[Boatanchors] Replacing 866s with 3B28s thread drift to CFLs

[D C *Mac* Macdonald]

If you want your incandescent lamps to last,
simply buy the 130 Volt rated versions. Our
house built in 1999 was supplied with such
lamps. Some of them are STILL burning after
almost 11 years. The "standard" 120V versions
do NOT last very long because the mains here
in Oklahoma City vary widely over the course
of a year. To prevent brownouts, line voltage
can run as high as 127 or 128 Volts during the
Summer in low use periods.  They can drop down
to 105 on really hot days with temperatures at
or above 100F.

IIRC, operating an incandescent lamp at 10%
below its "design" voltage increases its
lifespan by at least 100% and maybe longer.
I haven't looked at the charts in many years.

I think GE published a chart on this many
years ago.

* * * * * * * * * * *
* 73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 *
* (Since 30 Nov 53) *
* Oklahoma City, OK *
* USAF, Ret (61-81) *
* * * * * * * * * * *

> From: 1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com
> To: sdaitch at kuw.ibb.gov; WA5CAB at cs.com
> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 03:55:01 -0800
> CC: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Replacing 866s with 3B28s thread drift to CFLs
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Sheldon Daitch" <sdaitch at kuw.ibb.gov>
> To: <WA5CAB at cs.com>
> Cc: <1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>; <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 12:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Replacing 866s with 3B28s thread 
> drift to CFLs
> 
> 
> > Bob,
> >
> > interesting information on the pricing.
> >
> > CFLs generally run about $3.15 for the smaller
> > 8 watt to 14 watt sizes, and about $5 for the
> > larger sizes, 23 watts or so, Philips brand, at the
> > local Wal-Mart equal (Carrefour). I think Osram
> > brand CFLs run about the same price and the
> > discount CFLs are even cheaper.
> >
> > Unfortunately, they are all 240VAC versions, as
> > that is the local standard.
> >
> > I use the CFLs for our exterior lighting at the house,,
> > where they tend to last about a year, averaging about
> > 12 hours per night. I'd never get that kind of life out
> > of incandescent lamps. Typical incandescent bulbs,
> > GE, Sylvania, Philips, Osram, they run about 35 cents
> > for 60 to 100 watt bulbs.
> >
> > Changing some of the exterior lamps is a pain and
> > requires dragging out a ladder, and while the use of
> > CFLs may not be cost efficient, strictly from an
> > accounting basis, but when the inconvenience factor
> > is in the equation, CFLs can make sense.
> >
> > We don't use the CFLs inside, as few CFLs fit the
> > lamp bases and globe sizes, and a number of the
> > ceiling lamps are on dimmers.
> >
> > As for the mercury issue, you are correct, no more
> > mercury in the home, but the CFL supporters claim
> > with the reduce energy consumption of CFLs, less
> > mercury is released in the atmosphere from the
> > reduced fuels burned generating electricity. I suppose
> > if the US were 100% nuclear power for electricity,
> > the mercury concerns in fuel would go away, but
> > the US is a long way from being 100% nuclear.
> >
> > I don't think I've ever changed out any of the CFLs
> > twice in eight months. I know my change rate for
> > incandescent lamps is probably worse than that.
> >
> > 73
> > Sheldon
> >
> Where are you that 240VAC is the standard for lighting? 
> There are plenty of CFL's available at all sorts of stores 
> locally, none are expensive. My experience with them over 
> the last several years is that they are much longer lasting 
> than incandescent lamps and run about a quarter of the power 
> for equal brightness. I also have a couple of battery 
> lanterns using CFL's, in fact, we had about a four hour 
> power outage tonight which gave them a work out.
> Probably the single largest source of mercury in the 
> envirionment comes from burning coal. Coal is still a 
> primary source of fuel for generating electricity. While the 
> coal industry has been touting "clean coal" there is little 
> to back up their claims. Nuculear power is certainly 
> attractive for a number of reasons but produces waste 
> products that stay dangerously radioactive for longer than 
> human civilization has been in existence. Most of the ideas 
> about being able to store and control it are simply 
> phantasies. The fact is that there is no genuinely clean 
> method of generating electricity yet known. The main need 
> for reducing environmental polution is simply to use less of 
> it. In that sense CFL's make a lot of sense.
> This is enough OT stuff for me so I will stop at this 
> point.
> 
> 
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles
> WB6KBL
> dickburk at ix.netcom.com 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
> 
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** 
> 
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html