<Food Miles in AustraliaThe Oil DrumTransportation Ethics: The Trafficist>
<DrumBeat: November 30, 2007DrumBeatDrumBeat: December 2, 2007>

341 comments on DrumBeat: December 1, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

SacredCowTipper on December 1, 2007 - 12:25pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

One would hope that oil filled space heaters would take off here in Iowa, given that we have excellent wind resources shut in by lack of long distance transmission lines.

One $2,500 investment would pretty much free us from heating bills and I itch to get this done ...

Not a cure everywhere, but blanket policies are generally not such a good idea. I think the incandescent bulb ban *is* a good thing, as it only troubles the maker of the EasyBake stove ...

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
john milton on December 1, 2007 - 1:33pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I think the incandescent bulb ban *is* a good thing, as it only troubles the maker of the EasyBake stove ...

Places around my house where I don't use CFL bulbs:

- Inside my kitchen stove (gas): Too hot

- Inside my fridge and freezer: Too cold

- In the motion sensor controlled security lights outside the house: Too cold in winter to provide enough light quickly

- In my photographic darkroom: They give off enough light to fog film for 3-5 minutes after you switch them off due to residual glow from the phosphor

- In various task lamps that right now use 12 Volt halogen bulbs: Not available in that size or brightness

- In dimmer equipped fixtures: even the "dimmable" CFL's don't work as promised; lifespan of less than a dozen hours in some cases, audible buzzing, non-smooth dimming and unequal brightness in multi-bulb fixtures

- In my workshop: they have a strobe effect which sometimes makes things like spinning saw blades and grinder wheels seem stationary or slow moving when in fact they are not. Very unsafe!

Please just tax them lots to discourage use where they are not needed but don't ban them outright. All lighting methods are not yet equal in ways that do matter

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TrueKaiser on December 1, 2007 - 2:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Not to mention that they are not inherently worse either. USAGE of the bulb determines how wasteful they are over type. I have seen way to many people get the cfl bulbs only to leave them on all the time.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ArianeB on December 1, 2007 - 6:36pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Agreed

I see misplaced animositiy towards CFLs though from certain conservative quarters as if saving electricity is a sin or something. Most anti CFL people seem to be anti AGW theory too.

All I know is that I replaced all my general lighting incadescents with CFLs and cut my electric bills by 10% this summer. So I like them!

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TrueKaiser on December 1, 2007 - 7:00pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

cfl's are great 'only' if your one of those people committed to cutting your light usage as well. i have seen to many people in my area just replace normal light bulbs with them but leave the new ones on all the time thinking that no matter how much you use them they will still always be better then the wast full incondesents.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Gilgamesh on December 1, 2007 - 10:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

this is true though. You seem to be confused, the CFL may cost 1-2 $/bulb, but will last 10x longer and with 1/3rd the energy requirement, therefore so long as regular lightbulbs do not cost less than 1/30 the cost of a CFL, you win with a purchase of a CFL (in monitary terms) regardless of the use.

If you are worried about heating, insulate your home. Best investment you can make.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Pitt the Elder on December 1, 2007 - 11:47pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

You seem to be confused, the CFL may cost 1-2 $/bulb, but will last 10x longer and with 1/3rd the energy requirement, therefore so long as regular lightbulbs do not cost less than 1/30 the cost of a CFL, you win with a purchase of a CFL (in monitary terms) regardless of the use.

Uh, no.

Let's take a 30W CFL against a 100W incandescent. Assume the CFL lasts 2 years @ $4, and the incan lasts 3 months @ $1, with electricity going for $0.10/kWh.

Assuming you use the light for 8 hours a day - ~3000/yr - the CFL will cost $11/yr ($9 in electricity + $2 in replacement), vs. $34 for the incan ($30 in electricity + $4 in replacement). So the CFL is a huge win in normal use.

However, if you did the silly "keep the light on all the time" thing for a light that was rarely used before, you could certainly end up spending more. If the light was normally used only 2 hours/day, the incan would be $12/yr, whereas the CFL - used 24 hours/day - would be $29/yr.

So usage matters; indeed, usage is practically all that matters - you can see here how little the purchase price of the bulbs matters compared to the electricity costs.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
DIYer on December 1, 2007 - 7:28pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Won't they have to be ethanol-filled space heaters?
/sarcanol

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Aniya on December 3, 2007 - 12:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hi SCT,

Just a note, since I didn't see an address for you. You asked a question on Nov. 27, and I just offered a reply this evening (Dec. 2). (I say this because I took it as a sincere question, and I had some thoughts.) http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3293#comment-272124

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.