CFL database

Nice info Dave!

Wait until all the utilities get togther, wakeup, and start billing premiums for 3rd harmonic power. I suspect we we see a sharp decline in the mercury containing bulb sales.

All we need now is some politcians to get the information and really f*ck up the system for us.

Your figures? The truth is it's unlikely anyone knows precisely what percentage of electric energy in the US is consumed by lighting. I've seen various sites that quote anywhere from 17% to 22% and more. The issue isn't what percent is being consumed by lighting. The concern here (at least among those of us who care at all) is to find ways to reduce demand. Using CFLs is one means of reducing demand since they generate more light per Watt. Some of us think that reducing electrical use is a good thing. Some of us apparently don't think... so.

Dave is pointing out the obvious errors in claims being made, which are indeed bogus.

Yes CFLs generate more light per watt, but have mercury issues.

LEDs may yet save the day, but they are not quite there yet in terms of cost per watt

...Or efficiency.

Reports from initial testing indicate LEDs are not as efficient as CFLs.

This comes with an explanation. White for white. LEDs colours have to be combined to create white light and the lumens are not accumulative, whereas CFLs produce white light natively and require no filtering, reducing output.

Colour vs colour. LEDs produce coloured light singly and are extremely efficient, compared to other light sources, having 60-95% of their natural lumen density filtered out to produce the colour.

Why are only CFLs connected with mercury in this discussion? The good old 4' tubes have the same "issues" with mercury, and have been around for decades!

Back, 20+ years ago, we had a guy (knowledgeable) at work that used to yell at people for turning off the overhead flor lights at midday, and then turning them back on at the end of the day (we got dark at 4pm in the winter). "it takes more power to turn these lights on than it takes to keep them on all day!"

Just never get cut from a piece of broken glass from a 4' tube if you don't want to have a medical issue - yet how many times over the decades have you heard about this happening to anyone?

But the bulk of straight tube fluorescents are used in commercial or industrial facilities where hazardous waste disposal or recycling is not quite the same issue that it is for households. And they've been used there for many decades so there's no new mercury aside from normal growth. Switching from incandescents to CFLs means a net increase in mercury.

I've taken a cue from the "environmentalists" who claim they buy nebulous carbon offsets to counterbalance all of their trips by plane. I insist that my electric utility only supply me electrons generated from non-coal burning plants so I'm not causing any increase in mercury. ;^)

I was taught that, too, in Air Force electronics school in the late '50s. I think it was more myth than fact as the inrush current isn't that high and doesn't last very long. There is a significant effect on bulb life but even there the actual time was on the order of don't turn it off if it will be off less than 20 minutes. And things have changed significantly since then. The latest high efficiency electronic ballasts can even be used with occupancy sensors.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

That is patently untrue and I believe Dave knows it by now.

I do know of one horrific injury suffered as a result of a fluorescent tube. Many years ago a worker at Bristol-Meyers was standing next to an open 55-gallon drum containing a flammable solvent when an overhead tube came loose. The falling tube struck the edge of the drum and a spark set the vapors off, causing extensive burns. The victim's injuries were compounded by multiple cuts from the shattered glass.

Oh, come on.. you're back peddling!

I have 4' flor fixtures in my house, and have had them for 20 years! Lights over my workbench for example!

Same "hazard" exists in my house, even without CFLs.

"workshop lights" at HD or Lowes.. How many times have these been involved with HASMAT type stuff that you've heard of? Why are they more or less dangerous than CFLs in the home? Provide proof and not just spout your own opinion!

I'll c> AZ Woody wrote:

It's much simpler and, unfortunately, much worse than that. Dave rants against CFLs for the same reason he rants against Z-Wave. People he perceives as "the enemy" have spoken in favor of them.

I've supplied tons of facts backed up by URLs. You have responded with nothing but ill-informed opinion.

AFAIK, there are no mandated limits on the amount of mercury in fluorescents. It varies a great deal but, at bottom, the amount is directly related to bulb brightness, size and life. From the first paper cited below, it would appear that you can buy 4' straight tube fluorescents with about the same amount of mercury as CFLs are widely reported to contain. Those with green end-caps are low mercury. The second citation gives estimates of the mercury contained in various types of lamps.

That you have 4' fluorescent tubes in your garage while I have 18" fluorescents in one bath and circline fluorescents in the kitchen (and they've been there for 60+ years) does not affect the facts that there are billions more in use in commercial and industrial sites than in residential sites nor that if you or I or anyone else replaces an incandescent with a fluorescent, there's a net increase of mercury in our residences. If you continue to make the idiotic argument that that's not a fact, I won't waste my time with you.

The federal government classifies fluorescents as hazardous waste and businesses are required to dispose of them accordingly. Many states and localities also require special handling to dispose of them even for residences.

AZ Woody wrote:

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

I use old light bulbs for target practice, they pop real nice and sit up in some holes I drilled through a board. I guess it's not a good idea to start shooting these mercury ones then.

Another factor in this discussion is that most of these bulbs are not approved for usage in certain fixtures at certain locations without covers. Without further research I am not familiar with thee lighting rules. It is only hearsay from electricians I deal with.

By that I meant that incandecents do not contain mercury and CFLs do. The

4ft tubes also have mercury in them, in varying amounts IIRC. The green guys worry that with a huge influx of dead CFLs over current quantities, that there could be mercury concerns. I am not sure if that is valid or not and I don't have any really hard feelings in the matter. I went to CFLs because it saved money in the long run. I fully expect to see drop off bins for CFLs like they have for NiCad batteries, in the near future

Odd, that is not what the Gore groupies are saying around here.

California effectively mandated CFLs and FLs in 2005 for new homes, mandating that screw type fixtures not be installed. (Title 24). That will mean a net increase in mercury in landfills until there are provisions for separate disposal of dead FL and CFL bulbs.

Good overview here:

$DG4.259@trnddc04...

I guess we cant ask how many Polacks it takes to screw in a light bulb anymore then either :) (I'm Polish BTW). This is the first I have ever heard of someone mandating that the actual screw sockets be eliminated to prevent usage of incandescent. I guess they realize that you cant make it "illegal" to make a light bulb, so they will simply mandate different sockets from the home builders. Can you still buy a lamp in california? This is simply getting ridiculous. Funny how they are not mandating eliminating "wall warts" which run

365/24 drawing their 5 to 10 watts of continuously wasted energy simply because manufacturers want easy UL approval by not putting the power suppies in devices anymore with on/off switches. Instead using wall warts, how many actually bother to move a dresser to unplug their chargers, toys, radios, etc wall warts, not many.

Lon wrote: ...

If you've got an Ikea store nearby, you already have such a thing. I noticed it around 6 months ago, and that's where I drop off my dead CFLs.

A little off topic but....

It only takes one Pollack to screw in a light bulb. They stand on a ladder and hold the lamp still in the socket 'cause....

They think the whole world revolves around them.

BTW: In Ontario they had a big sale on Energy Wise ceiling fans. Looking for one at the time I got excited until I found them using some two pins twist lock base I have never seen. Well the next thing you know WalMart has a few of these new bases.

Why would somebody introduce a new base? Total marketting scam to sell more expensive lightbulbs. What are people going to do when there last CFL bulb burns out or the room isn't btight enough? Get the wire cutters and put in an industry standard medium base, hangin on the wires until they can get rid of the junk.

We are worried about mercury in the environment but not the extra gas, CO & CO2 to go 100 miles and back to dispose of every CFL...LOL

" snipped-for-privacy@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org" wrote > ...

They have mandated efficiency standards that can only be met by switch mode power supplies, effectively outlawing the old linear power supplies. If you do a search of the forum, you'll find where Andrew Ward asked whether he should replace the linear wallwart for his alarm system and I gave some comparisons of the efficiency of a linear PS wallwart vs a SMPS wallwart.

BTW, it would require a very large l>Funny how they are not mandating eliminating "wall warts" which run

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com