Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We know...TROLL
Ah, OK."D Yuniskis" <not.going.to.be@seen.com> wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
I have now found an internet site selling all varieties of
incandescents, including 60 watt pearl, so I shall be stocking up post
puzzled> Can't you (still) purchase these over-the-counter?
I'll admit to not having gone shopping for any recently (as I
have several dozen of various bulb types on the shelf) but
i didn't realize they have (?) disappeared...
In theory, they have this side of the pond. There was EU legislation put
in place - that our government of course felt it necessary to sign up to
What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?- which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all
Ah, OK.of the supermarkets and sheds stopped selling 60 watt pearl bulbs, ahead
of the 'ban' to make sure that they complied, and were not left with
cartloads of unsellable items on their hands. However, as I understand
it, due to a governmental administrative snafu, the actual legislation
was never enacted in the UK, leaving the way wide open for internet
sellers, to just carry on as they were, and take full advantage of
people's natural tendencies to stock up. I guess that the supermarkets
etc have not restocked to make sure that a) they don't catch a cold if
the situation suddenly changes, and b) they don't look bad that they've
sold out on their eco-bollox credibility ratings.
(which also makes me wonder if lead solder has gone this route)
No, not really. Standard leaded solder has disappeared from all
commercially available electronic equipment, with the exception of
classes of items such as avionics, life support, and military (draw your
own conclusions on this) which have been granted dispensations to
continue to manufacture in leaded technology. This has been the case
since June 2006 when the RoHS directive came into full operation.
However, there is no requirement for equipment manufactured and brought
to market before that date, and perfectly legally constructed using non
RoHS compliant materials, including solder, to be repaired using
anything other than originally specified non-compliant parts and solder.
<shrug> *Felt* as if it was shifted towards the blue (violet) end ofIndeed, it is considered to be not particularly metallurgically good to
mix the two types of technology. There is also no requirement for items
constructed for your personal use, and not to be offered for resale, to
be constructed with lead-free parts and solder. For these reasons,
traditional 60/40 solder is still readily available from all the usual
parts supply houses, and is expected to continue to be for the
foreseeable future.
haste. I have also just started trying out the halogen versions of
traditional light bulbs, which still seem to make it into the
eco-bollox "book of energy savers", even though they only consume a
few watts less than their equivalent light-output 'traditional'
tungsten cousins. Thus
I found the halogens to be a harsh light. Love them outdoors
(can you spell "bright as day"?) but I've removed all of the
indoor bulbs.
Really ? I have found the light to be perfectly pleasant, if perhaps a
little bright. Maybe that is your interpretation of "harsh" ?
IIRC, they have special drive requirements. And, suffer fromfar, I am impressed. I now have a 70 watt actual, 100 watt
equivalent, fitted to my hallway main light fixture. It is very
bright, very easy (for me anyway) to see by, and has a good colour
spectrum, not in the slightest way offensive to my eyes, unlike the
CFLs, which no matter how much anyone says that *they* can't tell the
difference with, *I* can ... d :-\
We're waiting for dimmable LED lamps (that won't require growing
extra limbs to purchase)...
Although like CFLs, they do seem to be getting a little better, I've yet
to see any that come close to other lighting technologies. My local
supermarket has a number of floodlight fixtures for the car park, split
between wall and pole mounts. Until a couple of weeks ago, these were
fitted with some kind of metal halide or maybe high pressure sodium
bulb. Whatever they were, they were a pale yellow, and did a grand job
of lighting the car park in all weather conditions. They have now
Here, we have ordinances re: "light polution" so fixtures andreplaced the fittings with white LED arrays. I would guess that each one
is probably a 10 x 5 matrix, so 50 LEDs. They are so bright that you
can't look at them so what power rating are they ? 1 watters ? or 3s
maybe ? Whatever, still a pretty significant power draw over 50 of them.
However, bright as they are, the light from them is "harsh" - there's
that word again - cold and shadowy. They don't actually come close to
the performance of the previous floodlights, whatever exact technology
they were. It will be interesting to see how well they penetrate fog, as
we're now into that season. When low pressure sodiums were first
introduced for street lighting, as I recall, fog penetration - which
*is* inescapably good for yellow light - was one of the cited advantages
for the technology. Certainly where you find white (mercury vapour ? egg
shaped bulbs) high intensity street lighting in use, it performs nothing
like as well in fog.
Actually, the fat is just one issue that "surprises" theIt's always fun to watch the expression on someone's
face when they taste *real* "ice cream"!
That is, high-butterfat ice cream with low overrun. The University of
Yes, we had a few dairies in my home town that bottled theirMaryland dairy store sold such ice cream, and it was a wonderful. Even the
It is amusing because people equate the overrun with "premium taste"."premium" brands don't match that quality.
Not exactly true, though. The uptake of CO2 by oceans and reef-You don't really remember who invented global warming do you?
Back in the mid 1980's when the coal miner's strike brought the UK economy
to its knees (the pound was $1.05), Margaret Thatcher came up with it as a
way of preventing the miners from ever having a politicial voice again.
The whole idea was to make coal and the miners so "dirty" to the common
man that the mines would be closed
What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlierHi Arfa,
snip
- which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all
What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?
"D Yuniskis" <not.going.to.be@seen.com> wrote in message
news:ibju97$ahr$1@speranza.aioe.org...
Hi Arfa,
snip
- which phased out incandescent bulbs with a pearl diffuse envelope. 60
watters were to be the first to go, followed by 100s. Clear envelopes
however, were to remain available, at least for the time being. So all
What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?
AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlier
phase-out of 60s, was that it was felt that CFLs had reached the point where
they could substitute for them in terms of equivalence of light output,
whereas they still had some way to go to be able to make that claim for
100s. As to why pearl before clear, I have not been able to find a
definitive answer to that one. I have seen it suggested that the pearl
envelope is more inefficient than the clear one, in that it blocks more of
the light output of the filament, causing it to be lost as heat. I'm not at
all sure that I believe that as a valid reason, and subjectively, I've
always thought that a pearl bulb in fact *appears* brighter than a clear
one. Certainly, the fact that the light is diffuse, seems to make it less
prone to generating sharp shadows, and from a purely aesthetic point of
view, pearl bulbs look much more attractive in fittings where they are
visible. Clear bulbs always seem to conjour up that 'seedy' feel that you
get from old thirties gangster and private eye movies.
Ah, that makes sense!What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
Frosted before clear?
AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlier
phase-out of 60s, was that it was felt that CFLs had reached the point
where they could substitute for them in terms of equivalence of light
output, whereas they still had some way to go to be able to make that
It could, perhaps, be related to the fact that clear bulbs tend toclaim for 100s. As to why pearl before clear, I have not been able to
find a definitive answer to that one. I have seen it suggested that the
pearl envelope is more inefficient than the clear one, in that it blocks
more of the light output of the filament, causing it to be lost as heat.
I'm not at all sure that I believe that as a valid reason, and
subjectively, I've always thought that a pearl bulb in fact *appears*
Ah, here we see clear bulbs "exposed" in fixtures more thanbrighter than a clear one. Certainly, the fact that the light is
diffuse, seems to make it less prone to generating sharp shadows, and
from a purely aesthetic point of view, pearl bulbs look much more
attractive in fittings where they are visible. Clear bulbs always seem
to conjour up that 'seedy' feel that you get from old thirties gangster
and private eye movies.
if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort ofFrom my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to
do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective
in making short-term changes; they are much less effective in
effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.
Both are pretty continuous spectrum light sources. The problem with bothwhen Simon Morley returns to the 20th century from the 19th with his
girlfriend Julia Charbonneau, she loves the brightness and clarity of
incandescent lamps, but he says he prefers gas light.
Last time I heard, that was coming up short!"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org:
From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to
do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective
in making short-term changes; they are much less effective in
effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.
if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
Freedom?
Yeah, our freedom to ruin everything without regard for the consequences."William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org:
From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people
to do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly
effective in making short-term changes; they are much less effective
in effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.
if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort
of stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we think,if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
these days, do you really think we would be in good hands if we gave upif that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we think,
which people we associate with, which books we read, which church we attend,
whom we have sex with, etc.
It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive or the
lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of this country
is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM! FREEDOM! FREEDOM!" are the
ones doing the most to destroy this country's economic vitality.
That's all well and fine how ever, after seeing who is running the show
Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we think,
which people we associate with, which books we read, which church
we attend, whom we have sex with, etc.
It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive or
the
lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of this
country
is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM! FREEDOM! FREEDOM!"
are >> the ones doing the most to destroy this country's economic
vitality.
Uh... you obviously didn't read what I wrote.Think about it, you are sounding like those that want 100% control
over you and you're willing to give it.. Has it ever occurred to you
that our leadership is using that as an excuse for them screwing up
so bad?
In article <ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
when Simon Morley returns to the 20th century from the 19th with his
girlfriend Julia Charbonneau, she loves the brightness and clarity of
incandescent lamps, but he says he prefers gas light.
Both are pretty continuous spectrum light sources. The problem with both
CFL and LED is they ain't - they have troughs and spikes. Which is what
makes them unpleasant to many, IMHO.
--
*It's not hard to meet expenses... they're everywhere.
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
But it is not of "less than zero importance". We are talking of a principleif that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we think,
which people we associate with, which books we read, which church we
attend,
whom we have sex with, etc.
It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive or
the
lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of this
country
is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM! FREEDOM! FREEDOM!" are
the
ones doing the most to destroy this country's economic vitality.
are you familiar with CAFE? Corporate Average Fuel Economy law,that"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in message
news:Xns9E2FC3226D716jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44...
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org:
From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people
to do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly
effective in making short-term changes; they are much less effective
in effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse
until they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making
sure the forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.
if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort
of stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
Yeah, our freedom to ruin everything without regard for the
consequences.
Think about what would have happened if the US government had, after
WW II, FORCED auto makers to gradually improve fuel mileage at a
"reasonable" rate. The world would almost certainly be quite
different.
I disagee.if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we
think, which people we associate with, which books we read, which
church we attend, whom we have sex with, etc.
It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive
or the lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of
this country is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM!
FREEDOM! FREEDOM!" are the ones doing the most to destroy this
country's economic vitality.