Tis bring a weee tear to my eye, thank you. Dewey -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Ellis Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:55 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [TN] what is the reliability of CFLs and LEDs as incandescent light bulb replacements? The lux-ury of lamp-ooning us, I'm LED to believe. Brian On 29/08/2012 16:51, Whittaker, Dewey (EHCOE) wrote: > This light bantering is becoming a fixture on Technet. > Dewey > > -----Original Message----- > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Douglas Pauls > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:27 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [TN] what is the reliability of CFLs and LEDs as incandescent light bulb replacements? > > My experiences are similar to Steve's, but not quite to that extent. I > don't find them reliable and too many that I bought were DOA out of the > box and returned. Then when they do burn out prematurely, we can't > dispose of them easily. > > On the other hand, my wife hates them with a passion (brightness and > spectrum) which may be the bigger reason why they are not used in my > house. > > I did convert my Christmas lights from incandescents to LEDs about 7 years > ago and I have yet to have them burn out and I really noticed the drop in > the energy bill during that time. As Rigo said, heat kills LEDs. Well, > we don't really have to worry about that in Iowa in December. > > I have one of the LED bulbs currently on trial in my house. So far, it > has outlasted all the incandescent bulbs, though it is not as bright as I > would like. > > Doug Pauls > > > > From: Steven Creswick <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Date: 08/29/2012 03:28 AM > Subject: Re: [TN] what is the reliability of CFLs and LEDs as > incandescent light bulb replacements? > Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]> > > > > 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] > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > 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] ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 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] ______________________________________________________________________