thing as CRT refresh rate (though there may be parallels)
Given normal video input at 30 frames per second, from what I understand, the LCD TVs with high response rates ("refresh rates") interpolate extra frames which is supposed to make fast motion video appear smoother (if it actually does is subject to opinion).
Again, people are not staring at CRTs (monitors) with refresh rates of 60hz any more. Most people are staring at LCD screens which don't refresh at all (in the same way that CRTs do).
CRT based TVs, due to their low resolution and nature of the displayed images, can get away with a lower refresh rate (ie 60hz which is really 30 fps due to interlacing). And I bet your HD TV based on CRT technology has a higher refresh rate than 60hz. While lots of people still have CRT based TVs, LCD TVs (and other non CRT based technology -- Plasma, DLT, etc) are becoming the norm with the huge drop in prices.
back to bulbs
Modern CFL bulbs don't have the 60hz flicker like older fluorescent technology. I would encourage the doubters to try the most modern CFL bulbs. They come in lots of different colors (whiter, more incan like yellow, soft white, bright sun white, etc) and have no flicker.
Modern CFL bulbs don't have the 60hz flicker like older fluorescent technology. I would encourage the doubters to try the most modern CFL bulbs. They come in lots of different colors (whiter, more incan like yellow, soft white, bright sun white, etc) and have no flicker.
True, as I suggested already.
True, as I suggested already.
Yes, I was just bringing it back on subject and agreeing.
back to bulbs
Modern CFL bulbs don't have the 60hz flicker like older fluorescent technology. I would encourage the doubters to try the most modern CFL bulbs. They come in lots of different colors (whiter, more incan like yellow, soft white, bright sun white, etc) and have no flicker.
Correct. One thing that I have had to do was purchase a stronger bulb than the "equivalent" on the package. If I am replacing a 60w bulb, I will get their 100w equivalent to get the light output that I need.
Are you against it simply because it is a social control/government regulation? If it is because it is a real medical problem you can get a waiver from what I read to allow you to buy incandescent lights.
It is a 50/50 thing. 50% because I do get headaches and then ya, the rest is because I am tired of all of the "social control/government regulation" as you put it.
thopkins22
06-16-10, 09:08
If it is because it is a real medical problem you can get a waiver from what I read to allow you to buy incandescent lights.
What will the penalty be for buying unauthorized light bulbs without a "medical waiver?" Fifty to five hundred dollar fines? A year in jail?
The very notion of needing a freaking waiver from the government to avoid prosecution for owning an incandescent lightbulb.... That this is being considered by gun owners, never mind the far left is absolute insanity.
Honestly I think we're in worse shape than the British for allowing their government to ban fire extinguishers and those little metallic cookie decorations.
For the record, I have some CFL's, I'm not opposed to using them. But making them mandatory? I swear I think I'll start burning my fireplace in August and letting my air conditioner work double time.
I think that is the point we have kind of gotten away from. We can all argue why we like or don't like one or the other, however the government banning Incandescent bulbs is just stupid.
I think that is the point we have kind of gotten away from. We can all argue why we like or don't like one or the other, however the government banning Incandescent bulbs is just stupid.
100% agree. I don't understand how anyone in their right (=correct, not "Right") mind could agree with this sort of thing.
I agree. The government is again sticking its nose where it doesnt belong. As for light sources, yeah get away from incandescents, but skip CFLs (mercury issues) as well and go straight to LEDs. But even then they arent a perfect replacement of incandescents. One problem with LEDs though is that they are very susceptible to minor voltage fluctuations. I know a bunch of property managers and building engineers that are pulling their hair out over LEDs that are blown by the most minute of voltage spikes that dont affect anything else. Then there is the problem of getting a truly white light from LEDs. But still I say they are the way to go.
Good points, but I still say LEDs are where its at once they can get the voltage issues solved. Oh BTW, PM incoming.
Its a government operation after all. Did you expect something different?
Got your PM and replied.
I have not heard anything like that about LED bulbs, but with CFL fixtures being so prevelant, we are never asked by our clients to use LED bulbs.
Our drawings specify the use of 41K CFLs and we have not recieved complaints of headaches or any discomfort from any of our clients or end users thus far. Granted I have only worked for this company for 2 years but in that time I have worked on 3 completed and 1 soon to be complete bank branches and I have not seen or been told of any discomfort from any contractor or occupant of the buiding during construction or after it has been turned over to the end user, and there is not a single incan. bulb in the entire building, save for once again, the fridge and microwave. Everything is either linear or compact fluorescent or HID.
No one has complained in my condo either. I use soft white and bright white depending on the room use.
Color rendering with CFLs does suffer, but with the new better coatings on bulbs they seem to produce a wider spectrum than before... its not like its a high pressure sodium bulb which renders anything red as black lol. The condo is very contemporary with a lot of light grays and natural bamboo floors everywhere, I do not find to the colors to suffer from the choice of bulb. The kitchen walls are bright orange, and the color does seem slightly muted at night when there is no natural light, but it is nothing that would drive me nuts as an end user, only as an Architec who can see the ever so slight difference in color from day to night... my GF does not see the difference lol.
woodandsteel
06-16-10, 16:38
Ok, I went to the Home Depot yesterday. I was looking at their display of CFLs. How does one choose the right one?
The brightest ones, that look like a flourecent light when turned on, are a no go. The make me sick, even if it is psychosomatic. I find that the yellow (softer?) ones aren't bright enough to be useful.
What are some reccomendations for lighting that mimics normal incandesants?
Either your vision is not right or you are not paying attention.
Forget phrases like "Off (or on) like a light". CFLs have come a long way but they still don't work right. LEDs may be better, but the color tone is so far off.
Have you tried to buy a 120W BR40 bulb at HomeDEpot or Lowes lately, they aren't there. I've gone mail order to get the bulbs we need. We have something like over 50 can lights (the lady who built the house was nuts) and my wife can sniff out any CFL that I try to stick in.
i switched to sylvania "instant on" CFL's in my bedroom. i find the color quite pleasant, but they are hardly "instant on" takes a good 30 seconds to a minute to actually reach full brightness. not a big issue i guess.
I think LED lighting is going to be the next big thing really. the flourescents are full of mercury and compromise :mad:
Ok, I went to the Home Depot yesterday. I was looking at their display of CFLs. How does one choose the right one?
The brightest ones, that look like a flourecent light when turned on, are a no go. The make me sick, even if it is psychosomatic. I find that the yellow (softer?) ones aren't bright enough to be useful.
What are some reccomendations for lighting that mimics normal incandesants?
Incandesant light is very warm, so the soft white is probobly the closest. If you if you find it to be too dark you can always go with a higher wattage bulb.
Im having a hard time trying to find the spectra of different bulbs, but it seems that at least according to this, the Philips bulbs seems to be the most comparable to incan's
http://web.ncf.ca/jim/misc/cfl/spectra.jpg
i switched to sylvania "instant on" CFL's in my bedroom. i find the color quite pleasant, but they are hardly "instant on" takes a good 30 seconds to a minute to actually reach full brightness. not a big issue i guess.
They really are "instant on". Just not full brightness instantly. Some CFL and older standard fluorescent lighting had that pause of a second or two and a few flashes before it came on. These "instant on" CFL bulbs come on instantly but are dimmer for the first 30-90 seconds.
I just bought a couple CFL (in a bulb for standard look) at IKEA. They are *not* instant on. They take a second or two to come on. Was kind of disappointed as they were reasonably priced for a CFL in an enclosed bulb (which are more expensive than the curly kind)
woodandsteel
06-17-10, 13:27
Incandesant light is very warm, so the soft white is probobly the closest. If you if you find it to be too dark you can always go with a higher wattage bulb.
Im having a hard time trying to find the spectra of different bulbs, but it seems that at least according to this, the Philips bulbs seems to be the most comparable to incan's
I will have to shop around for the Phillips then. Thank you.
Kentucky Cop
06-20-10, 21:02
So I did it after reading 4 pages of this craziness. I replaced my two lamps in my family room with Sylvania CFL "micro-mini" instant on's.
The indcan bulbs were 60 watt so I got the CFL 60 watts. I have to say, they have been on for 2 hours and it takes some adjusting to get used to. Its hard to explain, its a white'er light but appears to be not as bright as my 60w indcans. Lowes had a display of how to pic what color. On the low end was "softer white", the middle of the road was "bright white" which I got, and the brightest was called "Daylight".
Someone said earlier to get a higher watt CFL to get the desired brightness. Now, I replaced 60 watt bulbs with 60 watt CFL's. Do I need to put 75w CFL's in to get the desired brightness or do I get the "Daylight" to up the brightness. Also, if your say to put a higher watt in, will that cause a fire hazard or do they not run as hot as the incand's. Hell, I dont know folks. All you pro's let me know. I would like to make the change but I need to get it right first.
PS- I too have 75watt can lights on dimmers thru out the house and would love to replace those bastards with CFL's. The CFL dimmers are ridiculously expensive.
Thoughts....
KY cop
So I did it after reading 4 pages of this craziness. I replaced my two lamps in my family room with Sylvania CFL "micro-mini" instant on's.
The indcan bulbs were 60 watt so I got the CFL 60 watts. I have to say, they have been on for 2 hours and it takes some adjusting to get used to. Its hard to explain, its a white'er light but appears to be not as bright as my 60w indcans. Lowes had a display of how to pic what color. On the low end was "softer white", the middle of the road was "bright white" which I got, and the brightest was called "Daylight".
Someone said earlier to get a higher watt CFL to get the desired brightness. Now, I replaced 60 watt bulbs with 60 watt CFL's. Do I need to put 75w CFL's in to get the desired brightness or do I get the "Daylight" to up the brightness. Also, if your say to put a higher watt in, will that cause a fire hazard or do they not run as hot as the incand's. Hell, I dont know folks. All you pro's let me know. I would like to make the change but I need to get it right first.
PS- I too have 75watt can lights on dimmers thru out the house and would love to replace those bastards with CFL's. The CFL dimmers are ridiculously expensive.
Thoughts....
KY cop
I run 75w equivalent CFL's in places where I ran a 40w incandescent bulb. The issue with the different colors is how they work indoors. I use one of the "improved" spectrum bulbs, but I cant recall which.
Kentucky Cop
06-20-10, 21:16
I went with Sylvania's. Anyways, your suggestion is to move from 60w CFL's up to say 75w CFL's? Is it dangerous to go over the required wattage for the lamp or is CFL's safe to go over the lamps suggested bulb wattage. The reason I went with "bright white" (middle of the road), they appeared to be selling the most of those compared to "Daylight". Do you think "Daylight" in the 60w CFL's would be the ticket or more wattage. There is no telling how many test CFL's this is going to take me....
ALEXV states above that Phillips is the way to go. Is there that much difference in the big manufactures???
Ky Cop
my 75w equivalents use less power than the fixture is rated for. the "equivalent" gets in the way because they are comparing CFL output based on power to incandescent output based on power.
Kentucky Cop
06-20-10, 21:26
my 75w equivalents use less power than the fixture is rated for. the "equivalent" gets in the way because they are comparing CFL output based on power to incandescent output based on power.
So based on my lamps ratings for indcan's lights, I can go higher with CFL's because they still use less power equalling less heat. All my lamps are several years old meaning the watt ratings on them are intended for indcan's.
What brand CFL's do you use? I may just move up to 75w CFL's like you say to compensate for the 60w CFL's brightness. Thanks again for your help.
Ky Cop
I am pretty sure the power rating on the lamp fixture is independant of the bulb type. Power draw being power draw, regardless of what it lights up.
I have a wide variety of bulbs. I have honestly been getting a few each time I hit Home Depot. I have not settled on what I like the best, but I will say that the bulk pack Sylvanias that are bright white are the best for me. My light choice might be different than yours, but I prefer less yellow.
CFLs do seem to have a burn in period. When you first start using one it will take a couple hours to get to full brightness.
Kentucky Cop
06-20-10, 21:57
I am pretty sure the power rating on the lamp fixture is independant of the bulb type. Power draw being power draw, regardless of what it lights up.
I have a wide variety of bulbs. I have honestly been getting a few each time I hit Home Depot. I have not settled on what I like the best, but I will say that the bulk pack Sylvanias that are bright white are the best for me. My light choice might be different than yours, but I prefer less yellow.
Awesome. Sounds like the same Sylvania's I got. Hell, if you are running 75w CFL's were you were running 40w indcan's and your house hasn't gone up in flames yet, I should be good to move up.:D
Thanks, KC
Kentucky Cop
06-20-10, 22:00
CFLs do seem to have a burn in period. When you first start using one it will take a couple hours to get to full brightness.
My 60w CFL's don't seem as bright as my 60w indcan's. Do I move up to 75w CFL's or move up on the Sylvania brightness chart to "Daylight"? Also, did it take you guys a little bit to get use to the lights when you first made the switch. 3-4 hours in and I still take a double look at my surroundings.:rolleyes:
I went with Sylvania's. Anyways, your suggestion is to move from 60w CFL's up to say 75w CFL's? Is it dangerous to go over the required wattage for the lamp or is CFL's safe to go over the lamps suggested bulb wattage. The reason I went with "bright white" (middle of the road), they appeared to be selling the most of those compared to "Daylight". Do you think "Daylight" in the 60w CFL's would be the ticket or more wattage. There is no telling how many test CFL's this is going to take me....
ALEXV states above that Phillips is the way to go. Is there that much difference in the big manufactures???
Ky Cop
I don't know if Phillips IS the way to go, just seems by that light spectrum chart its the closest to our old school bulbs. Please don't take my word as gospal. There may be something else out there that is better, Ill try and find out, maybe send an e-mail to our lighting rep.
Also, dont forget that when buying a CFL you are talking about Wattage equivalent. A 60W Equivalent CFL is really only 13W. So going to a 75W Equiv. is not going to overload the fixture. Even if you want a 100W of bolb, you are really only pulling 23W throug your light fixture. You will be fine. You can run much higher Wattages with CFLs than with Incans, but the whole point is to run less to save money.
You can run much higher Wattages with CFLs than with Incans, but the whole point is to run less to save money.
Which is still accomplished, but using a 60w equivalent that draws 13w is better than 23w from a 100w equivalent, just not to the same effect.
Which is still accomplished, but using a 60w equivalent that draws 13w is better than 23w from a 100w equivalent, just not to the same effect.
Not sure I fallow.
Anyway, was able to pull this off of the Philips website
http://avoronoff.hypermart.net/CFL_Chart.jpg
looks like the "Natural Sunshine" is their closest to full spectrum lightbulb.
Not sure I fallow.
Anyway, was able to pull this off of the Philips website
http://avoronoff.hypermart.net/CFL_Chart.jpg
looks like the "Natural Sunshine" is their closest to full spectrum lightbulb.
We are replacing a 60w bulb with a 60w eq. CFL that uses say 8w, using a 100w eq CFL that draws 23w is still a reduction in power usage, just not as much as the 60w equivalent. I guess it is how you look at it. I look at the net power reduction, not the equivalent rating.
We are replacing a 60w bulb with a 60w eq. CFL that uses say 8w, using a 100w eq CFL that draws 23w is still a reduction in power usage, just not as much as the 60w equivalent. I guess it is how you look at it. I look at the net power reduction, not the equivalent rating.
gotcha.. agree 100%
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.