(10) Technologies That Deserve To Die

L

Lizard Blizzard

Guest
From:
"10 technologies that deserve to die"
By Bruce Sterling
Technology Review
10.21.2003

A science fiction writer's irreverent take.
[More than irreverent, he seems to be misinformed on occasion. I do not
necessarily agree or disagree with any of the rest of his article.
Sadly, he doesn't seem to be aware that incandescents have already been
replaced in most commercial situations. With fluo lights, of course.]


4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS

IN REALITY, these sad devices are "heat bulbs." Supposedly a lighting
technology, they produce nine times more raw heat than they do
illumination. The light they do give, admittedly, is still prettier
than the eerie glow of compact fluorescents and light- emitting diodes.
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.

Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy
hassle of running air conditioners to do battle with the blazing heat of
all these round little glass stoves...let's face it, these gizmos
deserve to vanish.

They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball. Our descendants will stare at
those vacuum-shrouded wires as if they were whale-oil lanterns.



--
----------------(from OED Mini-Dictionary)-----------------
PUNCTUATION - Apostrophe
Incorrect uses: (i) the apostrophe must not be used with a plural
where there is no possessive sense, as in ~tea's are served here~;
(ii) there is no such word as ~her's, our's, their's, your's~.

Confusions: it's = it is or it has (not 'belonging to it'); correct
uses are ~it's here~ (= it is here); ~it's gone~ (= it has gone);
but ~the dog wagged its tail~ (no apostrophe).
----------------(For the Apostrophe challenged)----------------
From a fully deputized officer of the Apostrophe Police!

<<Spammers use Weapons of Mass Distraction!>>

I bought some batteries, but they weren't included,
so I had to buy them again.
-- Steven Wright

FOR SALE: Nice parachute: never opened - used once.

(Problem) Evidence of leak on right main landing gear
(Solution) Evidence removed

F
o
d
d
e
r

f
o
r

s
t
u
p
i
d
"
n
o
t

e
n
o
u
g
h

i
n
c
l
d
u
d
e
d

t
e
x
t
"
e
r
r
o
r

m
s
g
..
 
"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote in message
news:bnbdkc$4jp12$1@hades.csu.net...
4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS
...
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.
Click to expand...
I say it's pretty darn good. Can't beat the wide, natural spectrum of
random thermal noise! Only difference between that and the sun is it's
hotter (and is mostly hydrogen and helium glowing), and has travelled
through 1AU of space and the Earth's atmosphere.

Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy ...
Click to expand...
Lamps as we know them today are amazingly rugged. Very thin glass, yet
I've dropped one onto a sidewalk from 10' up and it still didn't break!
Fluorescents, OTOH, are extremely fragile; I've broken one falling just
2' onto a table. And there was some paper there to pad its fall.

They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball.
Click to expand...
If you ask me, incandescents have got it down... show me a fluorescent
with that spectrum and I'll buy it.

Besides all this, what does the writer propose to replace it with?
Fluorescents don't fit because of what I just said. They are also
economically unfeasable, although some of the small devices have made
headway into such existing installations. Any other technology, say
electroluminescent whatever, or LEDs, is way off from this day in time
for a variety of reasons.

Tim

--
"That's for the courts to decide." - Homer Simpson
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
 
Yep, all the "greenies" want the incandescent light bulb to go away.
But so far, all of the substitutes are worse. Each of the fluorescent
bulbs, be they compact, or otherwise has a drop of mercury in it.
Does wonderful things when it hits the landfill, and they all hit the
landfill.

Each of the fluorescent bulbs create RF hash that wrecks some part
of the radio spectrum. The old fashioned ballast type fluorescents
are largely responsible for that buzzing noise you hear between the
stations on the AM radio. The compact fluorescents are even more
efficient RF emitters due to their HexFet switches, and complete and
total lack of shielding.

And, then there is the fire hazard. I had a lamp fixture burned
severly when one of those nice little compact fluorescent replacements
for an incandescent bulb failed. It was a "Lights of America" brand...
real garbage. I have yet to have one that lasted as long as they
are advertised to last.

-Chuck Harris

Lizard Blizzard wrote:
From:
"10 technologies that deserve to die"
By Bruce Sterling
Technology Review
10.21.2003

A science fiction writer's irreverent take.
[More than irreverent, he seems to be misinformed on occasion. I do not
necessarily agree or disagree with any of the rest of his article.
Sadly, he doesn't seem to be aware that incandescents have already been
replaced in most commercial situations. With fluo lights, of course.]


4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS

IN REALITY, these sad devices are "heat bulbs." Supposedly a lighting
technology, they produce nine times more raw heat than they do
illumination. The light they do give, admittedly, is still prettier
than the eerie glow of compact fluorescents and light- emitting diodes.
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.
Click to expand...
 
Chuck Harris <cfharris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:bnbodt$gr8$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
Yep, all the "greenies" want the incandescent light bulb to go away.
But so far, all of the substitutes are worse. Each of the fluorescent
bulbs, be they compact, or otherwise has a drop of mercury in it.
Does wonderful things when it hits the landfill, and they all hit the
landfill.

Each of the fluorescent bulbs create RF hash that wrecks some part
of the radio spectrum. The old fashioned ballast type fluorescents
are largely responsible for that buzzing noise you hear between the
stations on the AM radio. The compact fluorescents are even more
efficient RF emitters due to their HexFet switches, and complete and
total lack of shielding.

And, then there is the fire hazard. I had a lamp fixture burned
severly when one of those nice little compact fluorescent replacements
for an incandescent bulb failed. It was a "Lights of America" brand...
real garbage. I have yet to have one that lasted as long as they
are advertised to last.
Click to expand...
The trick is don't turn them off also burn them with the base down unless
they say otherwise.
Of the 6 or so I took apart, AD, I found three with burned out filements,
two with poor connections and one with dead electronics.
They do have some usfull parts in them and the ones with bad connections can
be reconnected but it is a pain.
Reconnected the good tube to a good base but it rolled off the bench befor I
could screw it in a socket #%~*!!

M2
 
Tim Williams wrote:

"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote in message
news:bnbdkc$4jp12$1@hades.csu.net...

4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS
...
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.


I say it's pretty darn good. Can't beat the wide, natural spectrum of
random thermal noise! Only difference between that and the sun is it's
hotter (and is mostly hydrogen and helium glowing), and has travelled
through 1AU of space and the Earth's atmosphere.


Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy ...


Lamps as we know them today are amazingly rugged. Very thin glass, yet
I've dropped one onto a sidewalk from 10' up and it still didn't break!
Fluorescents, OTOH, are extremely fragile; I've broken one falling just
2' onto a table. And there was some paper there to pad its fall.


They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball.


If you ask me, incandescents have got it down... show me a fluorescent
with that spectrum and I'll buy it.
Click to expand...
I think the whole point of this was that incandescents have most of
their electromagnetic radiation in the _wrong_ part of the spectrum,
namely IR. Of course that's where it's needed the least. Unless of
course you're using the light blub in an incubator! ;-)

Besides all this, what does the writer propose to replace it with?
Fluorescents don't fit because of what I just said. They are also
economically unfeasable, although some of the small devices have made
headway into such existing installations. Any other technology, say
electroluminescent whatever, or LEDs, is way off from this day in time
for a variety of reasons.
Click to expand...
Economically unfeasible? If so, then why are they all over the place?
I think you need to explain your assertions. And we haven't even
discussed HID lamps. I think you need to thoroughly read Don's Lighting
web pages. http://members.misty.com/don/light.html

Tim

--
Click to expand...

--
----------------(from OED Mini-Dictionary)-----------------
PUNCTUATION - Apostrophe
Incorrect uses: (i) the apostrophe must not be used with a plural
where there is no possessive sense, as in ~tea's are served here~;
(ii) there is no such word as ~her's, our's, their's, your's~.

Confusions: it's = it is or it has (not 'belonging to it'); correct
uses are ~it's here~ (= it is here); ~it's gone~ (= it has gone);
but ~the dog wagged its tail~ (no apostrophe).
----------------(For the Apostrophe challenged)----------------
From a fully deputized officer of the Apostrophe Police!

<<Spammers use Weapons of Mass Distraction!>>

I bought some batteries, but they weren't included,
so I had to buy them again.
-- Steven Wright

FOR SALE: Nice parachute: never opened - used once.

(Problem) Evidence of leak on right main landing gear
(Solution) Evidence removed

F
o
d
d
e
r

f
o
r

s
t
u
p
i
d
"
n
o
t

e
n
o
u
g
h

i
n
c
l
d
u
d
e
d

t
e
x
t
"
e
r
r
o
r

m
s
g
..
 
Chuck Harris wrote:

Yep, all the "greenies" want the incandescent light bulb to go away.
But so far, all of the substitutes are worse. Each of the fluorescent
bulbs, be they compact, or otherwise has a drop of mercury in it.
Does wonderful things when it hits the landfill, and they all hit the
landfill.

Each of the fluorescent bulbs create RF hash that wrecks some part
of the radio spectrum. The old fashioned ballast type fluorescents
are largely responsible for that buzzing noise you hear between the
stations on the AM radio. The compact fluorescents are even more
efficient RF emitters due to their HexFet switches, and complete and
total lack of shielding.

And, then there is the fire hazard. I had a lamp fixture burned
severly when one of those nice little compact fluorescent replacements
for an incandescent bulb failed. It was a "Lights of America" brand...
real garbage. I have yet to have one that lasted as long as they
are advertised to last.
Click to expand...
I had a Panasonic, one of those that weighed a lot more because it had a
real ballast with E and I transformer laminations. It lasted at least 5
years, even tho I left it on most of the time (it was only 13W, besides
I don't pay the electric bill. ;0)

The Philips are not too expensive. I'd say that if you stay way from
the two-for-one sales and cheaper ones you will do okay. One problem I
see is that people expect the CFL lamps to work where incandescents
would, but they fail to realize that if you let a lamp fixture fill up
with dead moths and other detritus, there's _no_ lamp that's going to
last long under those circumstances.

-Chuck Harris

Lizard Blizzard wrote:

From:
"10 technologies that deserve to die"
By Bruce Sterling
Technology Review
10.21.2003

A science fiction writer's irreverent take.
[More than irreverent, he seems to be misinformed on occasion. I do
not necessarily agree or disagree with any of the rest of his article.
Sadly, he doesn't seem to be aware that incandescents have already
been replaced in most commercial situations. With fluo lights, of
course.]


4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS

IN REALITY, these sad devices are "heat bulbs." Supposedly a lighting
technology, they produce nine times more raw heat than they do
illumination. The light they do give, admittedly, is still prettier
than the eerie glow of compact fluorescents and light- emitting
diodes. But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.
Click to expand...

--
----------------(from OED Mini-Dictionary)-----------------
PUNCTUATION - Apostrophe
Incorrect uses: (i) the apostrophe must not be used with a plural
where there is no possessive sense, as in ~tea's are served here~;
(ii) there is no such word as ~her's, our's, their's, your's~.

Confusions: it's = it is or it has (not 'belonging to it'); correct
uses are ~it's here~ (= it is here); ~it's gone~ (= it has gone);
but ~the dog wagged its tail~ (no apostrophe).
----------------(For the Apostrophe challenged)----------------
From a fully deputized officer of the Apostrophe Police!

<<Spammers use Weapons of Mass Distraction!>>

I bought some batteries, but they weren't included,
so I had to buy them again.
-- Steven Wright

FOR SALE: Nice parachute: never opened - used once.

(Problem) Evidence of leak on right main landing gear
(Solution) Evidence removed

F
o
d
d
e
r

f
o
r

s
t
u
p
i
d
"
n
o
t

e
n
o
u
g
h

i
n
c
l
d
u
d
e
d

t
e
x
t
"
e
r
r
o
r

m
s
g
..
 
Mark Mcmillan wrote:

Chuck Harris <cfharris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:bnbodt$gr8$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

Yep, all the "greenies" want the incandescent light bulb to go away.
But so far, all of the substitutes are worse. Each of the fluorescent
bulbs, be they compact, or otherwise has a drop of mercury in it.
Does wonderful things when it hits the landfill, and they all hit the
landfill.

Each of the fluorescent bulbs create RF hash that wrecks some part
of the radio spectrum. The old fashioned ballast type fluorescents
are largely responsible for that buzzing noise you hear between the
stations on the AM radio. The compact fluorescents are even more
efficient RF emitters due to their HexFet switches, and complete and
total lack of shielding.

And, then there is the fire hazard. I had a lamp fixture burned
severly when one of those nice little compact fluorescent replacements
for an incandescent bulb failed. It was a "Lights of America" brand...
real garbage. I have yet to have one that lasted as long as they
are advertised to last.
Click to expand...

The trick is don't turn them off also burn them with the base down unless
they say otherwise.
Of the 6 or so I took apart, AD, I found three with burned out filements,
two with poor connections and one with dead electronics.
They do have some usfull parts in them and the ones with bad connections can
be reconnected but it is a pain.
Reconnected the good tube to a good base but it rolled off the bench befor I
could screw it in a socket #%~*!!
Click to expand...
Hee-hee! SPLOT!

A guy gave me some cheap chinese made CFLs and I noticed that one of
them had already burned up. Pieces of crap.

M2
Click to expand...

--
----------------(from OED Mini-Dictionary)-----------------
PUNCTUATION - Apostrophe
Incorrect uses: (i) the apostrophe must not be used with a plural
where there is no possessive sense, as in ~tea's are served here~;
(ii) there is no such word as ~her's, our's, their's, your's~.

Confusions: it's = it is or it has (not 'belonging to it'); correct
uses are ~it's here~ (= it is here); ~it's gone~ (= it has gone);
but ~the dog wagged its tail~ (no apostrophe).
----------------(For the Apostrophe challenged)----------------
From a fully deputized officer of the Apostrophe Police!

<<Spammers use Weapons of Mass Distraction!>>

I bought some batteries, but they weren't included,
so I had to buy them again.
-- Steven Wright

FOR SALE: Nice parachute: never opened - used once.

(Problem) Evidence of leak on right main landing gear
(Solution) Evidence removed

F
o
d
d
e
r

f
o
r

s
t
u
p
i
d
"
n
o
t

e
n
o
u
g
h

i
n
c
l
d
u
d
e
d

t
e
x
t
"
e
r
r
o
r

m
s
g
..
 
Lizard Blizzard wrote:

I had a Panasonic, one of those that weighed a lot more because it had a
real ballast with E and I transformer laminations. It lasted at least 5
years, even tho I left it on most of the time (it was only 13W, besides
I don't pay the electric bill. ;0)

The Philips are not too expensive. I'd say that if you stay way from
the two-for-one sales and cheaper ones you will do okay. One problem I
see is that people expect the CFL lamps to work where incandescents
would, but they fail to realize that if you let a lamp fixture fill up
with dead moths and other detritus, there's _no_ lamp that's going to
last long under those circumstances.
Click to expand...
These were in open lamps with the base down, and with traditional lamp
shades. The Lights of America CFIs are anything but cheap in price...
typically $13 each. Compare that to a 60W incandescent lamp at 4 for
$0.99.

I have used Phillips, and they work ok, but are very slow to warm up,
and are very dim.

-Chuck Harris
 
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 12:32:29 -0500, "Tim Williams"
<tmoranwms@charter.net> wrote:

"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote in message
news:bnbdkc$4jp12$1@hades.csu.net...
4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS
...
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.

I say it's pretty darn good. Can't beat the wide, natural spectrum of
random thermal noise! Only difference between that and the sun is it's
hotter (and is mostly hydrogen and helium glowing), and has travelled
through 1AU of space and the Earth's atmosphere.

Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy ...

Lamps as we know them today are amazingly rugged. Very thin glass, yet
I've dropped one onto a sidewalk from 10' up and it still didn't break!
Fluorescents, OTOH, are extremely fragile; I've broken one falling just
2' onto a table. And there was some paper there to pad its fall.

They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball.

If you ask me, incandescents have got it down... show me a fluorescent
with that spectrum and I'll buy it.

Besides all this, what does the writer propose to replace it with?
Fluorescents don't fit because of what I just said. They are also
economically unfeasable, although some of the small devices have made
headway into such existing installations. Any other technology, say
electroluminescent whatever, or LEDs, is way off from this day in time
for a variety of reasons.

Tim
hmmmmm .. bet you haven't been into a lighting store in a long time.
Click to expand...
There are now full spectrum fluroescensts out now .. not terribly
expensive .. I changed over 90% of the lighting in my home to same ..
inital cost with rebates from the local power company was about 200 to
250 usd .. I saved 100 in electrical costs the first month of use.
 
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 20:34:43 GMT, oldsoundguy
<soundguy2@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 12:32:29 -0500, "Tim Williams"
tmoranwms@charter.net> wrote:

"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote in message
news:bnbdkc$4jp12$1@hades.csu.net...
4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS
...
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.

I say it's pretty darn good. Can't beat the wide, natural spectrum of
random thermal noise! Only difference between that and the sun is it's
hotter (and is mostly hydrogen and helium glowing), and has travelled
through 1AU of space and the Earth's atmosphere.

Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy ...

Lamps as we know them today are amazingly rugged. Very thin glass, yet
I've dropped one onto a sidewalk from 10' up and it still didn't break!
Fluorescents, OTOH, are extremely fragile; I've broken one falling just
2' onto a table. And there was some paper there to pad its fall.

They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball.

If you ask me, incandescents have got it down... show me a fluorescent
with that spectrum and I'll buy it.

Besides all this, what does the writer propose to replace it with?
Fluorescents don't fit because of what I just said. They are also
economically unfeasable, although some of the small devices have made
headway into such existing installations. Any other technology, say
electroluminescent whatever, or LEDs, is way off from this day in time
for a variety of reasons.

Tim
hmmmmm .. bet you haven't been into a lighting store in a long time.
There are now full spectrum fluroescensts out now .. not terribly
expensive .. I changed over 90% of the lighting in my home to same ..
inital cost with rebates from the local power company was about 200 to
250 usd .. I saved 100 in electrical costs the first month of use.
Click to expand...
The trouble with CF lamps is that they're all so bright! If you want
to replace a 15 or 25 watt incandescent in a small lamp or something,
all the available CFs are blinding! I think that they all want to make
the point of how efficient they are.

John
 
"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> schreef in bericht
news:bnbdkc$4jp12$1@hades.csu.net...
From:
"10 technologies that deserve to die"
By Bruce Sterling
Technology Review
10.21.2003

A science fiction writer's irreverent take.
[More than irreverent, he seems to be misinformed on occasion. I do not
necessarily agree or disagree with any of the rest of his article.
Sadly, he doesn't seem to be aware that incandescents have already been
replaced in most commercial situations. With fluo lights, of course.]


4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS

IN REALITY, these sad devices are "heat bulbs." Supposedly a lighting
technology, they produce nine times more raw heat than they do
illumination. The light they do give, admittedly, is still prettier
than the eerie glow of compact fluorescents and light- emitting diodes.
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.

Sure, but who needs natural daylight at night?
Click to expand...

Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy
hassle of running air conditioners to do battle with the blazing heat of
all these round little glass stoves...let's face it, these gizmos
deserve to vanish.

That's a mixture of arguments but only partly true.
Click to expand...
Cost? What are the cheaper alternatives?
Fragile? I've broken more drinking glasses then lightbulbs.
Replacement overhead? In a business environment yes, in a common household
no.
Waste of energy? Sure, all electrical light sources are inefficient.
Although fluorescents do better then incandescents.
Glass? We have plenty of it. Nevertheless there are recycling projects.
Tungsten? May be a point. Although I guess we will run out of fuel (oil
etc.) before we run out of tungsten.

They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball. Our descendants will stare at
those vacuum-shrouded wires as if they were whale-oil lanterns.

I'm very interested in that new technology. Because it's for sure that our
Click to expand...
current electrical light sources produce much more heat then light. But as
too often there's a lot af fiction and wishfull thinking and hardly science
among that scifi guys. As long as this superior technology does not appear,
I'll buy a new lightbulb when the old one is gone. Maybe I'll look for a
fluorescent if I expect it to be more economical. Nevertheless the
lightbulbs will have their use for many years to come. Even the old oil
lanterns are still used today, although I prefer the cheaper salad oil
instead of olive oil to power them. (Cann't get whale oil around here :) ).

petrus




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10-10-2003
 
"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote in message
news:bnbtju$4jkob$1@hades.csu.net...
I think the whole point of this was that incandescents have most of
their electromagnetic radiation in the _wrong_ part of the spectrum,
namely IR. Of course that's where it's needed the least. Unless of
course you're using the light blub in an incubator! ;-)
Click to expand...
Obviously, the answer must then be to get the bulb moving towards you
at about 1/2 the speed of light, the doppler shift ought to brighten
things up... ;)

Economically unfeasible? If so, then why are they all over the place?
I think you need to explain your assertions.
Click to expand...
I mean general home use - indeed they are everywhere in commercial/
industrial settings. But I don't see many around here in fixtures.

And we haven't even
discussed HID lamps. I think you need to thoroughly read Don's Lighting
web pages. http://members.misty.com/don/light.html
Click to expand...
I'll look after I snip your damned sig...

Tim

--
"That's for the courts to decide." - Homer Simpson
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
 
In article <u3imb.365285$lh.93966233@amsnews02.chello.com>,
p.kralt@hccnet.nl mentioned...
"Lizard Blizzard" <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> schreef in bericht
news:bnbdkc$4jp12$1@hades.csu.net...
From:
"10 technologies that deserve to die"
By Bruce Sterling
Technology Review
10.21.2003

A science fiction writer's irreverent take.
[More than irreverent, he seems to be misinformed on occasion. I do not
necessarily agree or disagree with any of the rest of his article.
Sadly, he doesn't seem to be aware that incandescents have already been
replaced in most commercial situations. With fluo lights, of course.]


4. INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS

IN REALITY, these sad devices are "heat bulbs." Supposedly a lighting
technology, they produce nine times more raw heat than they do
illumination. The light they do give, admittedly, is still prettier
than the eerie glow of compact fluorescents and light- emitting diodes.
But it's still a far cry from the glories of natural daylight.

Sure, but who needs natural daylight at night?

Plus there's the cost of light bulbs, their fragility, the replacement
overhead, the vast waste of energy, glass, and tungsten, the goofy
hassle of running air conditioners to do battle with the blazing heat of
all these round little glass stoves...let's face it, these gizmos
deserve to vanish.

That's a mixture of arguments but only partly true.
Cost? What are the cheaper alternatives?
Fragile? I've broken more drinking glasses then lightbulbs.
Replacement overhead? In a business environment yes, in a common household
no.
Waste of energy? Sure, all electrical light sources are inefficient.
Although fluorescents do better then incandescents.
Glass? We have plenty of it. Nevertheless there are recycling projects.
Tungsten? May be a point. Although I guess we will run out of fuel (oil
etc.) before we run out of tungsten.

They will be replaced by a superior technology, something cheap, cool,
and precisely engineered, that emits visible wavelengths genuinely
suited to a consumer's human eyeball. Our descendants will stare at
those vacuum-shrouded wires as if they were whale-oil lanterns.

I'm very interested in that new technology. Because it's for sure that our
current electrical light sources produce much more heat then light. But as
too often there's a lot af fiction and wishfull thinking and hardly science
among that scifi guys. As long as this superior technology does not appear,
I'll buy a new lightbulb when the old one is gone. Maybe I'll look for a
fluorescent if I expect it to be more economical. Nevertheless the
lightbulbs will have their use for many years to come. Even the old oil
lanterns are still used today, although I prefer the cheaper salad oil
instead of olive oil to power them. (Cann't get whale oil around here :) ).
Click to expand...
Didja know that at one time GM used whale oil in their transmission
fluids? Weird! http://www.importautoberdoo.com/liquids.html

petrus
Click to expand...

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
Didja know that at one time GM used whale oil in their transmission
fluids? Weird! http://www.importautoberdoo.com/liquids.html
Click to expand...
As did all ATF makers, best thing that ever happened to auto gearbox
repairers when they removed it.
 
In article <Oasmb.2312$xS2.651993@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>,
mjolinor@hotmail.com mentioned...
Didja know that at one time GM used whale oil in their transmission
fluids? Weird! http://www.importautoberdoo.com/liquids.html

As did all ATF makers, best thing that ever happened to auto gearbox
repairers when they removed it.
Click to expand...
Why? Did they get high off it? :p


--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 11:23:40 +0100, "Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com>
Gave us:

Didja know that at one time GM used whale oil in their transmission
fluids? Weird! http://www.importautoberdoo.com/liquids.html

As did all ATF makers, best thing that ever happened to auto gearbox
repairers when they removed it.
Click to expand...

Aside from the fact that it killed whales, why was it the best thing
that ever happened, when they removed it? It actually performed
better.

Also, it was used in the rear end gear, not the transmission.
Automatics used hydraulic fluids. Standard gear boxes and rear end
gears used heavy oils, and this was one. So, NO ATF makers used it in
an ATF fluid. I was used in gear oils.
 
"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:lqalpvop45armqoh2c6ie564tp1pr9lihc@4ax.com...
Aside from the fact that it killed whales, why was it the best thing
that ever happened, when they removed it? It actually performed
better.
Click to expand...
It also worked wonders in watches, just as rec.crafts.metalworking!

I wonder if you could find any in Japan, if not at least on the black
market... ;-)

Tim

--
"That's for the courts to decide." - Homer Simpson
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
 
Chuck Harris wrote:

And, then there is the fire hazard. I had a lamp fixture burned
severly when one of those nice little compact fluorescent replacements
for an incandescent bulb failed. It was a "Lights of America" brand...
real garbage. I have yet to have one that lasted as long as they
are advertised to last.
Click to expand...
I bought two of their halo bulbs (which they apparently
don't sell any more); one broke _by itself_ in a floor lamp,
the other was in a table lamp for a couple years and now is
going strong on my nightstand nine years later. The
nightstand lamp does the usual very intermittent service but
starts as quickly as the best of them. Go figure...

I think it's just inconsistent Q.C. on their part.

Mark L. Fergerson
 
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 15:43:52 -0500, "Tim Williams"
<tmoranwms@charter.net> Gave us:

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:lqalpvop45armqoh2c6ie564tp1pr9lihc@4ax.com...
Aside from the fact that it killed whales, why was it the best thing
that ever happened, when they removed it? It actually performed
better.

It also worked wonders in watches, just as rec.crafts.metalworking!

I wonder if you could find any in Japan, if not at least on the black
market... ;-)

Tim
Click to expand...
Not likely. My brother still has a bottle of gear oil that has it
in it.

I still have some ivory.

Both items won't be worth much until some time passes.
 
oldsoundguy wrote:

hmmmmm .. bet you haven't been into a lighting store in a long time.
There are now full spectrum fluroescensts out now .. not terribly
expensive .. I changed over 90% of the lighting in my home to same ..
inital cost with rebates from the local power company was about 200 to
250 usd .. I saved 100 in electrical costs the first month of use.
Click to expand...
I do not believe that. Implied is that the 100 dollar savings
was due to the lighting change. Your electric bill may very
well have been 100 dollars lower - but what numbers do you have
concerning how many dollars the lighting change saved you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top