Re: d-day

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

GE and others are planning improvements to incandescents that will meet or
exceed the new efficiency standards. GE has said they expect to reach the
same efficiency as CFLs in a few years. I think the NYT article I cited
touched on that.

There is also rapid progress with LEDs. There's been a doubling of effiency
every couple of years (similar to Moore's law for semiconductors). If that
continues, they will undoubtedly garner a large market share since they
essentially last forever. They are already widely used in traffic lights,
commercial signage, etc. There are still problems with the color temperature
as far as use where color temperature is important. Harsh white is possible
but soft and cuddly is still to be developed.

So, I think your "no doubt CFL is the future" is overly optimistic. Europe
has had much higher energy costs so they've always done things differently.
I haven't been to Europe in many years but still recall the timer switches
on the hall lights in a small hotel I often stayed at in the Loire valley
25-30 years ago. The timer barely gave enough time to transit the hallway.

What has the European experience been as far as expected life for CFLs?
There have been several posts to this forum about premature failures. It's
difficult to draw conclusions based on limited anecdotal data but it appears
that this is an ongoing problem. There was a large scale program in Ireland
that had a very high failure rate but that may have been because they were
using a low cost bidder (I'm speculating). Cuba and Venezuela have programs
to replace all the incandescents with the governments supplying free CFLs.
It will be interesting to see what their failure rates are.

"Ghost" <ghost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>22% sounds optimistic, but there is no doubt CFL is the future (actualy
>present in almost all EU).
>
>Uzytkownik "Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisal w wiadomosci
>news:476ee87c.465882109@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Nobody has said that incandescent bulbs are efficient enough although some
>> people try to distort what I've written in order to make it appear that
>> way.
>> All I have said is that the claims that switching 100% to CFLs will result
>> in a 22% or greater reduction in USA electricity use (or even in the 12%,
>> which is what percentage Texas uses, in the article cited at the beginning
>> of the thread) are wildly exagerated. In the past I've cited Department of
>> Energy statistics that support my contention that the real savings will be
>> much, much less. We need to be doing far, far more.
>>
>> "Ghost" <ghost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>Maybe my english is too bad for understand people here - but do you think
>>>that old "warm" bulbs are effective enough? In Europe nobody think that -
>>>maybe because cost of electricity is far, far higher.
>>
>>
>> http://davehouston.net  http://davehouston.org
>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/roZetta/
>> roZetta-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


http://davehouston.net  http://davehouston.org
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/roZetta/
roZetta-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx