Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Greenpeace petition for Ireland to ban inefficient lightbulbs

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    BendiBus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,074 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    casey212 wrote: »
    Help enrich government and big business.

    I thought big (lighting) business was dead set against this legislation?

    casey you're getting boring.


  • Options
    #93
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    BendiBus wrote: »
    I thought big (lighting) business was dead set against this legislation?

    casey you're getting boring.

    i am not posting to entertain people. If you want to see a circus watch the television or read a newspaper.


  • Options
    #94
    blackbox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,237 ✭✭✭blackbox


    What about candles?

    They are a highly inefficient (compared to incandescants) form of lighting. Also people use them where thay are not needed - e.g. well lit churches.

    These should be banned before incandescent bulbs.


  • Options
    #95
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,792 ✭✭✭SeanW


    casey212 wrote: »
    In our "progressive" world it is now illegal to light your buildings as you see fit.
    No-one will prevent you from travelling to the UK and buying incandescent lightbulbs there if you feel that strongly the need to use them in your home or wherever.

    I'm no fan of the mainstream Green movement for what I consider to be some serious errors in their approach, but I think you're going way too far into the realm of conspiracy theory to be taken seriously.


  • Options
    #96
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    I'm sure this has been mentioned before but there are other technologies on the market if you don't like CFL's (LED clusters etc.)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    SeanW wrote: »
    No-one will prevent you from travelling to the UK and buying incandescent lightbulbs there if you feel that strongly the need to use them in your home or wherever.

    I'm no fan of the mainstream Green movement for what I consider to be some serious errors in their approach, but I think you're going way to far into the realm of conspiracy theory to be taken seriously.

    And do you honestly believe that the u.k. will not take on a similar policy within a year or so. No i'll take that back, it could be seen as a "conspiracy" theory.


  • Options
    #98
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    I'm sure this has been mentioned before but there are other technologies on the market if you don't like CFL's (LED clusters etc.)

    I like my bulbs as they are now, thanks.


  • Options
    #99
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    casey212 wrote: »
    I like my bulbs as they are now, thanks.

    Well some of us are concerned about our energy use.


  • Options
    #100
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    casey212 wrote: »
    And do you honestly believe that the u.k. will not take on a similar policy within a year or so. No i'll take that back, it could be seen as a "conspiracy" theory.

    The UK are considering the idea, it's likely to be implementated in four years.


  • Options
    #101
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Well some of us are concerned about our energy use.

    I don't know what age you are, however I will assume you are over ten years old.

    Would you have been as concious of your energy consumption back in 1998?? If you were not, why have things changed?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The UK are considering the idea, it's likely to be implementated in four years.

    Exactly. Within the next few years the whole of europe will fall in line. And bear in mind that many of the larger manufacturers are considering stopping production of normal bulbs, supposedly on their own initiative, therefore even if "laws" are not in place you will still have no choice.

    People talk about "reasoning", why not produce both bulbs and let people choose for themselves.


    Given how educated, innovative, progressive, proactive, empowered, goal-oriented, synergistic, investigatory,transitioning, mission-critical and world class the modern irish person now is this choice would be a "no-brainer".

    (sorry I watch a lot of fox news).


  • Options
    #103
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,058 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    blackbox wrote: »
    What about candles?

    They are a highly inefficient (compared to incandescants) form of lighting. Also people use them where thay are not needed - e.g. well lit churches.

    These should be banned before incandescent bulbs.
    If you include heat output as well as light then candles are twice as efficient as incandescents.

    IIRC lithurgical candles are made from beeswax which is renewable.

    Actually taking into account the resources and metals needed to make an incandescent and the fittings and the switches and wiring then candles probably have a lower ecological footprint for the smaller sizes.


  • Options
    #104
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    If you include heat output as well as light then candles are twice as efficient as incandescents.

    IIRC lithurgical candles are made from beeswax which is renewable.

    Actually taking into account the resources and metals needed to make an incandescent and the fittings and the switches and wiring then candles probably have a lower ecological footprint for the smaller sizes.

    Candles would be a health and safety disaster. (i.e it might permit some degree of independence to people, therefore it would be banned)


  • Options
    #105
    BendiBus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,074 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    casey212 wrote: »
    Would you have been as concious of your energy consumption back in 1998?? If you were not, why have things changed?

    I wasn't.

    The reason things have changed is that I've learned, through my own research (but obviously prompted by media coverage) how dependent we are on fossil fuels from dodgy parts of the world. Supplies of these fuels will only become less reliable & more expensive.

    I believe we need to become less dependent and this needs a dual approach of alternative indigeneous energies and reduced energy waste.

    Not a terribly green reason I agree but I also find the arguments claiming environmental benefits of reducing the burning of fossils to be compelling.


  • Options
    #106
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    BendiBus wrote: »
    I wasn't.

    The reason things have changed is that I've learned, through my own research (but obviously prompted by media coverage) how dependent we are on fossil fuels from dodgy parts of the world. Supplies of these fuels will only become less reliable & more expensive.

    I believe we need to become less dependent and this needs a dual approach of alternative indigeneous energies and reduced energy waste.

    Not a terribly green reason I agree but I also find the arguments claiming environmental benefits of reducing the burning of fossils to be compelling.

    I fully agree with you. You are making the choices based on the right reasons, you value your independence.

    You also have to question why these parts of the world such as the middle east and africa are dodgy.

    I'm am all for renewables etc., given that I can make a choice, not through having all other options taken away. Ideally I would like to be totally independent in all these areas.


  • Options
    #107
    blackbox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,237 ✭✭✭blackbox


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    If you include heat output as well as light then candles are twice as efficient as incandescents.

    IIRC lithurgical candles are made from beeswax which is renewable.

    Actually taking into account the resources and metals needed to make an incandescent and the fittings and the switches and wiring then candles probably have a lower ecological footprint for the smaller sizes.

    Come on, if you include heat output, incandescent bulbs are as efficient as CFLs and LEDs. (I was only jokin' about the church candles - though at one time whale oil was used for lighting - just because the source is biological doesn't mean it has a low ecological footprint.).

    My point is that candles didn't have to be banned as the mainstream source of light. A newer and better technology simply made them pointless except as a decoration.

    When there is a sigificantly better alternative available (and CFLs meet this in some cases), people will no longer use incandescent bulbs.

    Banning is the wrong solution. It is a symptom of the desire of some individuals to have power over others.


  • Options
    #108
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    casey212 wrote: »
    I don't know what age you are, however I will assume you are over ten years old.

    Would you have been as concious of your energy consumption back in 1998?? If you were not, why have things changed?

    No, no I wasnt, largely due to the fact that I was 8 years old. So does this mean that you believe that peoples beliefs and attitudes cannot ever change?


  • Options
    #109
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    No, no I wasnt, largely due to the fact that I was 8 years old. So does this mean that you believe that peoples beliefs and attitudes cannot ever change?

    That all depends on the factors influencing the change. People have a habit of jumping on bandwagons.

    If you were to ask an 8 year old today about environment/climate change, I can guarantee you they would parrot the standard beliefs. School curriculums are updated as the government sees fit. (By the way my daughter is six years old and she could preach in favour of this subject of the next week)


  • Options
    #110
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    casey212 wrote: »
    That all depends on the factors influencing the change. People have a habit of jumping on bandwagons.

    If you were to ask an 8 year old today about environment/climate change, I can guarantee you they would parrot the standard beliefs. School curriculums are updated as the government sees fit. (By the way my daughter is six years old and she could preach in favour of this subject of the next week)

    Right so let me see if I have got this straight, You think that because children are easily taught things and that the things they are taught are set by the government, that we should abandon science and instead disbelieve everything anyone else says.


  • Options
    #111
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Right so let me see if I have got this straight, You think that because children are easily taught things and that the things they are taught are set by the government, that we should abandon science and instead disbelieve everything anyone else says.

    Trust your own instincts.

    So if the government do not set the cirriculum, could you pleae excuse my ignorance and let me know who does.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    casey212 wrote: »
    Trust your own instincts.

    So if the government do not set the cirriculum, could you pleae excuse my ignorance and let me know who does.

    One I am not a scientist so I cannot 'trust my instincts' when it comes to an issue of such importance and complexity.

    Two my post clearly says that the government does set the curriculum, I don't know how you got the opposite idea.


  • Options
    #113
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    One I am not a scientist so I cannot 'trust my instincts' when it comes to an issue of such importance and complexity.

    Two my post clearly says that the government does set the curriculum, I don't know how you got the opposite idea.

    So you base your beliefs on science and yet you yourself are not a scientist. Would that mean that you accept anything as long as enough scientists are in favour?


  • Options
    #114
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    casey212 wrote: »
    So you base your beliefs on science and yet you yourself are not a scientist. Would that mean that you accept anything as long as enough scientists are in favour?

    When the vast majority of the scientific community are in favour of something yes I am inclined to believe in it. Scoff all you like.


  • Options
    #115
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    When the vast majority of the scientific community are in favour of something yes I am inclined to believe in it. Scoff all you like.

    I am arguing not scoffing. Political correctness, the death of all opinions follows. In a free society people should disagree all the time, it is only natural.

    As I have stated before the majority of those scientists are on the payroll.


  • Options
    #116
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    casey212 wrote: »
    I am arguing not scoffing. Political correctness, the death of all opinions follows. In a free society people should disagree all the time, it is only natural.

    As I have stated before the majority of those scientists are on the payroll.

    Ok I'm going to stop right here. You have your beliefs and thats great but neither of us is going to convince the other one of anything so how about we just leave it. Ok?


  • Options
    #117
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Ok I'm going to stop right here. You have your beliefs and thats great but neither of us is going to convince the other one of anything so how about we just leave it. Ok?

    If only everyone would end a debate on such I note I would not be posting here. The problem is that others who share your beliefs choose to coerce others into the same system.


  • Options
    #118
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,058 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    blackbox wrote: »
    Come on, if you include heat output, incandescent bulbs are as efficient as CFLs and LEDs.
    true , but candles would still be twice as efficient as any of them ;)


  • Options
    #119
    Peanut
    Registered Users Posts: 1,462 ✭✭✭Peanut


    I bought a Philips Softone 20w (100w claimed equivalent) energy saver there today (standard fitting), to replace an existing 11w energy saver. (€6.50 in Dunnes)

    It appears to be quite good. The brightness and colour of light is very similar to the equivalent 100W incandescent. edit: The bulb takes a minute or two to get up to full brightness.

    I wouldn't bother with the very low wattage energy savers, they just seem annoyingly dim. They may be ok in some situations, but if you have an existing 60w incandescent, if you replace it with a 18-20w CFL you'll get both a brighter light and 1/3 of the energy consumption (disregarding heat).

    If you want a warm-white style light more reminiscent of incandescents, then check that the bulb you're buying says this on the package.
    It should write something like 'softone' or 'warm', or it can also be stated as a lower colour temperature, such as 2700k.


  • Options
    #120
    Peanut
    Registered Users Posts: 1,462 ✭✭✭Peanut


    Today I bought an "Ecopal" 24w CFL from Decwells DIY in George's St., Dublin. (€6.30)

    They have an interesting selection of low energy bulbs, including some LED Halogen replacements.

    This 24W bulb is claimed as a 120W equivalent. It certainly appears very bright.
    Light colour is good.

    The interesting thing about this bulb is that it's instant on - flick the switch and it's immediately full on brightness. Considering that this is a Chinese import bulb, I had some doubts about it, but it appears to work very well (at the moment anyway), probably better than the Philips.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,792 ✭✭✭SeanW


    I actually quite like the whiter light from normal U-shape CFL tubes. It seems whiter, cleaner somehow and things look better under it.


Advertisement