Re: Anyone moved to LED Lighting?

["Robert Green" <robert_green1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Chuck" <cbachmann@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:he643p$h5d$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

> I will stay with old fashion bulbs as long as I can. My wife can't be
> exposed to florescence bulbs. People with immune problems (arthritis or
> lupus or fibromyalgia) react badly to the CFL type bulbs. They emit
> ultra violet light like the sun does.

My wife detests fluorescents of any kind, especially when she's working on a
computer.  She says they trigger migraines.  I am not sure that LEDs will be
much better in that regard, but I am hoping they will be.  I recently read
an article that said the recession was reducing carbon output way more than
any other mitigation technique like CFLs.

As aemeijers@xxxxxxx pointed out, it's very hard to accurately assess the
benefit of CFLs because of the complexity of the issue.  Few models seem to
include the fact that in the winter, incandescent bulbs actually help heat
the home.  The true cost/benefits of CFLs over tungsten bulbs are incredibly
complex and that allows either side of the argument to spout nearly any
numbers they feel like.  All they need do is adjust the underlying
parameters or ignore facts like the future cost of removing mercury from the
enviroment the same way we're now removing asbestos.

We've stockpiled a fair number of incandescent bulbs at my house, because
like you, I believe that I shouldn't be forced to use a technology that
makes someone in my family sick.  In a free country I should have the right
to spend money on what I choose to, not what the government mandates.

If Americans truly want to save energy, how about dimming Las Vegas, which
is
reported to consume 5 gigawatts a day to keep all those lights running?  I
wonder how many tons of carbon are consumed by the thousands of people who
fly in every day to gamble away their children's college fund?  (-:

--
Bobby G.