In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 09:12:13 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

They don't "dim", they don't like living "base up" in an enclosed can
and they don't work well in load powered switching applications like 2
wire motion detectors or timers.
The ironic thing is these are the things energy aware customers are
likely to have.

Dimmable CFL's dim!

I agree you can find a few CFLs that dim. I had to go 3 pages down in
the CFL list at Lowes to find the first one.

http://tinyurl.com/cr58szt

They cost 7 times what a regular CFL costs, last 80% as long and burn
7% more power for the same output. (actually worse than that dimmed)
You also do not get the color shift that most people want when you dim
them.
The reviews give a regular CFL 5 stars, the dimmable gets 3
In my experience they don't even last as long as an incandescent if
you keep them dim most of the time.

Please give cite to those numbers.

On 5/1/13 2:47 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 01 May 2013 14:09:52 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 5/1/13 1:49 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:41:21 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 5/1/13 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 01 May 2013 06:10:24 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


The study demonstrated that conservatives and liberals were equally
likely to buy either bulb, but conservatives were less likely to buy the
energy savings lightbulb if you told them it would help the environment.
*That* is the point here.

I understand that and I explained it. If you just say it helps the
environment without actually showing it saves money, people assume it
is more expensive.
There are also questions about just how much it "saves the
environment" when you start talking about mercury and the extra
manufacturing pollution. Fortunately for the US, that all happens in
China. (unless you were a light bulb factory worker here).
You still have the disposal problem and the issues with a broken bulb
in the home.
Maybe liberals simply blow all of that off because they are "saving
the planet". It says so right on the non-biodegradable bubble pack.


I think you are again overanalyzing. I posit that the reason the
conservatives didn't buy the energy saving bulbs is because they don't
give a damn about the environment.

... But you said they would buy the more expensive bulb if the thrust
of the puffing was that they saved money.
Price is still king.
For purposes of the survey, the bulbs were priced the same. Price was
not a factor, only the pro-environment factor.

I would like to see the actual study, Do you have a link to the
source data but I will agree some people are skeptical of "green"
products, simply because of their experiences with them.


I think the original article had a reference to the source material.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 13:26:54 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 01 May 2013 07:49:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

You can get CFLs in a number of different colors from cool white to a
warmer almost red/yellow. I use them where they will work but a lot of
my interior lighting is on occupancy sensors and they don't like CFLs.
The "off state" load is not enough to power the occupancy sensor
properly and you end up with a flickering light that burns out
quickly.
They had to change the National Electric Code on the last code cycle
to force people to bring a neutral to every switch so you could use a
3 wire switching device. That is another cost for this "saving".


That code change has nothing to do with CFL's. It's to cater to
lighting control freaks who think using a simple switch is too arduous.

It has everything to do with CFLs and LEDs. They do not support line
powered switching devices. It is to allow smart switching devices so
lights turn off when you leave a room. I believe they are mandated in
the newer energy codes.

Know anybody like that?

Me, I have occupancy detectors all over my house.

So basically it's your lighting desires which
might add costs to those who were happy just flipping a switch.

and the energy code

And NEC was no doubt lobbied for the code change by the special
interests who will financially benefit from the code. NEC should stay
out of design, especially for this type of frill.

This actually came from the IAEI (electrical inspectors) who were
concerned that installers were using the EGC (safety ground)
That was actually allowed if the standby current was 500 ua.

Further, nobody is being "forced" to use the neutral unless they're
having inspected switch work done, or they're putting in fancy lighting
control devices that need it. It doesn't apply to existing switches.

It applies to any circuit extension and all new construction.

And some states have their own exceptions. NC excepts most residential.

There are a lot of states that cave in to builders and write code
exceptions.

Lighting control outside of commercial building timing and entertainment
venues is about the most prissy and self-indulgent crap I can think
of...wait...isn't there a toilet that costs about 5 grand and wipes your
ass? Maybe that wins.

Maybe you should talk to the people who write the energy codes.

Which addition of the code is this in and what section? Does it specify
that the addendum was because of CFL's?

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 14:29:13 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 09:12:13 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

They don't "dim", they don't like living "base up" in an enclosed can
and they don't work well in load powered switching applications like 2
wire motion detectors or timers.
The ironic thing is these are the things energy aware customers are
likely to have.

Dimmable CFL's dim!

I agree you can find a few CFLs that dim. I had to go 3 pages down in
the CFL list at Lowes to find the first one.

http://tinyurl.com/cr58szt

They cost 7 times what a regular CFL costs, last 80% as long and burn
7% more power for the same output. (actually worse than that dimmed)
You also do not get the color shift that most people want when you dim
them.
The reviews give a regular CFL 5 stars, the dimmable gets 3
In my experience they don't even last as long as an incandescent if
you keep them dim most of the time.

Please give cite to those numbers.

Did you look at the link?

The dimmable is 14w v 13w for a 60w equivalent.
The dimmable is 8000 hours the regular 10,000 hours MBTF
The consumer rating is what it is.

I'm sorry, where does that say that the cost is "7 times what a regular
CVL costs"? And while the dimmable doesn't last as long, 4/5ths of the
life of a standard CFL isn't bad, and better than an incandescent by a
LONG shot. You've been hoodwinked by FOX, like the Mercury in them,
which is 100 to 600 times less than a fever thermometer.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 13:26:54 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 01 May 2013 07:49:07 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

You can get CFLs in a number of different colors from cool white to a
warmer almost red/yellow. I use them where they will work but a lot of
my interior lighting is on occupancy sensors and they don't like CFLs.
The "off state" load is not enough to power the occupancy sensor
properly and you end up with a flickering light that burns out
quickly.
They had to change the National Electric Code on the last code cycle
to force people to bring a neutral to every switch so you could use a
3 wire switching device. That is another cost for this "saving".


That code change has nothing to do with CFL's. It's to cater to
lighting control freaks who think using a simple switch is too arduous.

It has everything to do with CFLs and LEDs. They do not support line
powered switching devices. It is to allow smart switching devices so
lights turn off when you leave a room. I believe they are mandated in
the newer energy codes.


Right. It's about lighting controls, not CFL's per se.
I run 95% CFL's on 2-wire. No problems, no extra cost.
And I'm not "forced" to do anything differently.
That's you political spinning.

Know anybody like that?

Me, I have occupancy detectors all over my house.


So you need 3-wire. I don't. Because you have lighting controls.
Can't help you with that. Your choice.

So basically it's your lighting desires which
might add costs to those who were happy just flipping a switch.

and the energy code


Oh, really? What energy code mandates lighting controls on residences?
3-wire on all switches is pure NEC.

And NEC was no doubt lobbied for the code change by the special
interests who will financially benefit from the code. NEC should stay
out of design, especially for this type of frill.

This actually came from the IAEI (electrical inspectors) who were
concerned that installers were using the EGC (safety ground)
That was actually allowed if the standby current was 500 ua.


Baloney. A code for lighting controls requiring 3-wire would fix that.
No need to make every switch 3-wire.


Further, nobody is being "forced" to use the neutral unless they're
having inspected switch work done, or they're putting in fancy lighting
control devices that need it. It doesn't apply to existing switches.

It applies to any circuit extension and all new construction.


Right. Padding the accounts of special interests, as I already said.

And some states have their own exceptions. NC excepts most residential.

There are a lot of states that cave in to builders and write code
exceptions.


Good for them in this case. Electricians generally think it's a stupid
code from what I've read. Steps over the "design" line.

Lighting control outside of commercial building timing and entertainment
venues is about the most prissy and self-indulgent crap I can think
of...wait...isn't there a toilet that costs about 5 grand and wipes your
ass? Maybe that wins.

Maybe you should talk to the people who write the energy codes.

Nothing to do with the energy code. Just NEC.
Besides, it doesn't affect me. And since I'll never buy new
construction or use lighting controls, it never will.

In article , says...

On Wed, 01 May 2013 06:10:24 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


The study demonstrated that conservatives and liberals were equally
likely to buy either bulb, but conservatives were less likely to buy the
energy savings lightbulb if you told them it would help the environment.
*That* is the point here.

I understand that and I explained it. If you just say it helps the
environment without actually showing it saves money, people assume it
is more expensive.
There are also questions about just how much it "saves the
environment" when you start talking about mercury and the extra
manufacturing pollution. Fortunately for the US, that all happens in
China. (unless you were a light bulb factory worker here).
You still have the disposal problem and the issues with a broken bulb
in the home.
Maybe liberals simply blow all of that off because they are "saving
the planet". It says so right on the non-biodegradable bubble pack.

You can't just throw them in the trash. They are hazardous waste.

http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/a...ial_detail.asp
?categoryID=36

On Wed, 01 May 2013 20:05:45 -0400, wrote:

This came about because the 2 wire devices do not work with LEDs and
CFLs. They work OK with incandescents.

===

For us laymen, can you explain why that is?

On 5/1/2013 9:05 AM, True North wrote:
We bought a pkg of 4 small chandelier type LED bulbs a couple months ago at Costco.
The wife likes running numerous floor type lamps and I balked at the energy use of the standard bulbs.
I believe they are about 4 watts but throw the light of a 60.
Anyway, now we're both happy...she gets her light and I save on our expensive electricity.

Lowes had them on sale last year for $10. I bought about 40 of them. my
savings for a year were more than $300 in Elec. cost.

On Wed, 01 May 2013 21:35:15 -0400, wrote:

This came about because the 2 wire devices do not work with LEDs and
CFLs. They work OK with incandescents.

===

For us laymen, can you explain why that is?

The switcher power supply in a CFL will store the minuscule current
the 2 wire line powered devices use and when the filter capacitor
reaches the point that the switcher generates a usable amount of
power, it flashes. This becomes a relaxation oscillator.
I have tried CFLs in a couple of my occupancy sensor locations and
they all flash. You can usually get by this by putting a small
incandescent in parallel with the CFL.
I have a 15' string of LED rope light on a SSR (triac) controlled
circuit and it never really turns off. You always see a dim glow
coming from it.
You sort of defeat the purpose of using a 13w CFL or LED if you have
to put a 15w light bulb in there to turn the switch off.

===

Good explanation, thanks. It seems intuitive to me that there must
be some way to fix that at the circuit design level but I'm just
guessing.

On 5/1/2013 8:29 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Wed, 01 May 2013 20:05:45 -0400, wrote:

This came about because the 2 wire devices do not work with LEDs and
CFLs. They work OK with incandescents.

===

For us laymen, can you explain why that is?


I'd like to know too. I have almost 40 LEDs working with 2 wires. There
are of course three wires in the fixture but one of them is ground and
not part of the circuit.