[RFI] CFL Bulbs that are OK!

[Roger (K8RI)]

On 11/30/2010 10:50 AM, Michael Coslo wrote:
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 10:17 AM, doc at kd4e.com wrote:
>
>
>> It has made sure that GE, who was losing in the incandescent bulb
>> market, had the corner on the CFL market.
>>
>> Other than that it's like the just-confessed latest revelation of
>> Al Gore's self-serving dishonesty on grain-alcohol, a "solution"
>> with undisclosed new problems.
>
> As we all know, all problems are the fault of liberals. But we need to have that pointed out as often as possible. And this RFI group should do it with every post, cuz' its the right place don'tya think?. 8^)
>
> Anyhow, before we burn anyone at the stake, the CFL market is in it's early-middle stages, and will probably end up being a dead end technology anyhow. 20 years from now, I doubt you'll find a CFL anywhere. Fragile bulbs, mercury issues, and quality control problems.
It's my understanding that the CFL is an interim measure, just as is 
Ethanol in gas. At least that is the way they were presented.
I've not had problems with CFLs other than the short life of the early 
ones I've already mentioned.  Alcohol is inefficient, and CFLs  (like 
all fluorescents) contain mercury which is considered undesirable.  
However the no one gets excited about a broken fluorescent tube which is 
much larger than any CFL I've seen so I think the worry over broken CFLs 
is blown a bit out of proportion.   OTOH I think the concern will be for 
LEDs and their required power supplies which have the potential (no pun 
intended) to create much more noise than CFLs , particularly as they 
come into general use, likely raising the background noise considerably.

Once LEDs become viable both in the economic sense and environmentally 
(RFI) the CFLs which are toxic and use more power than the LEd will 
likely become relatively scarce as their use drops, just as is the use 
of incandescents.  OTOH I'd expect the CFL to out and out disappear 
while the incandescents will likely be around in small numbers for a 
very long time.

BTW the coal fired power plants are reputed to put out more mercury (by 
several times) for the energy used by a CFL than the amount of mercury 
contained in the CFL.
> Like it or not, LED lighting is probably the wave of the future. What does this mean? It means that the weak link in the system is going to be the power supply in the bulb, it means that probably bulb price will go up. I give about 50-50 odds that we might see something else,
Possibly a different form of LEd, but I'd still expect to see the price 
of LEDs reduced to at or below the price of CFLs.
Large arrays for large output of a broad spectrum contain many LEDs 
which could be placed in series requiring less voltage drop.
>   and that will be a separate and low voltage line run to the lighting systems. Running 120 volts just to be stepped down to a few volts is technically stupid, and probably a liberal idea anyhow. This is a system already in use in off the grid,  low voltage solar or wind powered systems.
>
> I've seen some LED lights that give off a nice warm color, not unlike a good tungsten bulb.
I use full spectrum lights and have grown used to the color temp, which 
used in conjunction with the warm color, or incandescents make the warm 
colors and incandescents looks sickly.
>   It's coming folks, just like tube technology replaced coherers, and RF alternators. And some bemoaned their passing too.
I'm looking forward to the maturing of LEDs that do not create RFI, give 
a full, or at least pleasing spectrum, and are not expensive.

73

Roger (K8RI)