Pollution

[moonshadow]

Hey... it's the Hogwarts Express!

Everyone knows that thing doesn't run on coal and steam... it runs on magic!

[Jim]

As for the mercury, that (along with countless other uses) may well be a health hazard far greater than any savings in power plant emissions, but I will leave that aside for the moment.

According to the US EPA:

Small amounts of mercury can be released into the environment when CFLs break, or if they are improperly disposed of at the end of their useful lives.
Despite these emissions, the use of CFLs actually helps reduce total mercury emissions in the U.S. because of their significant energy savings. Using energy-saving CFLs reduces demand for electricity, which in turn reduces the amount of coal burned by power plants, which reduces emissions of mercury when the coal is burned. -- http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/what-are-connec ... y-and-cfls

[Sinned]

These energy saving bulbs ( I presume that that's what you are talking about ) are a real con as they aren't bright enough to read by ( I have had to buy an led night light to provide a night time reading lamp ) and they don't last anything like the thousands of hours that they quote. In fact the old incandescent lights ( we stockpiled loads and loads of them before they disappeared from the shelves ) last far longer. Again we have the nanny state telling us what is good for us and in this case not even giving us the opportunity to exercise our freedom to choose. As for disposal, they just go in the general rubbish.

[Gordon]

I love led bulbs too. Good riddance to incandescent bulbs and the compact fluorescent.

[crfriend]

I love led bulbs too. Good riddance to incandescent bulbs and the compact fluorescent.

The incandescent bulb was a good job by early 20th Century standards, but they do have their problems with energy consumption per lumen (or watts/cm-squared); however, they're the only thing that works well with conventional dimmers.

The compact fluorescent is a classic case of what happens when Government gets its hands on an issue it's not qualified to adjudicate and mandates something by legal fiat. In short, idiocy.

LEDs are a better option by far, and given more modern management techniques (PWM, mainly) can be dimmed quite nicely, just not with the sort of technology that's ensconced in many walls today. I'm using mostly LEDs now, and when a CFL dies it gets replaced with an LED which, with any luck, won't need any attention until long after I'm dead and gone.

But, I still have an incandescent in my "sunrise simulator" which keeps the worst of the Seasonal Affective Disorder at bay. I tried an LED in it and it just didn't produce a workable result.

[partlyscot]

One of the bigger problems with the switch to LEDs, is that they are subject to issues with poor design and manufacture. It is good to see the big brand names getting into it at the consumer level. At the moment I'm thinking of Cree, who have been selling their brand household bulbs in Home Depot. 18 months ago, a 40W equivalent was $20 ( Canadian) I’ve just checked, and the current 60W equivalent is about $10, and the 40W is listed at $2.96!! Not sure if that is selling off old design stuff, or a misprint. Will be going in as quick as possible and buying them out. That particular version has a nice, comfortable soft rubbery coating, and stays very cool. The light is excellent, and have had no failures so far. Cheaper off brand stuff should normally be treated with suspicion, receipts kept, and only purchased from companies with no nonsense refund policies. The market is very volatile at the moment, and there are other developments that are still shaking out, remote control, colour changing options, various other ideas being tried out.

One interesting innovation I saw involves a very strong LED light source, installed above a diffuser designed to mimic the Rayleigh scattering of the atmosphere. The end result is an artificial skylight that is essentially impossible to tell from the real thing, there are videos of attendees at a lighting convention coming in to see this new system everyone’s talking about, and the look on their faces is priceless. You can see they are just blown away by it, they know damn well that it cannot be a real skylight, but their senses are saying is. At the moment, each example is hand built, outrageously expensive, (tens of thousands) but I suspect that various people are gearing up a factory to bring the price down to something mere mortals can own.

[Couya]

The first time I had to get a LED to replace a broken bulb, I was very disappointed by the coldness of the light, cold yet, dazzling. As it happens I had a CFL not in use that gave a off a very yellow light. The two on the same wall provide a decent balance.
Another LED, in a general purpose lamp, gives a good light nearby, but it seems to weaken considerably by the time it reaches the far walls; I have a pool pf strong light rather than a well-lit room. But I have gotten used to it.
The prices asked for are quite capricious for the LEDs in my local shops, but the town hall seems to be convinced of their value, replacing all the decorative lights around the town by LEDs. Must have been a huge investment, so I hope they live up to their low-energy consumption reputation.

Martin

[partlyscot]

You should make sure to check the colour temperature when you buy bulbs. I think the ones you want have a temp of 2700K, or warm white. I was looking at some the other day and almost bought the "daylight" ones with a temp of 5000K, which is possibly what you bought. That would be very crisp, but very blue light. Most places like Home Depot have a display showing the bulbs lit, to give you some idea.

[skirted_in_SF]

You should make sure to check the colour temperature when you buy bulbs. I think the ones you want have a temp of 2700K, or warm white. I was looking at some the other day and almost bought the "daylight" ones with a temp of 5000K, which is possibly what you bought. That would be very crisp, but very blue light. Most places like Home Depot have a display showing the bulbs lit, to give you some idea.

I like 3500k for CFLs. For me, it's a good compromise between what I see as a greenish cast to the 2700k lamps and what I would suspect would be too blue/white for 5000k. I happen to be lucky enough to work with a professional lighting person to ask for suggestions.

[crfriend]

I like 3500k for CFLs. For me, it's a good compromise between what I see as a greenish cast to the 2700k lamps and what I would suspect would be too blue/white for 5000k. I happen to be lucky enough to work with a professional lighting person to ask for suggestions.

I took the more active route and opted to experiment with things, and I find that I prefer the "hotter" 5000K light to the "warmer" lower-temperature ones. This may swing if/when summer comes 'round and I don't need the very "hot" ones that I find somewhat invigorating.

In places where CFLs still exist, I find there is a mixture, with some visibly "hotter" than others. Sometimes this is deliberate, as it is at my bathroom sink, and in other places it's accidental but reasonably pleasing nonetheless.

One unfortunate effect, though, is that unless you get very specialised LEDs (wi-fi- or Bluetooth- enabled no less in many instances), dimming them does not produce the corresponding temperature gradient that one gets naturally from incandescents. This may be one of the reasons why attaching a 1200 Lumen LED to my "sunrise simulator" was a failure; not only was the onset-time of brightness too fast (a function of the bulb's internal switching-mode power supply), but also never changed colours the way that a natural sunrise does. I had to locate a genuine incandescent to fill that role.

I really, really, wish the government would keep its fingers out of things it cannot understand. At least incandescent bulbs can still be bought on the open market for "special applications" so one does not need to resort to the Black Market for them, but I suspect that day is not long in coming.

How many folks have considered computer-network security for their light-bulbs? I suspect the number is rather low.

[straightfairy]

I'm not sure how any combustion engine has "zero emissions" so I'll presume you mean it has never tested above the allowable standard?

Part of the MOT test for diesels is a requirements for 'zero visible smoke emissions' under specified loads, which is probably what was referred to.
They do also now test for CO, NOx etc.

[Milfmog]

Part of the MOT test for diesels is a requirements for 'zero visible smoke emissions' under specified loads, which is probably what was referred to.
They do also now test for CO, NOx etc.

The MOT test for diesel cars registered after 1 August 1979 requires a metered smoke test (not visual although visible smoke can result in a failure), however, the MOT does not specify or measure CO or NOX emissions for diesels. (More detail here).

Have fun,


Ian (Owner of a VW diesel engined car with dodgy emissions-busting software).

[Kirbstone]

At least over here they give advance notice of more pollution on the way....

Tom

Choo choo train sign Rs.jpg

[dillon]

I'd spend so uch time studying that work of art, that I'd probably get hit by the train!

[straightfairy]

Part of the MOT test for diesels is a requirements for 'zero visible smoke emissions' under specified loads, which is probably what was referred to.
They do also now test for CO, NOx etc.

The MOT test for diesel cars registered after 1 August 1979 requires a metered smoke test (not visual although visible smoke can result in a failure), however, the MOT does not specify or measure CO or NOX emissions for diesels. (More detail here).

Have fun,


Ian (Owner of a VW diesel engined car with dodgy emissions-busting software).

I stand corrected. (Owner of a VW diesel engined car that pre-dates dodgy emission busting software )