more legislative fun..

[Michael A. Terrell]

"William R. Walsh" wrote:

Hi!

Let the ecofreaks find out that you've spilled any mercury
from a broken lamp and you'll have a hazmat cleanup
expense.

Is that what it's come to these days? Sometimes I forget that people
used to be sensible. (Yes, I know that mercury is not a nice thing,
but I also know that there are only trace amounts in these bulbs. And
I don't make a habit of breaking them, but accidents happen. I very
seriously doubt that anyone has been worse for the wear outside of the
bulb. I've broken two CFLs, both several years apart.)

I'm talking about if the bulb is struck or dropped.

Neither circumstance would have been likely in a fully enclosed
fixture. If it had been broken while being transported to or from the
fixture, it would have been no worse (or better) than an unsheilded
CFL.

So, paying for twice the electric for the light you get is OK?

Hmm? What light was I paying twice for? I don't understand what you're
saying.

You said that the plastic was blocking most of the light. At the
point that hits 50%, it's worn out.

If it's OK to strip that cover you might as well use the uncoated,
clear UV lamps.

Barring a Rather Serious Scientific Examination, I came to the
conclusion that the cover was not a required part. The underlying tube
is nothing more than a frosted white fluorescent bulb. The cover was
clear plastic with no special attributes. It's *not* a clear tube.
(You don't seriously think I'd knowingly expose a tube that was clear,
do you? I know full good and well what "germicidal bulbs" are.)

If you say so. Do whatever you want but I won't put up with
useless crap, or eliminate safeguards.

It was an easy (conceptually speaking) task to repair the bulb. (Isn't
that the point of this newsgroup?) I didn't mind doing it in the
slightest. But then again, I'm not above fixing almost anything unless
it was total crap to start with.

I'm not in the habit of eliminating safeguards from equipment. That's
a very bad idea. If I don't understand a safeguard's function, it
stays in place, because I know full good and well that I can't think
of everything. A clear plastic sheild on a lightbulb operating in a
fully enclosed fixture wasn't going to be missed.

Well, it's been an interesting discussion anyway.

William

--
Greed is the root of all eBay.

 

[Jerry Peters]

William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

This country needs to become energy-independent, for political as
well as practical reasons.

Build nukes. We know they work,reliably and 24/7/365.Very
practical,too. However,if you want to install your own wind
to turbines,or to invest in a business venture, fine. No need for gov't
mandate anything.
If you want a government-controlled economy, MOVE elsewhere.

And what if private industry doesn't make the right decisions -- those that
benefit society as a whole, rather than the stockholders? Do you really
believe that individual selfishness always produces the best results?

As opposed to say the government which always makes the politically right
decisions, ie which ever group contributes the most to their
re-election campaigns.
It's been tried, see the Soviet Union; look at the results.

there's also no reason we shouldn't be drilling in ANWR and
other places. and building new refineries and pipelines.
That's where our energy-independence falls down.

Big Oil and Big Coal are doing everything it can to delay alternate energy,
so that it can reap the most profits.

Because coal and oil make sense perhaps. Do some rough calculations
for wind turbines for example: 3-5 MW per turbine with a moderate
wind. The average coal/gas/oil fired power plant is ~1000 MW. Now add
in the "prairie preservationists", the Kennedys, and all of the
environuts who don't want to see turbines or power lines.
Not to mention *storing* the energy for when the wind isn't blowing.

Jerry

I've never understood the "logic" of allowing private interests to exploit
public resources for private gain.