----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Crystall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:04 PM Subject: Re: Coalition Seeks Elimination of Incandescent Light Bulb
> On 20 Mar 2007 at 7:38, Nick Arnett wrote: > >> On 3/20/07, Jim Sharkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Charlene and I swapped out a majority of our incandescents for >> > those >> > double helix-looking flourescents several months ago, and I >> > really >> > can't tell the difference in the lighting. I'll have to ask her >> > if >> > our electrical bill's gone down in a noticeable way, though. >> >> >> I have found that some of them didn't last nearly as long as >> advertised. I >> had 'seven year' bulbs fail in less than a year. I know that the >> older ones >> will die faster if they're turned on and off often, but I'm not >> sure about >> those with electronic ballasts. > > Less so. My main problem with them is I have for many years used > "natural" light bulbs, and getting those in energy saving formats is > expensive. > > I find it really does make a difference (and work uses them as well, > which is even better). > The early versions of the electronic ballast were plagued with problems, but the current product is pretty reliable. Most electronic ballasts now can use either 277V or 120V so you don't have to worry about picking up the wrong ballast these days. All T8 lamps are energy savers, so you don't see that noted on the packaging anymore. Avoid the old T12 flourescent lamps (Those are the old fat ones, the newer skinny ones are the T8s), they are just too dim for the amount of energy used and are likely to be phased out in time. (But note that each type uses a different ballast, so if you want to change to T8s you need a new ballast too.) xponent The Tubes World Tour Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
