I am guessing ... postulating ... that if someone conducted a scientific
test they may discover that the environment is a significant factor in
the life of a CFL.
Looking at the stability of the power system, moisture, temperature,
dust, vibration, proximity of magnetized materials, proximity of strong
RF fields, etc.
Between the actual bulb and the power supply there are a number
of potential vulnerabilities which need to be addressed.
This could also impact the aging effect vis-a-vis increasing RFI.
WDYT?
> Dan Violette wrote:
> I had the opposite. Started about 8 years ago and replaced mostly the whole
> house with CFLs. Only had 3-4 that are not still running (including lights
> in all ceiling fans) and average electric bill dropped about $5/mo that
> first year when I checked. Did not replace outdoor nor 3-way lamps. Dan
>
>
> Do far my experience with CFL's has been very poor. I mark the date in
> service on each one as I install it. 6 months is the longest one has lasted
> with a couple a little as 2 weeks. Overall, I would rate them as more
> expensive than incandescent bulbs. Reduced power consumption does not
> offset the initial price. I am going to have to replace two more 100W
> equivalent ones this morning.
>
> David
> KC2JD
>
--
Thanks! & 73, doc, KD4E
FS/Swap/Wanted: http://kd4e.com/swapn.html
Free OS : http://www.PuppyLinux.com
Personal: http://kd4e.com
|_|___|_|
| | & | |
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/ \ {|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_|~~~~|
| -| | |
============\ # KD4E
Have an http://ultrafidian.com day!
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|