ST Alpha - "have they? CFLs are a terrible substitute, given their manufacturing cost and toxic nature.." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "well, your point #2, at least, is demonstrably false." by znufrii

have they? CFLs are a terrible substitute, given their manufacturing cost and toxic nature..

Posted by colinski (aka colinski) Jul 10 '09, 13:22

LED lights will be the future and have been in the works for years, long before any mandates were made. it just so happens that they're getting to a commercially viable point now... why keep pushing CFLs when you can have 100,000 hour plus lights.

if you're refering to the 60 watt bulbs that only use 57 or whatever, that's just rediculous. every little bit counts, but 3 watts isn't going to do anything.

besides, we're talking about energy forms here.. we're supposed to have some unknown energy source be out future... and at the same time, don't forget that electric vehicles are still running on coal...

Responses:

from an efficiency standpoint, assuming you can get the transmission costs down, it's far better to burn coal in a plant to make electricity to run - Reagen Jul 10, 13:27 3
- i'm only bringing up the toxic due to the EPAs wild procedures for breakage of one.. - colinski Jul 10, 13:31 2
  - certainly I didn't make the change to CFLs when they were $20 a bulb. But they're well past the point of economic benefit now. -- nm - Reagen Jul 10, 13:36
  - Personally, I am not a huge fan of CFLs, except for lights that are on 24/7 (or nearly so). However, I am excited about LED lights. -- nm - Beryllium Jul 10, 13:32
and how about cars? - colinski Jul 10, 13:26 5
- The problem is that companies have not been paying their true costs for decades. Centuries, even. Pollution has been free, and that has costs - Reagen Jul 10, 13:32 4
  - that's not true at all.. have you seen the regulations on the power industry, on other industries? - colinski Jul 10, 13:46 3
    - CO2 *is* pollution. -- nm - Reagen Jul 10, 13:49 2
      - Uh... -- nm - Plants Jul 10, 13:51 1
        
        Face it, Plants McGee - you're a minority now. You want the CO2? You can't *HANDLE* the CO2! -- nm - Beryllium Jul 10, 13:52
yes. -- (link) - znufrii Jul 10, 13:25 4
- and they cost $5... so what? it's not an innovation until it can replace the old at the same cost.. - colinski Jul 10, 13:30 3
  - calculate a return on investment from the reduced electrical usage, then get back to me. -- nm - Beryllium Jul 10, 13:31 1
    - (and reduced replacement cost due to longer lifespan) -- nm - znufrii Jul 10, 13:33
  - Life-span costs. You have zero forward vision. -- nm - Reagen Jul 10, 13:30

Post a message top

have they? CFLs are a terrible substitute, given their manufacturing cost and toxic nature..

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.