[Message Prev][Message
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Index][Thread Index]
RE: An end to high-energy bulbs
Maybe we should buy a container load, never know in 4 years time we
could b=
e
black market millionaires because people still want them and can=92t buy
th=
em.
=20
Jonathan
=20
=20
From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Kevin Hawkins
Sent: 27 September 2007 14:44
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] An end to high-energy bulbs
=20
Whilst I'm fully in agreement with saving energy wherever possible I=20
find it absurd that they intend withdrawing a product where there is not=20
an equivalent alternative available. Low Energy bulbs are a very=20
compromised replacement in terms of brightness, start time, colour=20
spectrum and dim ability - as well as looking cosmetically awful.=20
Existing automation / dimming systems are nearly all going to have to=20
replaced, albeit I am aware that dim compatible bulbs are supposedly=20
imminent. Inparticular the imminent withdrawal of 150W bulbs in Jan 08=20
(although I dont use any) , when no equivalent is available seems crazy.=20
Kevin
Mark Hindess wrote:
> HYPERLINK
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7016020.stm"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/70=
1
6020.stm
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
>
>=20
=20
=20
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.32 - Release Date: 26/09/2007
00:00
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.=20
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.32 - Release Date: 26/09/2007
00:00
=20
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
UKHA_D Main Index |
UKHA_D Thread Index |
UKHA_D Home |
Archives Home
|