[Message Prev][Message
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Index][Thread Index]
Re: Dimmable CFLs and UK government ban
- Subject: Re: Dimmable CFLs and UK government ban
- From: "JonShaw" <semi.jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:47:41 -0000
> PS: Apologies if this has already been posted, Gmail/Yahoo have
been
> bouncing posts for the last few days.
I've also had problems with bounced mail and had also just posted on this
topic!
BBC has an article on it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6433503.stm
> So I was quite interested to see this Uk supplier coming soon:
> <http://tinyurl.com/2og2g8> http://tinyurl.com/2og2g8
These look v interesting but they only seem to come in bayonet or screw
fitting (e22, B27) rather than GU10 or similar. This makes sense as they
look closer in dimensions to a standard bulb but much too long to fit in
many downlighters.
My current plan is to have "main lights" on a switch using CFLs
of one sort
and then "aux lights" on a dimmer. I'd like these to be
low-energy but as
someone mentioned it doesn't look like CFL is the right technology and
maybe
superbright LEDs are, but not yet.
>So can we get back to the point of slagging off CFLs now ...
Both CFLs and LEDs need to be developed if they are to replace GU10 type
fittings. I cannot see them introducing a ban until there is a GU10 type
replacement. Given the variation in dimming technologies for CFLs I hope
that low-energy GU10 replacements will work with standard trailing edge
dimmers.and two wires . but to be on the safe side I'll probably install
3-core + earth cable.
FWIW there seems to be a ban in Australia coming up, anyone know what C-bus
are doing in this area? As it is their home market they should be ahead of
the europeans.
> One of the things that has put me off CFLs is that early on it was
> recommended not to switch them on and off frequently since this
> drastically reduced their life. But none of the greenie sites ever
> seem to mention this, so it's not clear to me whether this problem
>has been fixed or merely swept under the carpet on the basis that it's
> better to leave 25% of the energy consumption on all the time than
> light it 25% less.
It would be good to have an answer to that one . sounds like a problem for
Which? Or similar to look into.
Jon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
UKHA_D Main Index |
UKHA_D Thread Index |
UKHA_D Home |
Archives Home
|