Jump to content

Are decent lightbulbs available anywhere in Sheffield

Recommended Posts

That statement has me confused, please elaborate? is the lumen output or colour rendering that you are pertaining to?

 

It's a shabby, untidy spectrum with far too much UV and a big gap in the 5-600nm range.

 

The cyan/blue component is far too strong and makes the light poor for reading.

 

I prefer to read by daylight, or halogen/incandescent.

 

I still don't think the case for CFLs is proven sufficiently to BAN incandescent lights. Especially from a waste perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a shabby, untidy spectrum with far too much UV and a big gap in the 5-600nm range.

 

The cyan/blue component is far too strong and makes the light poor for reading.

 

I prefer to read by daylight, or halogen/incandescent.

 

I still don't think the case for CFLs is proven sufficiently to BAN incandescent lights. Especially from a waste perspective.

 

I am still confused as you say you prefer to read by daylight( often referred to as 6000 Kelvin) or by Halogen/Incandescent (3000 Kelvin) there is a very noticeable difference there.

I think with CFL's it's a case of "horse's for courses" Choose the bulb to match the wattage it's replacing in lumen's output. not equivalent wattage as stated by the manufacturer, it is so open to exaggeration

( 100 watt bulb = 1,000 lumen's roughly)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could one of these low energy bulbs help?

 

They sound interesting (If more than a little expensive) however I'd want to reserve judgement on them, as I don't know whether they aren't a little gimmick-y.

 

Full spectrum daylight bulbs do relieve SAD, but the amount of light you get from sunlight is just slightly morethan you'd get from one of those little swirly bulbs. :hihi:

 

My lightbox (A Diamond 3) uses full-spectrum bulbs, but there are 3 36 watt bulbs in it. Quite a lot of light. - And ideally, you need to have it within about 2 metres.

 

As for 'ionising' bulbs ... really?

 

If they do produce significant amounts of ionised oxygen, do you really want to be breathing that? - What about 'free radicals' ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I got two of those, sarky, and the dratted things blew up after a fortnight's regular use, - they literally went "Bang" and left broken glass and the metal bayonet fitting still in the pendant holder. not keen on them at all.It's a real pain, foxydebs, the lights definitely are duller than the old bulbs, and they give me headaches.

 

The worst part is the murcury particles in your house.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-506347/An-energy-saving-bulb-gone--evacuate-room-now.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am still confused as you say you prefer to read by daylight( often referred to as 6000 Kelvin) or by Halogen/Incandescent (3000 Kelvin) there is a very noticeable difference there.

I think with CFL's it's a case of "horse's for courses" Choose the bulb to match the wattage it's replacing in lumen's output. not equivalent wattage as stated by the manufacturer, it is so open to exaggeration

( 100 watt bulb = 1,000 lumen's roughly)

 

 

Get a CD and look at the reflected the light from a CFL and a Halogen on the shiny side (improvised spectroscope).

 

You will see that the CFL has "hotspots" and "darkspots" on the spectrum. The Halogen will have a continuous spectrum from red to violet, as will incandescents.

 

CFL has an "incomplete" spectrum, because it's based on producing large amounts of ultra-violet and then doping the unit with phosphors that will fluoresce under UV bombardment.

 

So a daylight CFL, supposedly rated at 6500degK, does not emit a spectrum similar to sunlight, and is far too blue for reading.

 

(Your eyes cannot focus blue light as easily because of its shorter wavelength).

Edited by Phanerothyme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find the flickering effect on all fluorescent lighting, Ruby, brand new or long-time-installed. I find it happens, generally, at the very ends of the fluorescent tubes. It's the flicker that seems to trigger migraines and headaches.

 

You get flickering with the normal office type fluorescent, unless it has a higher operating frequency, but with the CFL its very rare as they use electronic ballasts which don't cause flickering. The early "jam-jar" style ones used magnetic ballasts and did flicker.

 

As far as mercury is concerned, the electricity generated from a coal power station to light an incandescent lamp for 8,000 hours produces around 5.8mg of mercury compared to 1.8mg in total from a CFL. So, over its lifetime a CFL is better for the environment as it produces less mercury pollution than using an incandescent.

 

Given the long life of a CFL any problem from the rare occasion they may break is grossly exaggerated. You would probably get a much higher dose of mercury poisoning from your teeth fillings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as mercury is concerned, the electricity generated from a coal power station to light an incandescent lamp for 8,000 hours produces around 5.8mg of mercury compared to 1.8mg in total from a CFL. So, over its lifetime a CFL is better for the environment as it produces less mercury pollution than using an incandescent.

 

In this country, at the moment.

 

But not in Norway, for example.

 

CFLs are one choice for domestic illumination and have many benefits, but they shouldn't be the only choice because they have as many serious deficiencies as the other methods of illumination.

 

The rush to ban incandescents and compel the use of CFLs has not been an environmentally motivated decision, and their energy benefit is not universal.

 

Also the rated lifespan of CFLs is grossly exagerrated, so calculations of their energy efficiency tend to be heavily skewed.

 

Many people consider the far IR output from incandescent bulbs as wasted energy, because it does not provide illumination.

 

Try incubating chicks under a CFL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh, and don't forget that if the Daily Mail is to be believed (:hihi:), then you'll get skin cancer too: http://thedailymailoncologicalontologyproject.wordpress.com/2008/01/04/lightbulbs-give-you-cancer/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once all these incandescent bulbs have been banned completely...how am I going to power my Mathmos lamp????

 

The only thing that gives me a smile about these new ugly energy saving bulbs is.....just how ugly are they going to look in the posh electric chandeliers in stately homes :hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am slowly changing the fittings and buying spot light ones, they give a good light, cant stand the new energy saving ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

try the hardware shop in castle market down stairs i got 10 100 wat bulbs for 3 pound just be fore the legislation came in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also another issue that has not been discussed here (unless I have missed it) The light from these energy saving bulbs is very bad for people with poor sight/partially sighted. I sit in my corner at home trying to read my large print library book. I said to hubby this is ridiculous I can hardly see with this daft light he told me to have 2 lamps I replied well that defeats the object of having energy saving bulbs, burning 2 to get the effect of one. omg some men lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.