cfl's

[Trevor]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:b87h7nFk3qpU1@mid.individual.net...

I recall hearing of someone who was suing for getting skin cancer on his
head allegedly caused by working under fluorescent tubes in an office all
day

And what was the outcome of the case? Thrown out as he couldn't prove it was
not from sun exposure I bet. (FAR more likely)

Trevor.

 

[Trevor]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:b85lq9F7h84U3@mid.individual.net...

it hasn't really become cost effective yet, and I tried some, but the
output is too low.

For the incorrect ones you tried maybe, but there are LED's replacing 500W
halogen floodlights now. That's when you start to see serious energy savings
and huge heat reduction!


>ok for desklamps tho.

Will be when the cost comes down. Not cost effective there yet IMO.

Trevor.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 29/08/2013 1:59 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:b85liaF7h84U1@mid.individual.net...
UV radiation is substantially blocked by regular glass.

they still emit radiation

But not enough to be of any concern. I guess you never watched an old CRT TV
or heaven forbid used a CRT computer monitor as they are far worse for
radiation emmision.

Trevor.

**Indeed. X-rays anyone?

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Damian]

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b853tsF46heU1@mid.individual.net...

felix_unger <me@nothere.com> wrote
whoever conned the govt into mandating their use

The govt conned themselves...

must be laughing all the way to the bank.

Unlikely given that none of them are made here.
not only are they an environmental hazed,

Bullshit.
they are simply not cost effective.

Bullshit.
they don't last 10 times longer than conventional bulbs,

The best of them do.
or however many times it was supposed to be, and they cost heaps more.

Mine have been quite literally free.
they emit UV radiation too.

Bullshit.

Yes. they do, whether it gets out enough to damage our skin, etc is another
story. That would depend on the quality of the bulb and the age.

 

[Damian]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:b8526dF3sfjU1@mid.individual.net...

whoever conned the govt into mandating their use

I'm not aware of anybody mandating it.
I believe it's a choice, so far.

must be laughing all the way to the bank. not only are they an
environmental hazed, they are simply not cost effective. they don't last 10
times longer than

The ones I buy dirt cheap from warehouses do last lot longer than that.

conventional bulbs, or however many times it was supposed to be, and they
cost heaps more.

They cost more, dunno about heaps more. Depends where you buy it and how
smart shopper you are.

they emit UV radiation too.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
http://www.facebook.com/VoteForTonyAbbott
http://www.liberal.org.au/ruddfacts/

 

[Phil Allison]

"Damian"

"felix_unger"

whoever conned the govt into mandating their use

I'm not aware of anybody mandating it.

** GLS bulbs ( that do not met MEPS) were taken off sale several years
ago - it is now a punishable offence to sell them.

I believe it's a choice, so far.

** Only for those with a stash of such bulbs OR are using the still legal
halogen kind.

Which is a hoot since they have little of no efficiency advantage.

Eg like these:

http://cdn.ukofficedirect.co.uk/od/item/180241/0-Huge-0.jpg


..... Phil

 

[SG1]

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:b87r2jFlsc5U1@mid.individual.net...

On 29/08/2013 8:28 AM, SG1 wrote:

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:b86e56Fcne1U1@mid.individual.net...
Snip

I dislike the "warm white". Some are even yellower than the
incandescents they're meant to replace.

However, the cool white (or daylight) ones did take a bit of getting
used to, after half a century of yellow night-times. But I'd never
willingly go back - the world looks quite different when you can see
the blue in things.

Sylvia.

When triphosphours first came out an electrian suggest their long life
and improved brightness would be a benefit. Well it was to the
manufacturer, I bought a couple. Bright yes, Warm white YUK.
Cool white only way to go for these aging eyes. Am have difficulty
finding Cool white in cfls and LEDs but I will continue my search..


I buy my cool white CFLs in Woolworths. Most recently, a few months ago.

Sylvia.

That is where I got some but our favourite wollies no longer sells them,
Woolies brand that is, too many claims for them not lasting I would say. Had
to take one back that died an early death and anoth died the other week.
SWMBO prefers incandescants.

 

[Rod Speed]

"Damian" <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:kvmkcr$b3$1@speranza.aioe.org...

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b853tsF46heU1@mid.individual.net...
felix_unger <me@nothere.com> wrote
whoever conned the govt into mandating their use

The govt conned themselves...

must be laughing all the way to the bank.

Unlikely given that none of them are made here.
not only are they an environmental hazed,

Bullshit.
they are simply not cost effective.

Bullshit.
they don't last 10 times longer than conventional bulbs,

The best of them do.
or however many times it was supposed to be, and they cost heaps more.

Mine have been quite literally free.
they emit UV radiation too.

Bullshit.

Yes. they do,

No they don’t. UV doesn’t get thru glass.

whether it gets out enough to damage our skin, etc is another story. That
would depend on the quality of the bulb and the age.

Nope, because UV doesn’t get thru glass.

 

[Rod Speed]

"Damian" <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:kvmkom$13c$1@speranza.aioe.org...

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:b8526dF3sfjU1@mid.individual.net...

whoever conned the govt into mandating their use

I'm not aware of anybody mandating it.

It was mandated anyway.

> I believe it's a choice, so far.

You're wrong, as always.

must be laughing all the way to the bank. not only are they an
environmental hazed, they are simply not cost effective. they don't last
10 times longer than

The ones I buy dirt cheap from warehouses do last lot longer than that.

I get them for free and they last fine. Haven't had to replace any of them.

conventional bulbs, or however many times it was supposed to be, and they
cost heaps more.

They cost more,

Nope, mine didn’t. Didn’t cost a cent.

dunno about heaps more. Depends where you buy it and how smart shopper you
are.

In spades when you get them for free.

>>they emit UV radiation too.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Rod Speed"

Nope, because UV doesn’t get thru glass.

** I wonder how they make "black light " fluoro tubes then ?

Are the tubes made from quartz glass ?



..... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"felix_unger"

As the LED technology matures I think that the cfl might be the vcr of
the
lighting world.

It can't happen soon enough

** Don't hold you breath waiting for LED bulbs to overtake CFLs.

There are a number of major technical problems that make it near impossible
to produce * genuine equivalents * to CFL or fluoro tubes with a LED
rray - let alone beat them.

LED efficiency is one, colour quality another and LEDs intolerance to heat a
third.



... Phil

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 29/08/2013 5:21 PM, SG1 wrote:

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:b87r2jFlsc5U1@mid.individual.net...
On 29/08/2013 8:28 AM, SG1 wrote:

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:b86e56Fcne1U1@mid.individual.net...
Snip

I dislike the "warm white". Some are even yellower than the
incandescents they're meant to replace.

However, the cool white (or daylight) ones did take a bit of getting
used to, after half a century of yellow night-times. But I'd never
willingly go back - the world looks quite different when you can see
the blue in things.

Sylvia.

When triphosphours first came out an electrian suggest their long life
and improved brightness would be a benefit. Well it was to the
manufacturer, I bought a couple. Bright yes, Warm white YUK.
Cool white only way to go for these aging eyes. Am have difficulty
finding Cool white in cfls and LEDs but I will continue my search..


I buy my cool white CFLs in Woolworths. Most recently, a few months ago.

Sylvia.

That is where I got some but our favourite wollies no longer sells them,
Woolies brand that is, too many claims for them not lasting I would say.
Had to take one back that died an early death and anoth died the other
week. SWMBO prefers incandescants.

I was buying Philips brand in Woolies. But since you have a SWMBO, the
point seems moot.

Sylvia.

 

[Jeßus]

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:54:37 +1000, "Trevor" <trevor@home.net> wrote:

"Jeßus" <none@all.org> wrote in message
news:94ms19pu2uoa3rdn8b8fmdpuu15ic0c53f@4ax.com...
I can't stand the cool colour temps, especially with CFLs... I always
go for the warm ones.

Wow - I hate the warm ones that much I didn't think anyone would like
them! Different stroke I guess!

Heh... yep, each to their own

That's why they make different color temp versions, and have done with
normal tubes before CFL's even existed.
My preference is by far for quad phospur long tubes. They put out a better
spread of light for the same energy, and a bettter spectrum spread as well.

True, I have a pair of quads in the kitchen, and also a down light
with a 4.5W LED, which is on most of the time in the evenings.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 28/08/2013 5:05 PM, felix_unger wrote:

On 28-August-2013 2:20 PM, Jeßus wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:30:38 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.com
wrote:

whoever conned the govt into mandating their use must be laughing all
the way to the bank. not only are they an environmental hazed, they are
simply not cost effective. they don't last 10 times longer than
conventional bulbs, or however many times it was supposed to be, and
they cost heaps more. they emit UV radiation too.
Never been a fan of CFLs, it's a good thing LEDs matured into a much
superior alternative.

it hasn't really become cost effective yet, and I tried some, but the
output is too low. ok for desklamps tho.

**More bollocks. I have a 100 Watt LED here right now. It is (measurably
and visibly) brighter than a 500 Watt halogen floodlight. LEDs head
lamps are now common-place amongst some automobiles.

So much for your "desklamp" bullshit.

Do some research, before you post more of your nonsense.

Refs:

http://lumin8lighting.com.au/category/floodlights

http://www.toyota.com.au/prius-v/range

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[felix_unger]

On 29-August-2013 5:23 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

"Damian" <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:kvmkcr$b3$1@speranza.aioe.org...

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b853tsF46heU1@mid.individual.net...
felix_unger <me@nothere.com> wrote

they emit UV radiation too.

Bullshit.

Yes. they do,

No they don’t. UV doesn’t get thru glass.

whether it gets out enough to damage our skin, etc is another story.
That would depend on the quality of the bulb and the age.

Nope, because UV doesn’t get thru glass.

That must be why solariums are not dangerous then..


--
rgds,

Pete
-------
http://www.facebook.com/VoteForTonyAbbott
http://www.liberal.org.au/ruddfacts/

 

[felix_unger]

On 29-August-2013 1:59 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:b85liaF7h84U1@mid.individual.net...
UV radiation is substantially blocked by regular glass.
they still emit radiation
But not enough to be of any concern. I guess you never watched an old CRT TV
or heaven forbid used a CRT computer monitor as they are far worse for
radiation emmision.

everybody used CRT monitors. there was no other choice until LCD's came
on the market

Trevor.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
http://www.facebook.com/VoteForTonyAbbott
http://www.liberal.org.au/ruddfacts/

 

[felix_unger]

On 30-August-2013 7:30 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 28/08/2013 5:05 PM, felix_unger wrote:
On 28-August-2013 2:20 PM, Jeßus wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:30:38 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.com
wrote:

whoever conned the govt into mandating their use must be laughing all
the way to the bank. not only are they an environmental hazed, they
are
simply not cost effective. they don't last 10 times longer than
conventional bulbs, or however many times it was supposed to be, and
they cost heaps more. they emit UV radiation too.
Never been a fan of CFLs, it's a good thing LEDs matured into a much
superior alternative.

it hasn't really become cost effective yet, and I tried some, but the
output is too low. ok for desklamps tho.


**More bollocks. I have a 100 Watt LED here right now.

and how much did you pay for it?


--
rgds,

Pete
-------
http://www.facebook.com/VoteForTonyAbbott
http://www.liberal.org.au/ruddfacts/

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 30/08/2013 1:59 PM, felix_unger wrote:

On 30-August-2013 7:30 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 28/08/2013 5:05 PM, felix_unger wrote:
On 28-August-2013 2:20 PM, Jeßus wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:30:38 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.com
wrote:

whoever conned the govt into mandating their use must be laughing all
the way to the bank. not only are they an environmental hazed, they
are
simply not cost effective. they don't last 10 times longer than
conventional bulbs, or however many times it was supposed to be, and
they cost heaps more. they emit UV radiation too.
Never been a fan of CFLs, it's a good thing LEDs matured into a much
superior alternative.

it hasn't really become cost effective yet, and I tried some, but the
output is too low. ok for desklamps tho.


**More bollocks. I have a 100 Watt LED here right now.

and how much did you pay for it?

**Utterly and completely fucking irrelevant. I responded to yet another
of your ignorant claims. Nothing more.

FWIW: I paid $60.00 for it. It sure cost more than the halogen, but
costs 1/5th the amount of electricity to operate and radiates 20% of the
heat. In confined spaces, it is well worth it. Lots of light and minimal
heat.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 30/08/2013 1:50 PM, felix_unger wrote:

On 29-August-2013 5:23 PM, Rod Speed wrote:


"Damian" <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:kvmkcr$b3$1@speranza.aioe.org...

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b853tsF46heU1@mid.individual.net...
felix_unger <me@nothere.com> wrote

they emit UV radiation too.

Bullshit.

Yes. they do,

No they don’t. UV doesn’t get thru glass.

whether it gets out enough to damage our skin, etc is another story.
That would depend on the quality of the bulb and the age.

Nope, because UV doesn’t get thru glass.

That must be why solariums are not dangerous then..

**Points:

* A typical tanning bed uses 24 X 100 Watt fluoros.
* The lamps used employ a phosphor which is SPECIFICALLY designed to
produce UV radiation.
* The person using the bed is often within 100mm of the lamps (don't
forget that pesky inverse square law applies with UV radiation)

Stop grasping at straws. Your ignorant claims have been demolished. Shut
the fuck up.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Phil Allison]

"Trevor Wilson"
felix_unger wrote:

Nope, because UV doesn’t get thru glass.

That must be why solariums are not dangerous then..



**Points:

* A typical tanning bed uses 24 X 100 Watt fluoros.

* The lamps used employ a phosphor which is SPECIFICALLY designed to
produce UV radiation.

** The mercury vapour discharge inside any fluro produces little else.

* The person using the bed is often within 100mm of the lamps (don't
forget that pesky inverse square law applies with UV radiation)

** Invese square law ONLY applies to a point source of light.

Stop grasping at straws.

** Wot - like you are ?

FYI Fluoros used for UV light uses special glass like quartz.


.... Phil