Re: d-day

["Ghost" <ghost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yeap, I saw new incandescents (osram) - still far, far behind CFL. I don't
agree that incandescents ever be good as CFL (just physics laws). When LEDs
will be ready, probably replace CFL (long way). For now we (you - we already
done this) have replacements incandescents by CFL. I don't know what are you
talking about "premature failures" - I and my family, my neighbours, just
everybody I know - we all use CFLs for years. During last eight years I have
changed only two of them (unusual toroid shaped both). In new hause I'm
using HA driven by microlan - there is no side effects from CFLs.

Uzytkownik "Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisal w wiadomosci
news:476f9fc3.512800828@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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