Re: An end to high-energy bulbs

["Paul Bendall" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris,

For once I don't necessarily agree with you. Why do so many people use
100W bulbs when a 40W is more than adequate for most tasks? Why do so
many people use the big floodlights in the garden and leave them on
all evening.

Electricity is a very inefficient source of energy and using
alternatives to halogen or incandescent bulbs would save a lot of
energy.

However, where I start to agree with you is the whole nanny state
approach. I would rather see the government insetify the market so it
becomes more attractive to buy a LED or CFL.

In some situations an Incandescent can be more efficient than a
Fluorescent. I'm thinking of garage lights where they are on for less
than a minute. The current needed to start the fluroescent will outway
the savings in such a short time.

Paul
--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, Chris Hunter <cjhunter@...> wrote:
>
> 'tis difficult to believe anyone has really done the sums ... why
do
> we listen to & believe these green campaigners ... if the
difference
> was so real, CFLs would sell themselves ... the reality, for us,
> anyway, is they have their place, but their useful life is usually
> much less than seems to be assumed, and they don't always fit, or
> work (as with dimmers), etc.   If only they were held accountable
for
> what they are forcing us to do !
>
> Chris
>
>