[Lostgallifreyan]

Eeyore wrote in
:



Serge Auckland wrote:

Quite apart from the problems of disposing of old CFLs, I question
the whole principle of Low Energy lighting. If you have a
conventional bulb, much of the energy output is in the form of heat,
which will help heat the room, and consequently will reduce the need
for other heating, central or otherwise.

That's sort of fine if you want extra heat. Often as not you don't.

The other downside of your idea is that electricity is more costly
than other heat sources (often by a large amount).

No, that's no excuse for low efficiency lighting.


It wasn't an excuse, it was a reason, and a good one, there was more to his
point than you quoted. Most times light is used, heat is also wanted. Where
it isn't, you use a light source that doesn't add heat, and there are
several choices. LED's in outdoor and tunnel and other places where people
don't need to spend time keeping warm, or any of the other types already in
use, but that's not where people spend most of their time.

The current availability of CFL's is no excuse to risk vast pollution and
ebergy use in manufacture for all the general domestic uses that also need
heat, and this is true before you begin to consider all the dimmers that
must be replaced and thrown away.

If you're looking for excuses, at least look in the right place. Trying to
force an end to the incandescent lamp to satify a political expedient is
not engineering, but an excuse. No matter how people heat their homes, the
important thing is not to let it all out of the roofs, doors and windows,
it's less important where it comes from.