Lights Out for your bulb

[joea]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You see, here it already starts as I predicted! "Yes, save the world, but don't expect me to seriously change my living habits. I have plenty of good reasons, you see." Modern planes are okay beyond a certain distance, and if you have reasons to travel. Mass tourism is not. It even is no right.

Well ok, thanks for the personal shot. I guess I started it, sorry. Not a good way to debate. I have several points to make. Who decides "a good reason" to travel or not, or what minimum distance? (Geography including mountains and water would indicate time should be the factor IMO). If we question mass tourism we must question job mobility (even if certain jobs like journalists and scientists require travel) and even educational mobility. (Yes my own experience again). These create the impetus to travel (encompassing all transport).

Good luck trying to limit mass consumption in democracies unless the elites make a show of limiting their own consumption as well or draconian measure that destroy democracy are implemented.

Originally Posted by Skybird

Trading is okay in principle, nothing against that. I sell you what you don't have and can't produce yourself, and you sell me what I don't have and can't produce myself. That'S what trading originally has been about in past times … But admitted, it maybe is less profitable, so... But if somebody thinks he must have his Irish butter in Germany and therefore all the energy and effort during the logistical efforts must be maintained in the name of "free trade" and "democracy", because it is so much more tasty (probably only in his imagination anyway), then I could not care less for that man. He better should change his taste, basta.

Well that is a very good principle, I agree totally. I suppose one way to deal with that is allow the trade but tax the heck out of it (this will bring howls from free traders). On the other hand, I don’t think the answer lies only in changing consumption patterns. I have no qualms about buying real Italian parmesan (granted not too far from Geneva) or Appenzeller from Eastern Switzerland, but favour shipping them as much of the distance as possible by rail rather than truck. Same with the search for alternative fuels, I don’t think the militaries of the world will want their toys to run out of juice when the current variety runs out.


Anyway, simplicity is nice but can also become an idolatry of sorts, or a new Puritanism. Cutting back in certain areas, doing without certain luxuries while permitting oneself others and allowing core needs (different for each person) even if not “PC” is a valid choice IMO.

[Skybird]

I agree that what I said will raise resistance from people who have an interest in keeping things as they are. Also, the example I gave concerning travel distances, is simplified, or left unfinished, for the sake of keeping my posting short. I know that. But that things are difficult does not necessarily mean that they are wrong. I do believe that our prime mistake is that we think we can get away if only we press the right buttons, or readjust some mechanical routines we got used to. That is wrong. I am absolutely convinced that we need to change our attitude, and world view as well as our priorities on what should be seen as valuable in our life, in order to survive as a civilisation, and maybe even as a species. Talking of mental evolution here - and as we all know, a species that does not evolute (is there such a verb? ), faces extinction sooner or later. Mankind has pro oven it's mechanic, tool-related intelligence so far, but intelligence, or wisdom if you want, goes beyond that, and wisdom I see openly little in our species, but a lot of emotional irrationalities, and instinct-driven automatic behaviour. we are victims of our own - maybe misled - evolution. Possible that our blueprint will be given up. As long as we think only in terms of "energy-saving engines", "ecology-days", "reducing consummation", we still live in a status of expecting that all world is only existent to fulfil our expectations, and that it all revolves around us. We need to learn instead that we have to fully, unconditionally fit into something that is much bigger and important than we are. Reducing long range holiday travel will only be successfully if people change the hierarchy of their beliefs on what makes a comfortable, worthy life: and that LR travel must not necessarily be a necessity to be happy. People tell me it takes them too much time to walk to the baker and get a bread, so they take a car. But the walk to the baker can have it's merits by itself if you go through a nice park nd the weather is fine. you can even learn to see it like that when it is raining. If you change your attitude on that "sparing time" issue, your behaviour changes all by itself. But our culture is not friendly towards such changes and helps to propagate especially values that are of the opposite "quality". You may think my example is profane, but then think of how willingly we have adopt to a society where parents reduce the time they spend with their kids in order to go to work, and/or even push their career. At younger and younger ages small children of 2, 3 years are given away into foreign hands or state-run institutions, so that their parents can go into the office. I think, such time priorities are severely messed up. Nevertheless we created a society were it is a must to behave like that if you wish to survive economically. We have become too abstract (talking as a mediation teacher here), and too materialistic.

BTW, I did not take your reply personally. I noticed that I have touched a nerve of yours, but your reply was ironic, not a personal attack. My reply that you quote was not meant as a personal attack either. Understand that reply of mine purely literally please. I said people agree to save the world, but not if they personally have to change themselves too drastically. You like to travel, okay. But your wish and preference is no must. That's what I was after. there are more important problems than your or my hobbies and preferences. BTW, if you can, do like I did, travel by ship and train only, it gives you far more intense an experience than getting beamed by Delta Airways. It changes your feeling of distance, and time, you get a far superior awareness of the world you pass through, while at angels 390, the world you travel is an abstract theory only. Snipping a finger and boom! you're on the other side of the planet, already is that abstract thing again that I pointed to above.

It's like diets. People eat too bad food, and in too huge quantities, then they make a diet to get rid of their weight, thinking that way they are fine to eat the same crap in the same amounts again afterwards. They want being cured without needing to change themselves, or their habits and attitudes. It is an attitude of constantly expecting that the world cares for us, and serves our comfort. The only way to reduce your weight CONSTANTLY is by changing your food habits forever, eating better food, and banning bad food (no matter how tasty it is).

[Gorduz]

The reason I don't use power saving bulbs is simply because here i Norway you have to use electricity to warm your house 3/4 of the year, and then it really doesn't matter wether you use bulbs or any other means to warm your house.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Gorduz

The reason I don't use power saving bulbs is simply because here i Norway you have to use electricity to warm your house 3/4 of the year, and then it really doesn't matter wether you use bulbs or any other means to warm your house.

That's only because you've gotten used to living in Norway.

I say expel everyone in the northern hemisphere to the temperate zone. Start packing.

[lesrae]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

That's only because you've gotten used to living in Norway.

I say expel everyone in the northern hemisphere to the temperate zone. Start packing.

Or we can just stay where we are, do nothing, and wait for the temperate zone to come to us!

[em2nought]

Being the most frugal person I know, I don't believe the energy savings will equal the increased cost. Especially with production costs and disposal costs included. And if the bulb doesn't last five years I can just ship it back as long as I include about what I paid for it in the first place to cover shipping. :hmm: The only benefit I've found is that my bedroom stays a tiny bit cooler. Also factor in that most of you won't bother to find the best price on the bulbs in the first place. Basically it's a drop in the bucket.

Now make everyone drive a Honda Fit or Toyota Yaris and you're onto something.

[joea]

Originally Posted by Skybird

BTW, I did not take your reply personally. I noticed that I have touched a nerve of yours, but your reply was ironic, not a personal attack. ...You like to travel, okay. But your wish and preference is no must. That's what I was after. there are more important problems than your or my hobbies and preferences. BTW, if you can, do like I did, travel by ship and train only, it gives you far more intense an experience than getting beamed by Delta Airways.
...
The only way to reduce your weight CONSTANTLY is by changing your food habits forever, eating better food, and banning bad food (no matter how tasty it is).

Ok, we all pick out what to reply to and I accept you had to simplify your example. I wonder if my communication skills are bad or something...I meant more than "travel for pleasure" just as I tried to communicate that Il-2 46 had more than just fantasy content as new content.

Well I will use examples from my personal experience as an ex-pat. I have family scattered all over because of work and educational opportunities, parents in Vancouver and a sister in New York for example, and even the boat/train option (and a ride on the Trans-Siberean is on my list of "must do") is out for visits because I do work. While I do like to travel this is what "touched my nerve." We live in a world where it is possible for 2 freinds of mine (one from Trinidad, of Irish/Trinidadian background) the other Spanish met doing ther undergraduate degrees in Ireland...then she (Spanish) came to Geneva to study translation while he went to the US to study dentistry. Now married and studies completed they live in the US while she works freelance receiving texts to translate by e-mail.

I don't see the point of living by banning completely the odd "bad dish" as well, just IMHO.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Letum

I've never broken a fluorescent bulb....

I have. Not fun.

I have sat with my ear up to one of the none buzzing ones just now......guess what.....no buzz.

I have sensitive hearing. I hear things that most people can't hear, at frequency ranges beyond what other people hear. Maybe that is part of the problem, but I have yet to see a florecent bulb that I can't hear.

Which bit do you call the coils?

The entire bulb looks like a coil. At least the ones over here do.

In the UK all power goes into the "national grid". The power plants are owned by different companies who charge their customers on a percentage system. Our power plants where recently reported to be running on 95% capacity. 5% is still a hell of a lot of spare energy, but there is a big drive to build more power stations. When the power stations produce a net surplus for the national grid it has nowhere to go out side of the grid, it is stored in capacitors for a while and eventually drained off.
By 2020 20% - 30% of the UK's power will come from renewable sources (wind, wave etc). (only 30% if the rest of the EU achieves similar targets).

Renewables work for me, but a windmill farm can't hold a candle to the power output of a single nuke generator. Only one known thing to me that has the capability to output more power than a nuke - Grand Coulee dam. All other dams can't. I wonder what the environmental cost is as associated with dam building too? Anyway, I am all for renewables if it makes sense.

Hehe, only an American would say that it should be my "main motivation".
The bulbs usually last 6 - 16 x longer than standard bulbs. This is the main saying. I am yet to replace one..

Yeah - I can't remember the last time I changed a normal bulb either. Been running for years just fine. I don't like the stereotypical response though. The point I was making is that it needs to be researched first for a cost benefit plan. If it takes 10x the energy to produce it than it will save in a lifetime, is it really worth it? This push feels remiscent of the push for pure digital TV - is it really neccesary? Same idea. Is this just a push by the industry to make a few more $$$ and force the average guy to pay more $$$ to them? That is what you must ask yourself.

-S

[GSpector]

Quote from SUBMAN1:
"This push feels remiscent of the push for pure digital TV - is it really neccesary? Same idea. Is this just a push by the industry to make a few more $$$ and force the average guy to pay more $$$ to them? That is what you must ask yourself."

Have you seen the new DLP projectors now showing up in theaters? These are also being push at us claiming to be better with sharper images and produces better sound.

Hog wash. DLP has the same problem LCD Monitors do and some CRTs with poor Graphic Card. If you look at any diagonal line or any line not straight up or down and there are Jaggies. Jaggies are not possible with Film projectors.

I agree, just another push for something the industry wants the general population to believe is better. It's not. What it is, is New Technology to replace old technology. That all. Not necessarily better technology.

[joea]

I got the last word yea!

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by GSpector

Quote from SUBMAN1:
"This push feels remiscent of the push for pure digital TV - is it really neccesary? Same idea. Is this just a push by the industry to make a few more $$$ and force the average guy to pay more $$$ to them? That is what you must ask yourself."

Have you seen the new DLP projectors now showing up in theaters? These are also being push at us claiming to be better with sharper images and produces better sound.

Hog wash. DLP has the same problem LCD Monitors do and some CRTs with poor Graphic Card. If you look at any diagonal line or any line not straight up or down and there are Jaggies. Jaggies are not possible with Film projectors.

I agree, just another push for something the industry wants the general population to believe is better. It's not. What it is, is New Technology to replace old technology. That all. Not necessarily better technology.

I agree 100%! DLP should be left out of the theatres. I can see why they want it though - you just have to load up a hard drive and display a movie just like I do at home. Simple. Film is also expensive and prone to degrading quality over time.

DLP / LCD / Plasma all have one thing in common - Poor picture quality. This stems from poor black levels (this part stems from backlighting), set resolutions (off resolutions = bad picture), poor color representation (part of this stems from backlighting again), and rise and fall times.

As you might have guessed, I have no desire to replace my CRT based TV's which are superior in every respect to the current crop of garbage out there. The dithering alone on DLP's and Plasma / LCD's makes it hard to concentrate for me. All I see is ugly picture.

There is one bad thing about CRT's though - I can hear them and they are loud when in operation. somewhere around the 16 khz range.

-S

PS. Maybe movie companies should look at the next generation of equipment on the way out - Laser projection. Laser projection should fix the poor black levels associated with the current generation of video equipment.

PPS. I'm still on the hunt for my Loewe Aconda 40" widescreen CRT as mentioned in a thread a while back - I can't find it yet and I've pretty much given up.

PPPS. One thing that irks me - They bill this to us as a 'better' technology. Quite the contrary.

[GSpector]

Good points. New technology is not always better, it's sometimes just new.

DLP would look better if they used FSAA :rotfl:

The New Bulbs would be better if they dropped the price by half that way the so called savings would be easier to see.:hmm:

[The Avon Lady]

Let's hope for newer and better technology:

The Auto X Prize.

Step right up, folks. There's $25,000,000 in the pot.