On 1/20/2014 3:24 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 4:15 PM, KC wrote:
Sure, but I don't want my lamps to look like SteamPunk... Just want
to put lamps up, that lamp....


What is steampunk

picture of steampunk type items.

http://tinyurl.com/ksqncbk

http://tinyurl.com/n2lqr9x

http://tinyurl.com/ktxb6vb

Mikek

On 1/20/2014 3:46 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/20/14, 4:40 PM, amdx wrote:
On 1/20/2014 3:18 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/20/14, 4:14 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 3:40 PM, amdx wrote:
On 1/20/2014 2:17 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 1:09 PM, amdx wrote:

I think your numbers are slightly exaggerated, but not a lot.
Payback
should certainly be less than one your for most people.

I don't know how you arrived at this number but I'm in agreement with
your conclusion

Math.


Where did I lose you.

I used the cost of a kWh as 13 cents.
I assumed the new bulbs use about 10% as much energy as the old style.
If you saved $50, you must have spend $55 before and $5 now.
Mikek

Awesome.


All this higher math...I need to find my college abacus.

You're not that old, you probably had a TI-30.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-30 Note the Red LEDs.
Mikek


I believe the HP-30 and most other scientific calculators appeared after
I had received my M.A. We had a couple of clunky desktop calcs in the
math labs and our trusty K&E sliderules. In those days, you actually had
to know how to do the math, not that I was ever a whiz at math, but I
did ok.

I apologize.

You are that old. :-)

The T1-30 was my first calculator I got for use in my electronics classes.
Mikek

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:31:16 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 1/20/2014 2:57 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2014 11:12:04 AM UTC-5, Hank wrote:

Lots of chaff here today. why bother trying to make something of it?

You could always add mud, and make bricks.


That's the first intelligent thing you've said in months.

I was thinking folks were trying to distract surface to air missiles.

That chaff stuff is pretty useful, huh?

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:35:07 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/20/14, 4:31 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 4:20 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:36:47 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/20/14, 8:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 23:36:15 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 20:01:21 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 1/19/2014 6:05 PM, wrote:
k

He said "incandescent" That is an incandescent bulb. Your trusty old
A19, non halogen.

But as I said, it's not a standard 100 Watt bulb.
It is a 130 Volt bulb, there's an exception for them
at least for now.
Mikek

The point BAO was trying to make was bans work. It sounds like this
"ban" is so full of exceptions that it is meaningless.
I only buy 130v bulbs anyway. My line voltage cruises around 124v and
regular 120v bulbs burn out pretty quickly.

Just for a real world example of meaningless bans. In 1994 they
"banned" large capacity magazines. The government was not willing to
buy back all of the existing ones (that pesky 5th amendment thing) so
there was a gray market for "pre-ban" magazines. (much like the pre
ban light bulbs)
There never seemed to be a lack of pre-ban magazines for sale for the
next decade until the law expired and they weren't even that
expensive. I believe they were coming in by the truck load.

Like this?

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/c...aspx?a=1150085




There must be a way you can find and attach a 9 mm model of one of those
to your new SIG, eh? Might be difficult fitting the assembly in your
pocket, though. Maybe not.

Nah, 15 rounds is plenty.

He's got some crazy ideas about souping up his guns. Don't listen to a
word he says.


I do? What might they be?

Well, you did bring up the idea of attaching a hundred round magazine to a pistol.

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:24:55 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 1/20/2014 4:15 PM, KC wrote:
Sure, but I don't want my lamps to look like SteamPunk... Just want
to put lamps up, that lamp....
What is steampunk

I had to look it up too, a couple months back. Google Images has some cute pics:

http://tinyurl.com/kgtlp7m

On 1/20/2014 4:35 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/20/14, 4:31 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 4:20 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:36:47 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/20/14, 8:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 23:36:15 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 20:01:21 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 1/19/2014 6:05 PM, wrote:
k

He said "incandescent" That is an incandescent bulb. Your trusty
old
A19, non halogen.

But as I said, it's not a standard 100 Watt bulb.
It is a 130 Volt bulb, there's an exception for them
at least for now.
Mikek

The point BAO was trying to make was bans work. It sounds like this
"ban" is so full of exceptions that it is meaningless.
I only buy 130v bulbs anyway. My line voltage cruises around 124v and
regular 120v bulbs burn out pretty quickly.

Just for a real world example of meaningless bans. In 1994 they
"banned" large capacity magazines. The government was not willing to
buy back all of the existing ones (that pesky 5th amendment thing) so
there was a gray market for "pre-ban" magazines. (much like the pre
ban light bulbs)
There never seemed to be a lack of pre-ban magazines for sale for the
next decade until the law expired and they weren't even that
expensive. I believe they were coming in by the truck load.

Like this?

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/c...aspx?a=1150085





There must be a way you can find and attach a 9 mm model of one of
those
to your new SIG, eh? Might be difficult fitting the assembly in your
pocket, though. Maybe not.

Nah, 15 rounds is plenty.

He's got some crazy ideas about souping up his guns. Don't listen to a
word he says.


I do? What might they be?
Tell us about the mods that were done to your 9 mm CZ. Let a jury of
your peers decide.

On 1/20/2014 4:40 PM, amdx wrote:
On 1/20/2014 3:18 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/20/14, 4:14 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 3:40 PM, amdx wrote:
On 1/20/2014 2:17 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 1:09 PM, amdx wrote:

I think your numbers are slightly exaggerated, but not a lot.
Payback
should certainly be less than one your for most people.

I don't know how you arrived at this number but I'm in agreement with
your conclusion

Math.

Where did I lose you.

I used the cost of a kWh as 13 cents.
I assumed the new bulbs use about 10% as much energy as the old style.
If you saved $50, you must have spend $55 before and $5 now.
Mikek

Awesome.


All this higher math...I need to find my college abacus.

You're not that old, you probably had a TI-30.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-30 Note the Red LEDs.
Mikek
Nah. He's older than that. He had one of those K&E slide rules.

On 1/20/2014 3:53 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/20/14, 3:41 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:02:11 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 1/20/2014 12:43 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:40:03 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 1/20/2014 11:22 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:25:35 -0500, Hank wrote:

I'm saving about $50 a month on my electric bill without changing
any
thing except light bulbs

Saving $50 a month?
Bull**** ... unless your house is lit like a used car lot all the
time.
That is 333 KWH per month (at 15c a KWH)
Assuming you turn the lights off when you go to bed that is about
2000
watts of light you save every HOUR (based on 5,5 hours between
sundown
and bed time)

You really had 2500 watts of light on all evening? (your LEDs and
CFLs
still draw something around 20%)

I think you have fallen for the hype.


I have 10 lamps that burn dusk to dawn. We use some lighting during
the
daytime also.

I have spreadsheeted my KWH, Cost per KWK, and total cost. I'm
comfortable with what I stated

10 lights from dusk to dawn? Let me guess, the Stalag 17 look .

If you are burning 11,000 watt hours of light a day we can see your
house from space.
That is as much as my whole house air handler strip heaters use when I
have the heat on for an hour running full blast.

You need to reevaluate your lighting plan.

Are you using a calculator, or are you counting on your fingers?

A calculator.
$50 at 0.15 a KWH is 333.33333333 KWH
Divided by 30 is 11.111111 KWH a day

The only variable is what is your cost for power, more accurately what
is the incremental cost, minus the fixed charges that you pay anyway.
I bet it is less than 15 cents ... unless you are in California.
I pay 13 cents top line to bottom line and using less power would
actually make that more per KWH because the fixed charges stay the
same..



The last time I looked, the rates around here were 8.15 cents to 9.74
cents, so, you're paying about a third more for electric than we are.
Interesting. Must be higher quality electricity.



Isn't Gregg in Florida? My experience with electrical power in Florida
was that it sucked. Constant brown outs and voltage dips.

That's one thing I can say that's good up here in MA. Our electric
service is excellent. I monitor the voltage regularly, especially
during heavy load periods in the summer. Voltage stays smack on 123
volts regardless of load and we have three large AC units plus a 150,000
BTU pool heater running (when required).

On 1/20/2014 4:47 PM, amdx wrote:
On 1/20/2014 3:24 PM, Hank wrote:
On 1/20/2014 4:15 PM, KC wrote:
Sure, but I don't want my lamps to look like SteamPunk... Just want
to put lamps up, that lamp....


What is steampunk

picture of steampunk type items.

http://tinyurl.com/ksqncbk

http://tinyurl.com/n2lqr9x

http://tinyurl.com/ktxb6vb

Mikek






Oh, an early guzzy. Got it.

On 1/20/2014 6:02 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:24:55 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 1/20/2014 4:15 PM, KC wrote:
Sure, but I don't want my lamps to look like SteamPunk... Just want
to put lamps up, that lamp....
What is steampunk

I had to look it up too, a couple months back. Google Images has some cute pics:

http://tinyurl.com/kgtlp7m

I don't get it.