Author Topic: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide  (Read 6653 times)

Thor

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,230
  • US Navy (retired)
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #50 on: December 04, 2007, 06:07:29 AM »
Firethorn, I had the electric company come out to check my power at the last house. All they brought was a digital multimeter.  rolleyes An oscilloscope would have seen any problems, but they didn't have those.
" a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand." - Lucius Annaeus

for Military, Vets, & Supporters, check out:
USMILNET

Conservative Discussion Forum


K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,381
  • I Am Inimical
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #51 on: December 04, 2007, 06:14:38 AM »
You know, I totally clutched on this, but the two CFLs I have in my bathroom are N:Visions.

Friends of mine told me about them and said that they're pretty darned good, so I bought two.

I like their warranty - 9 years or 10,000 hours.

http://www.nvisioncfl.com/


So far, no complaints.
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

Harold Tuttle

  • Professor Chromedome
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,069
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #52 on: December 04, 2007, 06:22:47 AM »
"The true mad scientist does not make public appearances! He does not wear the "Hello, my name is.." badge!
He strikes from below like a viper or on high like a penny dropped from the tallest building around!
He only has one purpose--Do bad things to good people! Mit science! What good is science if no one gets hurt?!"

Firethorn

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,789
  • Where'd my explosive space modulator go?
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #53 on: December 04, 2007, 06:33:01 AM »
Firethorn, I had the electric company come out to check my power at the last house. All they brought was a digital multimeter.  rolleyes An oscilloscope would have seen any problems, but they didn't have those.

That's it?!?  Sheeshh....

There's a number of issues that a simple multimeter can find, but I can check that myself(Ever tried to figure out why an outlet's showing 60 volts?).

Still, you need a bit more when trying to figure out funky equipment failure rates.

Worst case, you can stick a power conditioner on your house.  Bonus, many of them can keep power active for a 'blip' type power outage.

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #54 on: December 04, 2007, 06:57:06 AM »
Worst case, you can stick a power conditioner on your house.  Bonus, many of them can keep power active for a 'blip' type power outage.

I have one before the TrippLite suppressor the computer stuff is plugged into. It's a Raytheon one, military. No idea how much the government paid for it.  grin

Bogie

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,215
  • Hunkered in South St. Louis, right by Route 66
    • Third Rate Pundit
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #55 on: December 04, 2007, 08:05:57 AM »
The power center for my living room stereo has a voltage/amperage meter (switchable) on it... I've seen between 110 and 125 volts... It got during the summer that I could look at it and say "whoa... Everyone's got their AC on... better open the garage door so I can reach the generator..."

Blog under construction

Thor

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,230
  • US Navy (retired)
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #56 on: December 04, 2007, 09:58:23 AM »
Firethorn, best I could figure out is that it was dirty power. Unfortunately, I never acquired an Oscilloscope to really dig into it. I kind of wish I had one of those, a signal generator and a spectrum analyzer. I'd be set to open up my own business. After all, the Navy taught me pretty well when it comes to electronics.
" a sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand." - Lucius Annaeus

for Military, Vets, & Supporters, check out:
USMILNET

Conservative Discussion Forum


Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #57 on: December 04, 2007, 09:59:45 AM »
Firethorn, best I could figure out is that it was dirty power. Unfortunately, I never acquired an Oscilloscope to really dig into it. I kind of wish I had one of those, a signal generator and a spectrum analyzer. I'd be set to open up my own business. After all, the Navy taught me pretty well when it comes to electronics.

Go to bankruptcy auctions of electronics manufacturers.

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #58 on: December 04, 2007, 12:35:40 PM »
Quote
The colder the bulb is the longer it will take to warm up. When it's really cold the outside bulbs on the front of my house take quite awhile to warm up to full power.

That's not really good for security, is it?
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,381
  • I Am Inimical
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #59 on: December 04, 2007, 12:48:25 PM »
Quote
The colder the bulb is the longer it will take to warm up. When it's really cold the outside bulbs on the front of my house take quite awhile to warm up to full power.

That's not really good for security, is it?

Security isn't an issue.

The pole light comes on at dusk via electric sensor, so there's still quite a bit of ligth out. The porch light I turn on when I get home.

I also live in a fairly tightly packed townhouse community, so I catch the light from others pole lights, as well.

The reason I keep the light burning in the back of the house 24x7 is because that's a much less secure area. I have a 6 foot fence and back up onto a treeline.
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

seeker_two

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,922
  • In short, most intelligence is false.
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #60 on: December 04, 2007, 12:56:16 PM »
I like the Home Depot brand CFL....have them throughout my house. Even have the "Super Solar" ones for the outside lighting that I keep on all the time.....we can play a baseball game at midnight now....

They can pry my CFL's from my cold, dead sockets....  grin
Impressed yet befogged, they grasped at his vivid leading phrases, seeing only their surface meaning, and missing the deeper current of his thought.

Firethorn

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,789
  • Where'd my explosive space modulator go?
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #61 on: December 04, 2007, 01:18:37 PM »
I have one before the TrippLite suppressor the computer stuff is plugged into. It's a Raytheon one, military. No idea how much the government paid for it.  grin

Another option might be a 220V surge arrester - they're ~$80, and fits into your circuit breaker box.  Might not be perfect, but should prevent surges for the whole house.

Brad Johnson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,083
  • Witty, charming, handsome, and completely insane.
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #62 on: December 04, 2007, 01:20:26 PM »
They can pry my CFL's from my cold, dead sockets....  grin

I'd be careful issuing ultimatums around this bunch.

Brad
It's all about the pancakes, people.
"And he thought cops wouldn't chase... a STOLEN DONUT TRUCK???? That would be like Willie Nelson ignoring a pickup full of weed."
-HankB

Sergeant Bob

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,861
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #63 on: December 04, 2007, 01:26:43 PM »
They can pry my CFL's from my cold, dead sockets....  grin

[giant alien cockroach voice] Your terms are acceptable [/giant alien cockroach voice]
Personally, I do not understand how a bunch of people demanding a bigger govt can call themselves anarchist.
I meet lots of folks like this, claim to be anarchist but really they're just liberals with pierced genitals. - gunsmith

I already have canned butter, buying more. Canned blueberries, some pancake making dry goods and the end of the world is gonna be delicious.  -French G

seeker_two

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,922
  • In short, most intelligence is false.
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #64 on: December 05, 2007, 01:49:05 AM »
They can pry my CFL's from my cold, dead sockets....  grin

[giant alien cockroach voice] Your terms are acceptable [/giant alien cockroach voice]

Makes sense....in the end, the only things that will be left will be cockroaches, Twinkies, and CFL's.....
Impressed yet befogged, they grasped at his vivid leading phrases, seeing only their surface meaning, and missing the deeper current of his thought.

CAnnoneer

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,136
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2007, 09:05:33 AM »
If you eat oceanic fish, especially predatory ones like tuna, you already get plenty of mercury.

AJ Dual

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,162
  • Shoe Ballistics Inc.
Re: Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide
« Reply #66 on: December 08, 2007, 10:46:59 AM »
Just like mammals, heavy metals in fish tend to congregate in the nerves and brain tissue. The original mercury scare in fish was from a study where the entire fish was liquefied in a blender, then the mush was tested.

A later study that only tested the cuts of the fish a first-world citizen from a western background would eat showed the mercury risk was negligible.
I promise not to duck.