(06-19-2012 12:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I use the CFL bulbs because they save me lots of money. Feel free to be stupid and use the other ones. And also while you're at it, stop wearing your seat belt and start ignoring the speed limit. I don't want the government to infringe upon your rights to be a dumb***.

You are assuming he wears his seatbelt and doesn't already ignore speed laws.

(06-19-2012 12:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I use the CFL bulbs because they save me lots of money. Feel free to be stupid and use the other ones. And also while you're at it, stop wearing your seat belt and start ignoring the speed limit. I don't want the government to infringe upon your rights to be a dumb***.

I use other ones because the quality of light from CFL's is crap and I live up north, in the winter nice light is kind of nice.

I also dont like shooing my kids away from teh room every time one breaks because of the mercury they contain. Those two things, and the lower cost, is worth the slightly higher energy usage.

(06-19-2012 09:55 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  my electric bills have been $30-45 less per month since then.

Seriously or exaggerated? Isn't that a 10% drop or so?

NVM, just saw you said since March. Avg temperature has increased enough to drop your bill that much alone.

(06-19-2012 01:13 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 12:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I use the CFL bulbs because they save me lots of money. Feel free to be stupid and use the other ones. And also while you're at it, stop wearing your seat belt and start ignoring the speed limit. I don't want the government to infringe upon your rights to be a dumb***.

I use other ones because the quality of light from CFL's is crap and I live up north, in the winter nice light is kind of nice.

I also dont like shooing my kids away from teh room every time one breaks because of the mercury they contain. Those two things, and the lower cost, is worth the slightly higher energy usage.

Do you regularly break your bulbs?

(06-19-2012 10:47 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Maybe. But we don't eat them as nearly as often because 1. THe time it tales to prepare one 2. if you buy one from a restaurant, they are quite expensive. THe same can't be said of fried chicken. To be fair though, the south eats more than fried chicken, they eat EVERYTHING fried. Which leads to obesidy which is why the south is much fatter than the north in general.

I eat fried food at least 4-5 times a week, I'm 6'0" tall and 170 pounds. It's not that eating fried foot makes you fat, its the quantity of food, fried or not.
On the KFC front, and related to the sugary drinks, a Chicken breast from KFC has 360 calories, a 30oz Pepsi has 350, a 30oz Mt Dew has 390. The sugary drink is as much to blame as the fried food.
Regardless of how bad for you sugary drinks are it's an individuals choice what and how much to drink. I cut out most soft drinks because I was shocked that I was drinking 65% of my daily calories. I still love a Mt. Dew, sweet tea, or coke, but I drink them less often or if I do order one with dinner I also order a water with it so I won't drink the whole soft drink or tea.
Two words are overlooked in this entire discussion... PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. I am personally responsible for what I put in my body and for my healthcare. If more people took personal responsibility for their overall health and didn't rely on the govt to cover their healthcare costs, none of this would be an issue.

(06-19-2012 01:19 PM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 09:55 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  my electric bills have been $30-45 less per month since then.

Seriously or exaggerated? Isn't that a 10% drop or so?

NVM, just saw you said since March. Avg temperature has increased enough to drop your bill that much alone.

Dead serious. I changed out about 30 bulbs in my house. Its closer to 15% decrease with no other notable changes. I compared my bills to the same time last year, so other than a slight variation in temperature between last year and this year, it can only be attributed to the bulbs.

(06-19-2012 01:24 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 10:47 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Maybe. But we don't eat them as nearly as often because 1. THe time it tales to prepare one 2. if you buy one from a restaurant, they are quite expensive. THe same can't be said of fried chicken. To be fair though, the south eats more than fried chicken, they eat EVERYTHING fried. Which leads to obesidy which is why the south is much fatter than the north in general.

I eat fried food at least 4-5 times a week, I'm 6'0" tall and 170 pounds. It's not that eating fried foot makes you fat, its the quantity of food, fried or not.
On the KFC front, and related to the sugary drinks, a Chicken breast from KFC has 360 calories, a 30oz Pepsi has 350, a 30oz Mt Dew has 390. The sugary drink is as much to blame as the fried food.
Regardless of how bad for you sugary drinks are it's an individuals choice what and how much to drink. I cut out most soft drinks because I was shocked that I was drinking 65% of my daily calories. I still love a Mt. Dew, sweet tea, or coke, but I drink them less often or if I do order one with dinner I also order a water with it so I won't drink the whole soft drink or tea.
Two words are overlooked in this entire discussion... PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. I am personally responsible for what I put in my body and for my healthcare. If more people took personal responsibility for their overall health and didn't rely on the govt to cover their healthcare costs, none of this would be an issue.

How is your cholesterol level?

(06-19-2012 01:13 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 12:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I use the CFL bulbs because they save me lots of money. Feel free to be stupid and use the other ones. And also while you're at it, stop wearing your seat belt and start ignoring the speed limit. I don't want the government to infringe upon your rights to be a dumb***.

I use other ones because the quality of light from CFL's is crap and I live up north, in the winter nice light is kind of nice.

I also dont like shooing my kids away from teh room every time one breaks because of the mercury they contain. Those two things, and the lower cost, is worth the slightly higher energy usage.

Shop around. There are different types of CFL's that produce different shades of light.

And the amount of mercury is negligible. If you're panicking when they break, you're being absurd. BTW - I have never had one break.

What if I can't follow all the recommended steps? or I cleaned up a CFL but didn't do it properly?

Don't be alarmed; these steps are only precautions that reflect best practices for cleaning up a broken CFL. Keep in mind that CFLs contain a very small amount of mercury -- less than 1/100th of the amount in a mercury thermometer.

http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup-detailed.html

(06-19-2012 01:27 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Shop around. There are different types of CFL's that produce different shades of light.

Beleive me I've looked into it but even the best CFL's can't disobey the laws of physics. The way you're generating light produce exactly *1* energy of photons per phosphor in the bulb. You cant trick the eye by dropping 3 or four in but you're still not actually producing a rich spectrum of light.



For people with Seasonal effective disorder these Bulbs are next to useless. A high quality incandescent on the other hand can make the difference and prevent the need for very expensive medical grade light bulbs.

Quote:And the amount of mercury is negligible. If you're panicking when they break, you're being absurd. BTW - I have never had one break.

You don't have kids and that's why (1) You've never had a bulb break and (2) you would not be concerned if they did.

Quote:When the tube of a fluorescent light bulb breaks, the mercury **vapor** is released into the air. In an average room, the amount of vapor could briefly be well above the limits allowed in the general environment, and could exceed the levels allowed in the workplace.

Children breathe in more air in proportion to their size than adults and tend to be more active, so children could be exposed to comparatively higher levels of mercury than adults.

And this information brought to you by the EU...

1. I have a 12-year old.
2. I have never had one break.
3. Those "truly" affected with SAD usually need something stronger than your typical lightbulb for any serious relief.

But hey, it's good to know that you want to design standards for the whole country for something nearly impossible to diagnose that at most 5% of the population has. How liberal of you...lol

Besides...

What is the treatment for seasonal affective disorder?

In addition to being key in the prevention of seasonal affective disorder, regular exposure to light that is bright, particularly fluorescent lights, significantly improves depression in people with this disorder when it presents during the fall and winter. The light treatment is used daily in the morning and evening for best results. Temporarily changing locations to a climate that is characterized by bright light (such as the Caribbean) can achieve similar results. Light treatment has also been called phototherapy. Individuals who suffer from seasonal affective disorder will also likely benefit from increased social support during vulnerable times of the year.

Phototherapy is commercially available in the form of light boxes, which are used for approximately 30 minutes daily. The light required must be of sufficient brightness, approximately 25 times as bright as a normal living room light. Contrary to prior theories, the light does not need to be actual daylight from the sun. It seems that it is quantity, not necessarily quality of light that matters in the light therapy of seasonal affective disorder. The most common possible side effects associated with phototherapy include irritability, insomnia, headaches, and eyestrain.

(06-19-2012 01:27 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 01:24 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 10:47 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Maybe. But we don't eat them as nearly as often because 1. THe time it tales to prepare one 2. if you buy one from a restaurant, they are quite expensive. THe same can't be said of fried chicken. To be fair though, the south eats more than fried chicken, they eat EVERYTHING fried. Which leads to obesidy which is why the south is much fatter than the north in general.

I eat fried food at least 4-5 times a week, I'm 6'0" tall and 170 pounds. It's not that eating fried foot makes you fat, its the quantity of food, fried or not.
On the KFC front, and related to the sugary drinks, a Chicken breast from KFC has 360 calories, a 30oz Pepsi has 350, a 30oz Mt Dew has 390. The sugary drink is as much to blame as the fried food.
Regardless of how bad for you sugary drinks are it's an individuals choice what and how much to drink. I cut out most soft drinks because I was shocked that I was drinking 65% of my daily calories. I still love a Mt. Dew, sweet tea, or coke, but I drink them less often or if I do order one with dinner I also order a water with it so I won't drink the whole soft drink or tea.
Two words are overlooked in this entire discussion... PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. I am personally responsible for what I put in my body and for my healthcare. If more people took personal responsibility for their overall health and didn't rely on the govt to cover their healthcare costs, none of this would be an issue.

How is your cholesterol level?

Great. Both HDL and LDL as well as Triglycerides are all normal for my age (31). A great deal of my fried foods is very lightly breaded seafood and chicken though I do love country fried steak.

(06-19-2012 01:26 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Dead serious. I changed out about 30 bulbs in my house. Its closer to 15% decrease with no other notable changes. I compared my bills to the same time last year, so other than a slight variation in temperature between last year and this year, it can only be attributed to the bulbs.

I'm fairly impressed. I would think the water heater/HVAC/wash machine/TV would be a much larger % of the electric bill.

All this talk of CFLs & incandescents is meaningless because the future of lighting is LEDs.

(06-19-2012 02:38 PM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 01:26 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Dead serious. I changed out about 30 bulbs in my house. Its closer to 15% decrease with no other notable changes. I compared my bills to the same time last year, so other than a slight variation in temperature between last year and this year, it can only be attributed to the bulbs.

I'm fairly impressed. I would think the water heater/HVAC/wash machine/TV would be a much larger % of the electric bill.

Just my wife and I, the thermostat is set at 75, HE washer, energystar LCD TV. I bought contractor packs of the bulbs as lowes, about a $100 investment and its already paid for itself.

(06-19-2012 02:48 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  All this talk of CFLs & incandescents is meaningless because the future of lighting is LEDs.

Yes, once it's allowed to develop fully and without govt interference. If thrust upon the public now, much like solar energy, the cost would be astronomical. Ten years from now is a different story, and even then it may not be possible to retrofit current houses and lamps in every case. New homes and fixtures will be designed for LED, reducing the costs of the technology as its developed in a more standardized fashion.

(06-19-2012 07:51 AM)Rebel Wrote:  WHEREAS: High intake of soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages increases the risk of obesity and diabetes; and

Think they'd outlaw this?

(06-19-2012 03:01 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 02:48 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  All this talk of CFLs & incandescents is meaningless because the future of lighting is LEDs.

Yes, once it's allowed to develop fully and without govt interference. If thrust upon the public now, much like solar energy, the cost would be astronomical. Ten years from now is a different story, and even then it may not be possible to retrofit current houses and lamps in every case. New homes and fixtures will be designed for LED, reducing the costs of the technology as its developed in a more standardized fashion.

Philips has a model that has the same base as other bulbs and lasts 25yrs.



http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-04-...ement-bulb

(06-19-2012 05:08 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 03:01 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 02:48 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  All this talk of CFLs & incandescents is meaningless because the future of lighting is LEDs.

Yes, once it's allowed to develop fully and without govt interference. If thrust upon the public now, much like solar energy, the cost would be astronomical. Ten years from now is a different story, and even then it may not be possible to retrofit current houses and lamps in every case. New homes and fixtures will be designed for LED, reducing the costs of the technology as its developed in a more standardized fashion.

Philips has a model that has the same base as other bulbs and lasts 25yrs.



http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-04-...ement-bulb

Those things list for nearly $50. And how do they know it will last for 25 years? Almost anything electrical with an on/off current rush dies much faster than that, even if the current draw is small. There is no more simple a circuit than a standard light bulb (it's a dead short) and they fail quite quickly - relatively speaking.

(06-19-2012 05:24 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 05:08 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 03:01 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 02:48 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  All this talk of CFLs & incandescents is meaningless because the future of lighting is LEDs.

Yes, once it's allowed to develop fully and without govt interference. If thrust upon the public now, much like solar energy, the cost would be astronomical. Ten years from now is a different story, and even then it may not be possible to retrofit current houses and lamps in every case. New homes and fixtures will be designed for LED, reducing the costs of the technology as its developed in a more standardized fashion.

Philips has a model that has the same base as other bulbs and lasts 25yrs.



http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-04-...ement-bulb

Those things list for nearly $50. And how do they know it will last for 25 years? Almost anything electrical with an on/off current rush dies much faster than that, even if the current draw is small. There is no more simple a circuit than a standard light bulb (it's a dead short) and they fail quite quickly - relatively speaking.

Agree, this technology is a new, twenty five years from depending on the failure rate, THEN they can make the claim.

(06-19-2012 05:08 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  Philips has a model that has the same base as other bulbs and lasts 25yrs.



http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-04-...ement-bulb

I don't know a ton about LED lights other than they are expensive, and last I had heard there was some difficulty in making them work in some existing appliances and lamps because of the intense heat the generate internally. Making all of the compnents small enough to put enough LED's together was very costly.