Replies

Looks like a few FReepers are still not doing their homework and especially not doing the math.

Hardly. Don't slip into the they-must-be-Luddites fallback. Folks are just pointing out that anyone who uses their head scientifically already knows the differences between various technologies. For example, an educated populace during cold periods would place "inefficient" heat shedding incandescents in sockets near where they habitate and where that color of light is useful and in hot months would defer to lights that shed little heat. Keep them out of high ceilings and recessed locations where the warmed air is useless, etc.

Look, these things are just tools. Smart people know when to use the right tool for the right job. Some of these tools bias towards Heat+Light, some mostly light, some mostly heat. It is the environmental circumstances which are NOT uniform, and this is the precise point you are hearing from us, and this is an actual scientific point of view, unlike the ban incandescents chorus of dumbass liberals. Some German manufacturers went to "heat-globe" nomenclature to describe the so-called less efficient incandescents and that is quite sensible. Products for all scenarios should be available because THAT is the sensible scenario.

As the guy above you describes replacing the lights in a hotel, that is a fine example of wasted heat in hotels I have seen. Big, high ceiling conference rooms with track lighting like your photo ( although you might want to be careful as some LEDs throw off more UV than you might want on paintings and other items that should never be kept in direct sunlight ), decorative lights draping trees, hot floodlights illuminating concrete fascades, stage lights that make you drip with sweat, lots of areas ripe for replacement for relatively cool LED implementations.

I watched the neon and incandescents in Las Vegas change over the years and that was a very smart move for them, but note that it didn't require any FedGov mandate. So much heat was wasted outside ( from the human point of view, certainly birds and bugs are less happy :-) and that means money too. On the other hand, in middle NY State ( and perhaps many other places ) when they willy-nilly replaced critical things like traffic lights they had to then turn around and add units containing heaters to melt the ice buildup in winter ( that is a mind bending example of peak stupid ).

What this all means is that no liberal should ever be allowed anything that requires scientific thinking, logic or common sense ( let's just say they should never be allowed near anything of consequence ), but we should never knee-jerk react to anything because it has a valid specific case of so-called efficiency. It is that word that leads to all the problems.

So back to where I jumped in ... now it is about 20° F and snowing outside 10 feet away from me beyond a single wall. I have a couple of 60 Watt incandescent bulbs in lamps, not high up, but around chest height which are throwing off enough heat to warm the air around them in about a 5' radius, where the human beings ( and cats ) just happen to be. Putting some cool bulbs in there will just repeat the above-mentioned experience with street lights by causing the nudging up of the thermostat which causes a chain reaction of consequences as the furnace blows hot air into wide swaths of the house that do not require it, not just here. Better off putting on a sweater like Jimmy Carter.

It's possible that some liberals are fully aware of these examples and are willing to screw over the logical scientific minority in favor of the sheeple majority. And that highlights yet another problem with this whole mess. Both LED's and incandescents can co-exist, can we agree on this? Liberals do not agree, and neither did the idjit Bush43.