Forget About Gas Prices. How 'Bout - Lightbulbs?

Trapsp33d wrote: nobody put a gun to their and made them minors! I mean really would you have thought back then that was bad for you? I think I would have! coming home blowing black stuff out would have been a red flag for me.

For some, it was the only way to make ends meet. With rising prices for food and housing, people moved to mining towns, which for a while, provided good jobs with a good wage. It wasn't until mining companies started getting bought up by big companies that things started getting bad.

Trapsp33d wrote: it sure would be nice to replace every coal operation with manufacturing jobs but... how will that "manufacturing job" power it's lights? when their is no coal?

Is there any reason it needs to be coal? Why can't it be nuclear? If the population realized that having a coal power plant next door is just as bad as a nuke plant, I don't think we'd have as much resistance to nukes as we have now.

Trapsp33d wrote: "artificially low price for energy"? that sounds totally psycho man? so what is the real price? How many millions of dollars do we have to throw at the "Carbon pollution problem" before you realize it's fake?

Coal subsidies. Coal is only cheap because there are government subsidies for coal. Those subsides don't exist for other high-density means of power generation.

Trapsp33d wrote: "someone thought it would be a great idea to restrict our access to incans" the person who had that thought rush into their brain is and idiot! and some sort of light bulb Nazi!

And Godwin's Law comes into play...

The only other way to increase high efficiency light bulb adoption rate would have been to get rid of all energy subsidies and let the energy price increase. People would end up without power because it's too expensive. Keep the lights on, or buy food?

Trapsp33d wrote: Maybe I don't care how many watt's my lightbulb wastes in to heat! Maybe all I care about is a cheap damn light bulb! is that wrong ? it doesn't give someone the right to outlaw what I'm buying because I don't care!

Would you rather pay a lot now and a little later, or a little now and a lot later? I can deal with not having to pay out $300 a month to my electric company. Like I said earlier in this thread, I haven't had a single CFL die that didn't die due to mishandling. I've had countless incans die for no reason at all. My ceiling fans used to eat an incandescent bulb a week, I've had the same 4 CFLs in the same fan for the better part of 3 years.

Trapsp33d wrote: What next!? Oh I know lets outlaw cheeseburgers with more than 5 calories! then your local burger joint would have to"keep up with competitors" who are better equipped to make the transition.... what..... that is a terrible idea!

Bad analogy. How many small companies made incan light bulbs? How many of them had to "keep up with competitors"?

I'm not a fan of legislation to mandate certain products. In this case, I feel they did it to keep energy costs down and help delay an energy shortage.

I'm going to close this post with a bit of techie info to think about. When was the last time you purchased a high-end hot-wire flashlight? There's a reason incans aren't used in good flashlights anymore. They burn too much energy for the light they produce. There are single LEDs out there that can put out amazing amounts of light. Take this example:

http://www.dealextreme.com/p/sst-90-2300lm-led-emitter-8000k-white-light-bulb-4-2v-47961

2,300 lumens from a single emitter, using 30 watts of power. According to Wikipedia, that would be around a 135 watt incan bulb. While that particular emitter is still pretty expensive, you can get good emitters for a good deal less money that are closer to a 60 watt bulb in output.

Trapsp33d wrote: yeah like mountain top removal what's your problem you live on one? http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/rand-paul-mountain-top-removal-mining-enhances-the-land.php now that doesn't make it sound so bad

Have you actually been to Eastern KY or other places where mountain top removal happens? Go there. look around and talk to people there and tell me it isn't that bad. Now I am not so veggie eating hippie but the mountain top removal is one issue I feel really strongly about it. Also I should point out Rand Paul got massive amounts of campaign funding from the coal industry.

In reply to Trapsp33d:

Calling people Nazis in no way helps to prove your position.

I'm smelling troll in here.

Derick Freese wrote: I'm smelling troll in here.

What do trolls smell like? I've got this strange odor coming from the back of my shop, but it's dark and I can't go investigate it cause all I've got are these crappy LED bulbs that only come in sizes appropriate for a night light!

Well, are you using good ones, or a bunch of little kiddy lights?

Derick Freese wrote: I'm smelling troll in here.

Seriously.

LED bulbs are the most expensive type. Go with CFLs, they cost a couple bucks. Problem solved.

nderwater wrote: Small handfuls? How can you tell with the black bars in the way?

Had to point out that the boxes were black. Racist.

So, let me get this straight. You're calling me a "spineless coward" and a "nazi", but can't come up with a real argument? You're reposting comments that were collapsed due to being reported as abrasive, annoying, and just plain unneeded. Go back to Tumblr with the rest of the really weak trolls.

Please lock this thread.

I do want to make one more quick point. I'm on here using my actual name. You're hiding behind some uber-1337 hax0r username, and you're calling me a coward. At least I have the testicular fortitude to put my own ass out there to back up what I say on here.

I looked at LCD bulbs at Costco today. They don't give an equivalent rating compared to incandescent like CFLs do. They give you brightness units a unit that doesn't exist in the CFL or incandescent world.

I do like the light quality of LCDs, it's a clean clear light that's easy to read by. I hate yellow lights.

The rating you were given on the LED bulbs was likely lumens. A basic rule of thumb would be 500 lumens for a 40 watt incan, 800 lumens for a 60 watt incan. Those are pretty basic, and don't take a lot into account. It's certainly a "close enough" figure to start with.

Zomby woof wrote: I tested a number of CFL's when they first became popular. All of them used approximately double what they were rated as. A 13 W used about 25, which was still a lot better than it's incandescent equivalent. I'm living off a generator in my shop since the storm we had a few weeks ago. It's funny how accustomed you get to not having all the power you want at your fingertips.

I tested the bulbs in my house with my kill-a-watt, and they all came in about where rated.

Joey

No the number I saw didn't directly correspond to lumens. I found a brand that in one size it gave the light output in lumens and it didn't match the brightness unit number.

93EXCivic wrote: Please lock this thread.

No! Let him type. We're all getting a good idea what he's all about.

And even though I don't agree with him, I still hate CFLs. I hate them a lot.

joey48442 wrote: I tested the bulbs in my house with my kill-a-watt, and they all came in about where rated. Joey

Shoot, I have one of those. I use it to figure out how big a fuse to put in tube amps. If I get some time I'll test a few.

Can you remember the brand of bulbs at Costco? If I recall correctly, Costco carries Feit light bulbs. When I'm at a computer, I'll see what they're rating them with. It REALLY irks me when companies use non-standard units for comparison ratings. Reminds me of "peak musical power output" and computer speakers being rated at several hundred watts PMPO when the drivers were rated at 2 watts max, 1 watt RMS.

No problems with you guys hating on CFLs. I don't horribly care for them. As I stated before, LEDs are far better, but may not be fully ready for prime time. They're spendy, and aren't really being utilized correctly.

Trapsp33d wrote: you are running from my verbal(maybe written is a better word) challenges and trying to divert the argument to your testicles(joke), good job your a coward!

I'm guessing you didn't make straight A's in grammar class

Derick Freese wrote: Can you remember the brand of bulbs at Costco? If I recall correctly, Costco carries Feit light bulbs. When I'm at a computer, I'll see what they're rating them with. It REALLY irks me when companies use non-standard units for comparison ratings. Reminds me of "peak musical power output" and computer speakers being rated at several hundred watts PMPO when the drivers were rated at 2 watts max, 1 watt RMS. No problems with you guys hating on CFLs. I don't horribly care for them. As I stated before, LEDs are far better, but may not be fully ready for prime time. They're spendy, and aren't really being utilized correctly.

I don't remember the brand, but I think I'm going back today so I'll check.

The Feit brand CFL I've found to be much better than the name brands. The name brands take a while to warm up and put out full light whereas the Feit comes on at close to full output and also will start in colder weather. It doesn't hurt that they are cheaper too.

93EXCivic, I think this troll is more fun to toy with. He seems to be raging pretty hard over us not getting pissed off. There's still very valid on topic conversation going on in this thread.

CarGuy123, was the rating perhaps luminosity? I'm just trying to figure out what they're using.

Now, on to the troll.

Trapsp33d wrote: Trapsp33d Rained down a cluster bomb of knowledge <blockquote Derick Freese "had the testicular fortitude" to write: The only other way to increase high efficiency light bulb adoption rate would have been to get rid of all energy subsidies and let the energy price increase. People would end up without power because it's too expensive. Keep the lights on, or buy food?

WHO CARES if we sell more energy efficient bulbs!? you would rather choose between Electricity or food, then just let people sell regular bulbs?

I'm sorry but there you go sounding like a "energy efficiency" Nazi. you make it a higher priority than Food or electricity for pete's sake! it's like the Ultimate goal for you isn't it?

It's not about selling more bulbs, it's about using less energy. Would you rather be able to turn your lights on when you wanted, or only when the local factory shut down for the night because there's not enough electricity to go around?

Would you rather be able to afford your electricity with the now inexpensive bulbs. As a side effect of using less energy (and the same applies to the fuels we burn in our vehicles), it's cheaper. When you have fixed power production in an area, the price goes up to keep people from using as much. This prices the poor out of the market, only allowing rich people to have access to "luxuries" such as A/C in Arizona and refrigeration of food. I really DO NOT like grants and subsidies that pay 100% of the power bill for people that can't afford it, because it's often heavily abused.

Trapsp33d wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coward Cowardice is the perceived failure to demonstrate sufficient robustness and courage in the face of a challenge.

Good to see you can copypasta. At least you're looking of the definition to words now.

Trapsp33d wrote: you are running from my verbal(maybe written is a better word) challenges and trying to divert the argument to your testicles(joke), good job your a coward!

I haven't run from a single thing yet, but I have left a lot of immaturity at the door when I've posted in this thread.

Trapsp33d wrote: I'm not hiding at all I am also a member of two other forums,not sure if I can/should say which ones. and my name is the same there too! it doesn't have "uber" or "hax0r" in it. it would have been trapspeed but that was taken(it always is). you would have to be challenged in the mind to not be able to spell/read it. you must actually like it because you brought it up in the same paragraph with your testicles and your not putting anything out there! so what it's your real name . that's another "Who cares" moment. it's not like we're standing in an actual public forum and I'm wearing some sort of elaborate costume and you can't tell who I am! it takes more testicular fortitude to start my Miata than it does to put your real name on a forum

Here's an example of baiting. For the uninitiated, this is the type of crap trolls post to really get under your skin. I was stating that I use my real name here so that I'm not hiding behind a username. I'll say the same exact thing to you in person that I'd say here. I doubt you have the grapes to have this same conversation in person.

Trapsp33d wrote: When did your testicular fortitude become an actual point?

It became a point because you're hiding behind a name and aren't a veteran member. You're evoking Godwin's law and calling me a coward when I'm countering everything you say with actual logic. You're using some sort of Philip J. Fry logic. Where's your all Rush mix tape now?

ok you came in to the thread just to defend Nazi's! every single post except the one I quoted was just contradictory to my statements! and added nothing but hate! sorry I hurt your feelings! was your dad a Nazi?

Trapsp33d wrote: when did we start treating Nazi's like their Freddy Kruger!?

Since you have been belittling my IQ here, let's point out a few faults here.

1. No capital letter to start the sentence
2. pluralized with an apostrophe
3. used the wrong form of they're/their/there

Three mistakes in 10 words. That's a 30% failure rate using that sample. Perhaps you should attempt to fail less in the future?

You started a sentence with the ampersand symbol!