To: Utah Binger
You must keep up with technology whether the government gets it or not. In most cases they do not. Cheaper in the long run is the case. Buy the product once and never replace it. Do you get it yet? You might want too read post 91. Newer technology in the case of CFL's is in fact NOT better. Nor is it more monetary efficient. If you want to talk older florescent with tubes I will agree they can save money but not CFL's. You may be lucky and live in an area where the voltage is about 115/230. Utilities are quietly jacking voltage into homes too 225/250 and I do know what I am talking about. That means ZERO room for voltage surge or spike with will smoke the CFL electronic ballast.
93 posted on
12/04/2011 6:49:22 PM PST by
cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
To: cva66snipe
I understand planned obsolescence very well and I also know that CFL’s are inefficient at best, however down here in southern Utah we have weird power issues that we deal with daily. Surges are a way of life.
Wish we knew how to deal with it.
94 posted on
12/04/2011 7:03:39 PM PST by
Utah Binger
(Southern Utah where INVITED Freepers will meet again next summer. Jim Robinson Too)
To: cva66snipe
A warning to those buying incandescent bulbs to last. Do not buy cheap bulbs. Go too a lighting store and ask specifically for commercial grade incandescents or at least buy double life bulbs at other outlets.. Several reasons. The filaments are heavier and the base is brass. These bulbs are used in commercial multi story applications like hospitals etc. They are designed for abuse. You will get much longer life from them.
98 posted on
12/04/2011 7:44:35 PM PST by
cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson