|
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo....topStory.html
http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...segment01.html And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo....topStory.html http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...segment01.html And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Ya can thank the k00ks for those CFL's. My advice, stock up on incandescent bulbs. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
On Jan 26, 11:21*am, Drifter wrote:
http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:09:18 -0800, dave wrote: Incandescent bulbs are way more dangerous than CFLs. Yeah, because they break easier than CFLs when you stick them up your ass. I defer to your experience on the matter. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
"Wingdingaling6" wrote in message ... On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. Please don't bother people with facts. Over here, we use almost nothing BUT CFL's (use of incandescent lamps would increase our already exhorbitant power bill at least 2x), and nobody exhibits those symptoms. Anyone ever hear of psychosomatic symptomology? In point of fact, the CFL's that we buy (not necessarily the ones you might buy at Target) are far closer to natural sunlight than are incandescents. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
In article
, Wingdingaling6 wrote: On Jan 26, 11:21*am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Telamon wrote:
In article , Wingdingaling6 wrote: On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. And just how much UV do you think is actually escaping from the bulb? You'd get way more UV from being outside on a clear day than from being close to a CFL. If they can make CFLs to be used in a photographic lab you know the UV light actually being emitted has to be extremely low. JB |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
In article ,
John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , Wingdingaling6 wrote: On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. And just how much UV do you think is actually escaping from the bulb? You'd get way more UV from being outside on a clear day than from being close to a CFL. If they can make CFLs to be used in a photographic lab you know the UV light actually being emitted has to be extremely low. The mercury plasma in the bulb emits only UV light. The phosphors on the inside of the bulb emit visible light when struck by the UV light waves. This is why florescent lights are biased biased toward the blue. The light falls off as an inverse square of the distance so the smaller bulbs closer to you give you UV light at a higher rate. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Telamon wrote: In article , John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , Wingdingaling6 wrote: On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. And just how much UV do you think is actually escaping from the bulb? You'd get way more UV from being outside on a clear day than from being close to a CFL. If they can make CFLs to be used in a photographic lab you know the UV light actually being emitted has to be extremely low. The mercury plasma in the bulb emits only UV light. The phosphors on the inside of the bulb emit visible light when struck by the UV light waves. This is why florescent lights are biased biased toward the blue. The light falls off as an inverse square of the distance so the smaller bulbs closer to you give you UV light at a higher rate. Myself, I've never liked the light emitted by a fluorescent bulb. Give me good old incandescents any day. dxAce Michigan USA |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Telamon wrote:
No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. There is no UV damage to increase. You get more UV from a few minutes in the sun than you'd get from a year of sitting near a lamp. Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; so hoarding bulbs is silly. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
dxAce wrote:
Myself, I've never liked the light emitted by a fluorescent bulb. Give me good old incandescents any day. You say "the light" like there's only one kind. I quit using incandescents over 20 years ago, before CFLs. I'd get the LOA under cabinet 15 Watters at Homer's and put them everywhere. Left a lot of them on 24/7. When CFLs started happening I was a kid in a candy shop. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:44 -0800, Telamon wrote:
In article , John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , Wingdingaling6 wrote: No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. And just how much UV do you think is actually escaping from the bulb? You'd get way more UV from being outside on a clear day than from being close to a CFL. If they can make CFLs to be used in a photographic lab you know the UV light actually being emitted has to be extremely low. The mercury plasma in the bulb emits only UV light. The phosphors on the inside of the bulb emit visible light when struck by the UV light waves. This is why florescent lights are biased biased toward the blue. The light falls off as an inverse square of the distance so the smaller bulbs closer to you give you UV light at a higher rate. UV is not a problem with fluorescents. True, the plasma generates UV. But UV won't go thru ordinary glass. The glass used in those fluorescent tubes that are used as day-glo lamps is a very special mix. It is usually produced in an ordinary glass kiln at the end of a several-year run. After making the special batch the kiln is relined. Richard Feynmann was the only person to see the first atomic bomb blast without using goggles. He did it by sitting in a pickup, looking thru the windscreen, because he knew ordinary glass doesn't conduct UV. Source: "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynmann!", pgs.116-117. That's also why you can't get a suntan if you're in a car with the windows rolled up. I probably messed up the attributions above my response. Whatever. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
dxAce wrote:
Telamon wrote: In article , John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: Myself, I've never liked the light emitted by a fluorescent bulb. Give me good old incandescents any day. dxAce Michigan USA I'm with Ace and Telamon on this. i still think this is a bunch of crap. if you read the story or watched the video, you see what can happen. i may be 9th generation American, but, i still have that fair skin germen look. i love the sun, but i have to be careful, lots of skin cancer in the family. i have no idea who the real experts are on this. and, i will not trust the bulb industry's. if i remember, walmart started the big push on this. and, as with Ace, i got a bunch of the incans stored up. maybe i'll take a look at the led lights. got an LED flashlight, and it works real good. Drifter... |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:14:41 UTC, Roland Latour
wrote: Richard Feynmann was the only person to see the first atomic bomb blast without using goggles. He did it by sitting in a pickup, looking thru the windscreen, because he knew ordinary glass doesn't conduct UV. Source: "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynmann!", pgs.116-117. That's also why you can't get a suntan if you're in a car with the windows rolled up. My wife gets sunburned from sunlight coming through the side glass on her arm. I also get the "farmer tan" if I have my arm on the armrest, with the windows closed and the a/c going, if the sun is streaming in throught the window. What are you talking about? -- "What do you mean there's no movie?" |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
In article , dave
wrote: Telamon wrote: No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. There is no UV damage to increase. You get more UV from a few minutes in the sun than you'd get from a year of sitting near a lamp. Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; so hoarding bulbs is silly. Cheap [!] OLED screw-in bulb replacements can't get here soon enough... ....and "smart cars", dammit! Where's my smart car!! -j [I want to read a book under an OLED while "platooning" during rush hour!] |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
dave wrote: dxAce wrote: Myself, I've never liked the light emitted by a fluorescent bulb. Give me good old incandescents any day. You say "the light" like there's only one kind. I quit using incandescents over 20 years ago, before CFLs. I'd get the LOA under cabinet 15 Watters at Homer's and put them everywhere. Left a lot of them on 24/7. When CFLs started happening I was a kid in a candy shop. 'Cause you're a dumbass retard, just like I figured long ago, boy! |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
dave wrote: Telamon wrote: No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. There is no UV damage to increase. You get more UV from a few minutes in the sun than you'd get from a year of sitting near a lamp. Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; so hoarding bulbs is silly. Rickmers, you're silly. |
(OT) : Dirty Electricity [Production} - Think CFL and Energy-Star !
On Jan 26, 5:10*pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"Wingdingaling6" wrote in message ... On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. Please don't bother people with facts. Over here, we use almost nothing BUT CFL's (use of incandescent lamps would increase our already exhorbitant power bill at least 2x), and nobody exhibits those symptoms. Anyone ever hear of psychosomatic symptomology? - In point of fact, the CFL's that we buy (not necessarily - the ones you might buy at Target) are far closer to - natural sunlight than are incandescents. BAD, That's right just look for the Ones that say "DayLight" and/or "6500K" or 'Full Spectrum'. -aka- 'cool natural light' made-by or brand names :GE, Sylvania, Lights-of-America etc. My favorites CFLs are the Light-of-America Energy Saving Twister 7 Year Bulbs "SunLight" 135W [2000 Lumens] Replacements - Use Only 30W of Energy give more light than a 100W Incandesent Bulb and use less engergy that's a Win+Win :o) ~ RHF -fwiw- Light-of-America Model # 2830 S-L http://www.esplighting.com/2830-s.html http://www.budgetlighting.com/store/...&ppinc=search2 |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Telamon wrote:
In article , dave wrote: Telamon wrote: No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. There is no UV damage to increase. You get more UV from a few minutes in the sun than you'd get from a year of sitting near a lamp. That is not true according to measurements made by the British government. Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; so hoarding bulbs is silly. No they are not. They are making the new florescence bulbs with the old style base. Read page 14, Sparky. http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/...rms_Part-A.pdf |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Bob Dobbs wrote:
Bob Dobbs wrote: dave wrote: Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; so hoarding bulbs is silly. First I've heard of that, all my CFLs use Edison bases. Per someone's posting; I informed myself about the GU-24 interface proposals and now stand corrected. I imagine there will be adapters available for some time to come such that I don't have to scrap my supply of edison base CFLs. I no longer have any incandescent environmental lighting, and the only incandescent sources at all is the display on the Kenwood TS-2000. The lamps in my refrigerator and in my oven are still Medium Screw base incandescents. That and the Festivus lights... |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
"Bob Dobbs" wrote in message news:4980fa76.3113218@chupacabra... Even all the flashlights are all LED nowadays. Not all, but the superior ones are. They now make Luxeon single LED flashlights up to 10 watts (perhaps even higher) that outshine any handheld incandescent flashlight (except perhaps the heavy duty halogen flashlights that will only work for a few minutes on a fully charged battery) with a very good quality white light. I have one such Luxeon flashlight with a 3 watt lamp that is about 1/3 the size of a two "D" cell flashlight that is many times brighter and has a better beam. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
In article ,
dave wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , dave wrote: Telamon wrote: No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. There is no UV damage to increase. You get more UV from a few minutes in the sun than you'd get from a year of sitting near a lamp. That is not true according to measurements made by the British government. Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; so hoarding bulbs is silly. No they are not. They are making the new florescence bulbs with the old style base. Read page 14, Sparky. http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/...-29_Express_Te rms_Part-A.pdf I don't need to read it. The bulbs are in the stores. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "Bob Dobbs" wrote in message news:4980fa76.3113218@chupacabra... Even all the flashlights are all LED nowadays. Not all, but the superior ones are. They now make Luxeon single LED flashlights up to 10 watts (perhaps even higher) that outshine any handheld incandescent flashlight (except perhaps the heavy duty halogen flashlights that will only work for a few minutes on a fully charged battery) with a very good quality white light. I have one such Luxeon flashlight with a 3 watt lamp that is about 1/3 the size of a two "D" cell flashlight that is many times brighter and has a better beam. P.S. I'm not sure how they measure the wattage. I think it may be similar to the way CFL's are co-rated (i.e. the wattage listed is the incandescent equivalent). Otherwise, the small batteries used would last only a very few minutes at best. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Brenda Ann wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "Bob Dobbs" wrote in message news:4980fa76.3113218@chupacabra... Even all the flashlights are all LED nowadays. Not all, but the superior ones are. They now make Luxeon single LED flashlights up to 10 watts (perhaps even higher) that outshine any handheld incandescent flashlight (except perhaps the heavy duty halogen flashlights that will only work for a few minutes on a fully charged battery) with a very good quality white light. I have one such Luxeon flashlight with a 3 watt lamp that is about 1/3 the size of a two "D" cell flashlight that is many times brighter and has a better beam. P.S. I'm not sure how they measure the wattage. I think it may be similar to the way CFL's are co-rated (i.e. the wattage listed is the incandescent equivalent). Otherwise, the small batteries used would last only a very few minutes at best. Consider that a single AA battery has about a 2 watt-hour capacity. A D cell is much more. See: http://www.zbattery.com/zbattery/batteryinfo.html Battery life should be much better than your expectation. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
"joe" wrote in message ... Brenda Ann wrote: "Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "Bob Dobbs" wrote in message news:4980fa76.3113218@chupacabra... Even all the flashlights are all LED nowadays. Not all, but the superior ones are. They now make Luxeon single LED flashlights up to 10 watts (perhaps even higher) that outshine any handheld incandescent flashlight (except perhaps the heavy duty halogen flashlights that will only work for a few minutes on a fully charged battery) with a very good quality white light. I have one such Luxeon flashlight with a 3 watt lamp that is about 1/3 the size of a two "D" cell flashlight that is many times brighter and has a better beam. P.S. I'm not sure how they measure the wattage. I think it may be similar to the way CFL's are co-rated (i.e. the wattage listed is the incandescent equivalent). Otherwise, the small batteries used would last only a very few minutes at best. Consider that a single AA battery has about a 2 watt-hour capacity. A D cell is much more. See: http://www.zbattery.com/zbattery/batteryinfo.html Battery life should be much better than your expectation. 2 Wh sounds awfully optomistic for a AA. These flashlights use a couple of 1000mAh li-ion batteries in series. To extend the life of the lamp, and the useful battery life, they also use regulator circuits within the flashlight. These can't help but use up some battery power. 1A x 6V = 6W at 1000mAh = 6W for 1 hour. For the 3W flashlight, assuming zero power wasted as heat (which isn't true) would mean 2 hours of use. for the 10W light (uses the same batteries), it would be about 40 minutes. Obviously, these flashlights can be used for more than these short periods of time. |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Telamon wrote:
In article , John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , Wingdingaling6 wrote: On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. And just how much UV do you think is actually escaping from the bulb? You'd get way more UV from being outside on a clear day than from being close to a CFL. If they can make CFLs to be used in a photographic lab you know the UV light actually being emitted has to be extremely low. The mercury plasma in the bulb emits only UV light. The phosphors on the inside of the bulb emit visible light when struck by the UV light waves. This is why florescent lights are biased biased toward the blue. The light falls off as an inverse square of the distance so the smaller bulbs closer to you give you UV light at a higher rate. Yep, I know those particular factoids. The thing is that the phosphors are designed to absorb the UV light and re-radiate it in the visible range. Unless there is a problem with a section of the bulb not having sufficient phosphor coating, the UV light getting through should be very low. JB |
"CFL"? Dirty electric?
Brenda Ann wrote:
"joe" wrote in message ... Brenda Ann wrote: "Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "Bob Dobbs" wrote in message news:4980fa76.3113218@chupacabra... Even all the flashlights are all LED nowadays. Not all, but the superior ones are. They now make Luxeon single LED flashlights up to 10 watts (perhaps even higher) that outshine any handheld incandescent flashlight (except perhaps the heavy duty halogen flashlights that will only work for a few minutes on a fully charged battery) with a very good quality white light. I have one such Luxeon flashlight with a 3 watt lamp that is about 1/3 the size of a two "D" cell flashlight that is many times brighter and has a better beam. P.S. I'm not sure how they measure the wattage. I think it may be similar to the way CFL's are co-rated (i.e. the wattage listed is the incandescent equivalent). Otherwise, the small batteries used would last only a very few minutes at best. Consider that a single AA battery has about a 2 watt-hour capacity. A D cell is much more. See: http://www.zbattery.com/zbattery/batteryinfo.html Battery life should be much better than your expectation. 2 Wh sounds awfully optomistic for a AA. These flashlights use a couple of 1000mAh li-ion batteries in series. To extend the life of the lamp, and the useful battery life, they also use regulator circuits within the flashlight. These can't help but use up some battery power. 1A x 6V = 6W at 1000mAh = 6W for 1 hour. For the 3W flashlight, assuming zero power wasted as heat (which isn't true) would mean 2 hours of use. for the 10W light (uses the same batteries), it would be about 40 minutes. Obviously, these flashlights can be used for more than these short periods of time. You've gone from "a very few minutes at best" to "2 hours of use". Which is it? A 2 watt PR3 lamp produces about the same light as a 1 watt Luxeon LED. ( About 20 lumens.) CR3 Lithium batteries are more like 1300-1500 mAh capacity. .. |
(OT) : CFL's Have More Positive Pluses Then Bad
On Jan 28, 8:00*pm, John Barnard wrote:
Telamon wrote: In article , *John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , *Wingdingaling6 wrote: On Jan 26, 11:21 am, Drifter wrote: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.topStory... http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/glo...01.04.segment0... And you thought it only put crap in your radio. turns out these un-researched lights can kill you. 16X9 is a 20X20 north of us. you might want to read the story and watch the videos. and, keep your kids away from them. once again, Big Gov goes with Big Biz, and screw the people. Drifter... CFL's are nothing more than screw-in fluroescent lamps loke the types we've had since the 1930's. Remember that fluroescent tube lighting over your head in grade school and at Woolworths store when you were a kid? It's exactly the same thing in a CFL except the tube is a curly- cue shape instead of a long tube. CFL's ane not dangerous same technology we've had since the late 1930's. No they are not the same. The old bulbs operated at 60 Hz and the new smaller bulbs operate in the kilohertz range. The other problem is these smaller bulbs are used closer to people increasing the UV damage. And just how much UV do you think is actually escaping from the bulb? You'd get way more UV from being outside on a clear day than from being close to a CFL. If they can make CFLs to be used in a photographic lab you know the UV light actually being emitted has to be extremely low. The mercury plasma in the bulb emits only UV light. The phosphors on the inside of the bulb emit visible light when struck by the UV light waves.. This is why florescent lights are biased biased toward the blue. The light falls off as an inverse square of the distance so the smaller bulbs closer to you give you UV light at a higher rate. - Yep, I know those particular factoids. - The thing is that the phosphors are designed - to absorb the UV light and re-radiate it in the - visible range. Unless there is a problem with - a section of the bulb not having sufficient - phosphor coating, the UV light getting through - should be very low. - - JB CFL's Have More Positive Pluses Then Bad |
(OT) : D'Oh ! - Why Won't The CFL Light Bulb Work In My Oven . . .
On Jan 28, 3:45*pm, dave wrote:
Bob Dobbs wrote: Bob Dobbs wrote: dave wrote: Edison base light fixtures are getting phased out; *so hoarding bulbs is silly. First I've heard of that, all my CFLs use Edison bases. Per someone's posting; I informed myself about the GU-24 interface proposals and now stand corrected. I imagine there will be adapters available for some time to come such that I don't have to scrap my supply of edison base CFLs. I no longer have any incandescent environmental lighting, and the only incandescent sources at all is the display on the Kenwood TS-2000. - The lamps in my refrigerator and in my oven - are still Medium Screw base incandescents. -*That and the Festivus lights... -was- "CFL"? Dirty electric? |
(OT) : LEDs Are The Future Of Lighting -was- "CFL"? Dirty electric?
On Jan 28, 5:11*pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"Bob Dobbs" wrote in message news:4980fa76.3113218@chupacabra... Even all the flashlights are all LED nowadays. Not all, but the superior ones are. They now make Luxeon single LED flashlights up to 10 watts (perhaps even higher) that outshine any handheld incandescent flashlight (except perhaps the heavy duty halogen flashlights that will only work for a few minutes on a fully charged battery) with a very good quality white light. I have one such Luxeon flashlight with a 3 watt lamp that is about 1/3 the size of a two "D" cell flashlight that is many times brighter and has a better beam. and can Shine Brightly for Hours and not just Minutes {Less than an Hour} LEDs are the Future of Lighting ~ RHF |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com