Red Alert on Green Bulbs

[kreed]

On Jan 25, 11:57 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Fran wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Fran wrote:
The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs
are typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't
heat up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall
onto carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.

Utter RUBBISH. I though you had more sense.

This only applies to EXPENSIVE CFLs that have a covering 'bulb' over the tube.
This also reduces their efficiency.

Not greatly

Oh, so that's OK is it ?

Note that the efficiency of CFLs is commonly misrepresented as FIVE times that of
incandescents.

4-6 is the usual lumens per watt input calculus.

As a result of a daft UK newspaper article claiming that incandescents were being
banned, I went to my local trade electrical store and and bought an allegedly illegal
150W GLS bulb (OSRAM) made in the EU (Slovakia).

The light output is rated at 2140 lumens. That's 14 lumens per watt.

Just more of the usual GREEN LIES.

You LIARS are finished.

Graham

Hear hear !!

 

[kreed]

On Jan 25, 11:57 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Fran wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Fran wrote:
The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs
are typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't
heat up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall
onto carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.

Utter RUBBISH. I though you had more sense.

This only applies to EXPENSIVE CFLs that have a covering 'bulb' over the tube.
This also reduces their efficiency.

Not greatly

Oh, so that's OK is it ?

Dont give "her" ideas.

(I only say "her" because in russian "her" (XEP in russian letters)
means cock)

Next these rabid green nuts will want to ban all light shades and
covers and bring in laws that all lights have to only have a naked
bulb, as they waste the light energy.

They will probably have gestapo like inspectors smashing down doors of
every home to make sure the bulbs are spotlessly clean too, as this
would reduce light efficiency, and then dictating what size CFL is
mandatory for a given room. Oh and dont forget to paint all walls
white to ensure minimum light absorption and loss.

Note that the efficiency of CFLs is commonly misrepresented as FIVE times that of
incandescents.

4-6 is the usual lumens per watt input calculus.

As a result of a daft UK newspaper article claiming that incandescents were being
banned, I went to my local trade electrical store and and bought an allegedly illegal
150W GLS bulb (OSRAM) made in the EU (Slovakia).

The light output is rated at 2140 lumens. That's 14 lumens per watt.


The only problem is, these morons (and most of the modern unedcuated

public) are too thick, and uneducated to understand real everyday
scientific fact.

I wish they would bugger off to some remote place - well away from us,
like the Amish in US (Afghanistan would be better), on a one way trip
with no modern facilities, electric power etc, make their "perfect
world" keep to themselves, and leave the rest of us alone. Stop
dictating to everyone else how we should live.

Just more of the usual GREEN LIES.

You LIARS are finished.

Graham

 

[Mr.T]

"Alan Rutlidge" <don't_spam_me_rutlidge@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:497961a3$0$9540$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

Some would go so far as to comment on Roddles as a "has been". The sad
truth in Roddles case is you had to have been something to be a "has
been".
Poor old Roddles was nothing to begin with, therefore the tag "has been"
can't be applied in his case.

Commonly called a "never was" here.

Besides, kill-filing him doesn't completely eliminate having to read his
rubbish when someone else responds to his drivel. :-(

Does cut out a hell of a lot since so many people have him kill-filed
already.

MrT.

 

[Alan Rutlidge]

"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
news:497d74ba$0$3321$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Alan Rutlidge" <don't_spam_me_rutlidge@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:497961a3$0$9540$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
Some would go so far as to comment on Roddles as a "has been". The sad
truth in Roddles case is you had to have been something to be a "has
been".
Poor old Roddles was nothing to begin with, therefore the tag "has been"
can't be applied in his case.

Commonly called a "never was" here.

Thanks for the heads up.

Besides, kill-filing him doesn't completely eliminate having to read his
rubbish when someone else responds to his drivel. :-(

Does cut out a hell of a lot since so many people have him kill-filed
already.

MrT.

Agreed. Not many take much serious notice of him.

 

[Rod Speed]

Some terminal fuckwit that got the bums rush from the
biggest sheltered workshop in the entire fucking country,
Alan Rutlidge desperately attempted to bullshit and lie
its way out of its predicament and fooled absolutely
no one at all, as always.

 

[SG1]

"Brocollinni Incognito" <Brocollinni@Incognito.com> wrote in message
news:gofhjk$o91$1@news.tornevall.net...

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:18:19 -0800, Fran wrote:

snip

The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs are
typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't heat
up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall onto
carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.

Err. They *do* shatter.

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????

 

[annily]

SG1 wrote:

"Brocollinni Incognito" <Brocollinni@Incognito.com> wrote in message
news:gofhjk$o91$1@news.tornevall.net...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:18:19 -0800, Fran wrote:

snip
The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs are
typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't heat
up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall onto
carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.
Err. They *do* shatter.



My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????



My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the

difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

 

[Phil Allison]

"annily"

SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a
bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a 23
watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron core
ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of 310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


....... Phil

 

[son of a bitch]

SG1 wrote:

"Brocollinni Incognito" <Brocollinni@Incognito.com> wrote in message
news:gofhjk$o91$1@news.tornevall.net...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:18:19 -0800, Fran wrote:

snip
The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs are
typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't heat
up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall onto
carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.
Err. They *do* shatter.



My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????

No different than going to Audio Shop and you see 4" 1,000 watt
speakers. There is a BIG difference between RMS Power and Peek Power,
but people only things with bigger numbers written on them.

 

[son of a bitch]

SG1 wrote:

"Brocollinni Incognito" <Brocollinni@Incognito.com> wrote in message
news:gofhjk$o91$1@news.tornevall.net...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:18:19 -0800, Fran wrote:

snip
The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs are
typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't heat
up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall onto
carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.
Err. They *do* shatter.



My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????

No different than going to Audio Shop and you see 4" 1,000 watt
speakers. There is a BIG difference between RMS Power and Peek Power,
but people only buy things with bigger numbers written on them.

 

[Brocollinni Incognito]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:18:19 -0800, Fran wrote:

<snip>

The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs are
typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't heat
up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall onto
carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.

Err. They *do* shatter.

 

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:09:07 +1100, "Phil Allison"
<philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a
bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?


** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a 23
watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron core
ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of 310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


...... Phil

So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'

Graeme

 

[annily]

nomail@hotmail.com wrote:

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:09:07 +1100, "Phil Allison"
philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a
bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a 23
watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron core
ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of 310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


...... Phil


So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'

Graeme

Well, it's supposed to be based on so much per kilowatt-hour, not kVA,
so I hope we are paying for watts, not VA.

 

[SG1]

"annily" <annily@ihopethisdoesntexist.com> wrote in message
news:009d4114$0$31701$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...

nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:09:07 +1100, "Phil Allison"
philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there
a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a
23 watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron
core ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of
310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


...... Phil

So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'

Graeme


Well, it's supposed to be based on so much per kilowatt-hour, not kVA, so
I hope we are paying for watts, not VA.

Hope to be paying less soon. A 1KW solar cell jobby going on roof. Cost to
me $355 cost to the feds $8000. Only problems night & clouds.

 

[Phil Allison]

<nomail@hotmail.com>...
"Phil Allison"

"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there
a
bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?


** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a 23
watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron core
ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of 310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2



So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'

** The watts figure is the one.

Domestic electricity meters measure energy consumption = watts over time.



........ Phil

 

[David L. Jones]

"SG1" <lostitall@the.races> wrote in message
news:dUJql.97005$xK6.93648@newsfe12.iad...

"annily" <annily@ihopethisdoesntexist.com> wrote in message
news:009d4114$0$31701$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:09:07 +1100, "Phil Allison"
philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is
there a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to
the difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a
23 watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron
core ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of
310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


...... Phil

So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'

Graeme


Well, it's supposed to be based on so much per kilowatt-hour, not kVA, so
I hope we are paying for watts, not VA.

Hope to be paying less soon. A 1KW solar cell jobby going on roof. Cost to
me $355 cost to the feds $8000. Only problems night & clouds.

Crikey, that's practically free!
Where do you live?

Dave.

 

[SG1]

"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MDKql.33233$FI5.2322@newsfe07.iad...

"SG1" <lostitall@the.races> wrote in message
news:dUJql.97005$xK6.93648@newsfe12.iad...

"annily" <annily@ihopethisdoesntexist.com> wrote in message
news:009d4114$0$31701$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:09:07 +1100, "Phil Allison"
philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is
there a bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to
the difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a
23 watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron
core ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw
of 310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


...... Phil

So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'

Graeme


Well, it's supposed to be based on so much per kilowatt-hour, not kVA,
so I hope we are paying for watts, not VA.

Hope to be paying less soon. A 1KW solar cell jobby going on roof. Cost
to me $355 cost to the feds $8000. Only problems night & clouds.

Crikey, that's practically free!
Where do you live?

Dave.
The Qld government had a lottery and I was toooo late for it, but they

arranged a contract with a company to supply at $355 above the feds rebate,
which I got approval for the other week. Oh the feds are dropping the rebate
to $7500 soon.

 

[MoiInAust]

"annily" <annily@ihopethisdoesntexist.com> wrote in message
news:009a55df$0$5805$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...

SG1 wrote:
"Brocollinni Incognito" <Brocollinni@Incognito.com> wrote in message
news:gofhjk$o91$1@news.tornevall.net...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:18:19 -0800, Fran wrote:

snip
The fact of the matter is that unlike incandescent bulbs, CFL bulbs are
typically made of a polymer, which is feasible because they don't heat
up. That's why they tend not to break if they are knocked or fall onto
carpet, and if they do they don't shatter.
Err. They *do* shatter.



My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a
bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????



My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

Surely with a purely resistive load VA is exactly the same as Watts?

 

[MoiInAust]

<nomail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
newsenmq4driq1tdvbv01fqik4bscnd7o0kvs@4ax.com...

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:09:07 +1100, "Phil Allison"
philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:


"annily"
SG1 wrote:

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there
a
bit
of skullduggery going on here?????????


My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?


** The power factor ( PF) for most CFLs is around 0.4 to 0.5 - so a 23
watt rating corresponds with 50 VA.

For comparison, my desk lamp uses a 15 watt fluoro tube with an iron core
ballast choke and starter in the base - it has a current draw of 310mA.

Makes the PF = 0.2


...... Phil


So the next question is
'What do we actually pay for on our electricity bill?'
Graeme

Sorry about m last ignorant post about VA = W! Of course Phil is right.
CFLs are not pure resistive loads!

 

[Phil Allison]

"MoiInAust"

My Woolies 23W job draws 210ma therefore it is a 50.4W globe. Is there a
bit of skullduggery going on here?????????



My alternating current theory is rusty, but couldn't that be due to the
difference between VA (Volts * Amps) and Watts?

Surely with a purely resistive load VA is exactly the same as Watts?

** Shame most fluoros and CFLs are nothing like resistors.




...... Phil