Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- From: "Phil Allison" <philallison@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:29:34 +1100
"Don Klipstein"
http://sound.westhost.com/articles/incandescent.htm
Early in the article I see the big "alarm bells" being enclosed fixtures
and dimmers.
** Yes - in both cases they are serious traps for users.
Both situations lead to fire hazards - as well as very short life spans.
I am seeing dimmable CFLs beginning to make an uptick in presence and
availability.
** Shame how that look exactly like the non dimmer safe kind.
Shame how the non dimmable kind APPEAR to work OK in a (triac) dimmed
socket set near to maximum on the dial - but in fact are operating under
enormous stress with 5 times the rated rms current draw.
More disasters just waiting to happen.
There are ones that can take the heat of enclosed fixtures and even the
heat-hellhole recessed ceiling fixtures.
** That sounds like utter BOLLOCKS to me.
Testing revealed that the internal temp ( where the electronics are located)
of a 23 watt CFL reached 100C very easily in a sealed fitting - while the
room ambient was only 22 C.
CFLs are a long way from being a direct replacements for the common light
bulb - those who say otherwise are criminal liars or dangerous fools.
The lighting industry is pulling it biggest ever scam on the public, while
the greenie lunatics all help.
....... Phil
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- From: Don Klipstein
- Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- From: Terry Given
- Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- References:
- Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- From: amdx
- Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- From: Don Klipstein
- Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- Prev by Date: Re: Prospective Female Engineer
- Next by Date: Re: Disobeying jet engines - why?
- Previous by thread: Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- Next by thread: Re: Ban on Incandescent Bulbs
- Index(es):