Brian,

Wow!  The only 'early ones' that I could get were made to the West of the US [across a large pond], and they were not cheap!  

I remember in one purchase, I had 50% mortality just getting them home.  The store asked me what I had done with them? ... took them out of box and screwed into socket.  Didn't work!!!   Here I am!  Had to expend an Additional significant amount of fuel and time to return them.  Suggested that they take the rest of the shipment and put them back into the shipping container and send them back to point of origin.  My 'environmental savings' had long since been flushed away.

  I prefer the cool white [daylight] bulbs vs the dim 'warm' ones myself...

I remain cautious about putting them in enclosed fixtures and/or continuous use applications.  Certain brands are on my do-not-use, or use-with-caution list.

I still remain skeptical about how much additional Hg was released into the environment by less than intelligent, frustrated consumers in the maddening rush to 'save the environment.'
 
Even though prices of CFL's have come down and reliability has gone up, they are still not particularly cost effective for many of my 'typical' home-use applications.  Your situation, on-the-island, could be different, however.  IMHO, 'Feel good' still remains a large factor in many cases.  LED luminaries are just way too expensive yet!

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Ellis
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 2:42 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] what is the reliability of CFLs and LEDs as incandescent light bulb replacements?

I agree that early CFLs were terrible for domestic use. Several years ago, being a professional environmentalist, I changed nearly every bulb in the house. I was disappointed because of 50 Hz flicker (well, 100 Hz really!), poor lifetime, cold light, long start-up time, poor reliability and high cost (about the equivalent of $10 each). They were all made in the USA (I was told the European ones weren't available). I think I must have taken 20 back for guarantee replacement. 
Little-by-little, they were replaced by European and Chinese ones with warm phosphors, faster start-up, high-frequency (flicker-free) "ballasts" with minimal mercury and 1/3 of the price. These seem to be lasting their advertised lifetime -- can't really say, as I've replaced only one in ~5 years. I'm now entirely satisfied. I'm also amazed at the great variety of shapes, styles and sizes that are sold now, including traditional bulb-shaped ones. I recently installed a new light and went to Leroy-Merlin for a decorative CFL; it took me half-an-hour to find what I was looking for, such was the choice. I would guess they must have had 200 or more different types of CFL on their shelves, which occupied a whole aisle.

Brian

On 29/08/2012 00:29, Bob Landman wrote:
> A very interesting discussion about what's inside these new devices.  Have any of you torn one of them apart to see how well they are made?  You'll be amazed at the poor quality of the components in a lamp that's supposed to have a 10 year life.
>
> -Bob Landman
>
> IFTLE 98 Lester the Lightbulb vs CFL and LED : the Saga Continues By 
> Dr Phil Garrou
>
> In IFTLE 63 [ see IFTLE 63, "Bidding Adieu to Lester Lightbulb http://www.electroiq.com/blogs/insights_from_leading_edge/2011/08/iftle-63-bidding-adieu-to-lester-lightbulb.html] back in Aug 2011 IFTLE attempted to make the case that our little 25 cent friend Lester the incandescent bulb had gotten a bump rap as he awaited extinction on death row.
>
> It's not that the claims of the newer technologies (CFL and LED) using less power than incandescent bulbs are invalid, but rather what appears to be the  bold faced lie that their much greater cost is compensated by their decades long lifetimes that upsets all Lester supporters.
>
> http://www.electroiq.com/blogs/insights_from_leading_edge/2012/04/iftl
> e-98-lester-the-lightbulb-vs-cfl-and-led-the-saga-continues.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask] 
> ______________________________________________________________________
>

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] ______________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________