CFLs and utility lights

judaspre1982 · Post by **judaspre1982** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:42 pm

============================

allsas · Post by **allsas** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:55 am

Converted one trouble light to a CFL to have one that doesn't heat the guard/reflector. Works Great and its COOL.

foxtrapper · Post by **foxtrapper** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:47 am

I've used CFL trouble/shop/utility lights, and have used the longer tubed flourescent trouble/drop lights.

Don't like em. The light spectrum isn't as wide, and I can really tell the difference. I can't see things as well as I can with a conventional incadescent bulb.

LED lights are even worse. They can be blindingly bright when shined in my eye, but don't show up anything when aimed away from my face.

Stock up on incadescent bulbs if you wish, and I do understand it. But also understand that they are not going out of production. That's a myth. All that has/is happened is an efficiency standard where the really lousy ones are being dropped. Good incadescent bulbs will continue to be made.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:34 am

foxtrapper wrote:I've used CFL trouble/shop/utility lights, and have used the longer tubed flourescent trouble/drop lights.

Don't like em. The light spectrum isn't as wide, and I can really tell the difference. I can't see things as well as I can with a conventional incadescent bulb.

LED lights are even worse. They can be blindingly bright when shined in my eye, but don't show up anything when aimed away from my face.

Stock up on incadescent bulbs if you wish, and I do understand it. But also understand that they are not going out of production. That's a myth. All that has/is happened is an efficiency standard where the really lousy ones are being dropped. Good incadescent bulbs will continue to be made.

Wonder why the GE glass plant that made bulbs for incandescent light bulbs is now an empty field?

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:56 am

JPG40504 wrote:Wonder why the GE glass plant that made bulbs for incandescent light bulbs is now an empty field?

I watched the CEO from GE on television a few nights ago and I think I might know the answer.

I believe it might have to do with labor costs "offshore" being so much less.

The media has been hot on this issue for some time now and we are learning through them that large corporations have no compunction resulting from going "offshore". It is simply good business practice from their point of view.

Economics 101, Chapter 1: The laws of supply and demand.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:29 am

dusty wrote:I watched the CEO from GE on television a few nights ago and I think I might know the answer.

I believe it might have to do with labor costs "offshore" being so much less.

The media has been hot on this issue for some time now and we are learning through them that large corporations have no compunction resulting from going "offshore". It is simply good business practice from their point of view.

Economics 101, Chapter 1: The laws of supply and demand.

That glass plant was here when I was in grade school, and had been expanded and updated all through these years.

'Perhaps' a tax write off was also a factor. Or EPA.

judaspre1982 · Post by **judaspre1982** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:08 pm

=========================

paulmcohen · Post by **paulmcohen** » Thu Sep 29, 2011 1:58 am

dusty wrote: Economics 101, Chapter 1: The laws of supply and demand.

Nothing to do with Supply and Demand, it has everything to do with regulations, tax manipulation, corporate tax rates and the cost Obama-care.

If companies bring money back to the US to invest they pay a 30% tax before they get to invest. If they invest overseas they pay little or no tax.

Incandescent bulbs were commoditized to the point where GE could not make any money selling them (even with the plants almost 100% automated) CFL had a much higher selling price but consumers did not want to purchase them due at first due to cost then to usage issues (no dimming, flicker, cold starts, different color...) so the companies working with the government got rebates and when that did not work by mandate.

Eventually CFL's might have taken over when they were perfected but instead, the mandate caused demand to rise faster than supply, and because of rebates price did not rise (according to Economics 101). US companies didn't have the capitol to invest in the US for a commodity market (without paying the tax) so they invested it overseas in China and other countries (GE signed a huge deal to invest in Chinese manufacturing while closing US plants).

Enough of politics back to wood.

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Thu Sep 29, 2011 8:22 am

I'm sorry, Paul but it is all about the laws of supply and demand.

I do not disagree when anything that you said here except that it is not pure economics. It is.

Why does any US company close up shop here and move overseas? Because of pure economics! Example: They can not find qualified labor here that is willing to work for what they are willing to pay! They do not have raw materials readily available here but there is a good supply elsewhere. Pure economics.

Oh yes, there is some greed involved also. There was a time when a 7% profit margin was adequate to call a business successful. Today I believe that the "profit margin" required of a successful business is more like 35%.

Remember the corner "grocery store". Mom and pop bought supplies, paid the rent, paid the bills, worked the store and put a few dollars in the bank "for their retirement days". Do "corner grocery stores exist anymore?

Nope, the vast majority of them have been replaced by "super markets or strip malls". Mom and pop are gone now, bless them. Left behind are today's economic woes and greedy developers, and out of work employees who are not satisfied with $10/hour jobs.

Newspapers used to be delivered ($.35/week or $1.05/mo - including a huge Sunday edition) by a kid on a bicycle. Now it is done by someone in a car - if delivered at all. The Sunday paper costs more than a monthly subscription used to and it doesn't contain much more than a bunch of business flyers. Remember the Sunday morning comics section. All gone! Pure economics.

BTW - the kid on the bike is now a member of the neighborhood gang.

Ed in Tampa · Post by **Ed in Tampa** » Thu Sep 29, 2011 1:49 pm

I just got my issue of Bottom Line Personal a little about everything bi monthly magazine. In it they have an article on Lights.
They say the Federal Energy Independance and Security Act of 2007 set lightbulb efficiency standards that will soon prevent the manufacture and importation of most incandescent bulbs. The law as stated will start with 100 watt in 2012 and work down 60 and 40 watts in 2014. There are exceptions like specialty bulbs, three way and appliance bulbs. Also most halogen bulbs.

They state that CFL life span is based on three hour cycles and if you turn the light on and off in a shorter span than 3 hours you significantly reduce its lifespan.

They say the manufactures are frantically working on color temps. That 2700K is basically an old light bulb color and most manufactures are producing CFL that can reproduce that color. With many more choices on the horizon. Diming and flicker was addressed in the article and they mentioned that HPF high power factor CFL take care of the flicker. Check Alibaba.com

As to my question on warmup time. The say most spiral CFL's no longer suffer a delay but CFL's contained in glass bulbs to mimick existing light bulbs do in some cases. I guess it is a try and see.

They predict LED's will make huge advances in the near future bringing down the cost and take the lead away from CFL's. They mention Halogen but mention heat problems though they mimize them.

Any questions I will look them up in this article and see if they address them.

Shopsmith Forums

CFLs and utility lights

CFL's in Trouble Light