In article ,
says...

On 5/2/13 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 2 May 2013 01:18:36 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 01 May 2013 22:44:14 -0400, Hank©
wrote:


Your life is too complicated by this stuff.

Once you get a good array of motion and occupancy sensors in place,
you start wondering why you didn't do it sooner.
This actually started over a quarter century ago when I saw my wife
and daughter using the open refrigerator as a night light.

You gotta be kidding. Even 100 year-old houses are wired with wall
switches by the door. Have you ever heard of flashlights and nite-
lites?

That was my first indoor motion detector, turning on a small light
that lit up the kitchen, dining room and hallway. Now everywhere you
go around he house, inside or out, the light follows you.
The only places that don't have detectors are the bedrooms.
Inside it is really just 5 strategically located detectors and some
low level lighting.

I bet my dogs would be shocked as they wander around the house.
Wonder what all that on/off does for bulb longevity. We have one small
CFL in the range hood that provides almost whole house night light.
Illuminates enough to avoid tripping everywhere, including the bedrooms
if the door is open. My basement isn't wired up for lighting, so I just
keep a 3 dollar LED flashlight on a shelf at the foot of the stairs to
get to the one wall switch 20 feet away in the dark. Haven't even
changed the batteries in about 4 years.
Different strokes.

I guess I like things a little more convenient than walking around
with a flashlight.
Human nature is to turn on the light but not to turn it off. I see it
every night when I am walking the dog around the neighborhood. I know
there are only 1 or 2 people in the house and it is lit up like an
office building, even after I know they are probably in bed.
If you are just passing through, turning off the light requires a 3
way or 4 way loop that probably was not put there by the builder and
would be tough to do after the drywall is up. A $20 occupancy sensor,
strategically located, connected to a light or two in the right place,
fixes all of that.


We don't have problems remembering to turn off the lights when we leave
a room. I do, however, have the outside lights on the front porch and on
either side of the garage on timer switches, and the floods around the
house on motion detectors.

I'm really okay with flicking a switch on and off when I need light or
am leaving. It really isn't a burden to me!

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 09:02:33 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...


And while the dimmable doesn't last as long, 4/5ths of the
life of a standard CFL isn't bad, and better than an incandescent by a
LONG shot. You've been hoodwinked by FOX, like the Mercury in them,
which is 100 to 600 times less than a fever thermometer.

You haven't been able to buy a mercury thermometer for decades and one
would last a lifetime. CFLs are consummables. Virtually every one of
them will end up in the environment somewhere.

No, they don't. And yes you can.

Who sells a mercury fever thermometer?

Notice, if you will, 13 states have them outlawed. That leaves 37 states
that they still can be sold. That plus, do you think that everyone in
those 13 states just got rid of the ones they had?

http://tinyurl.com/br5pjjl

And what about other thermometers that are in use?
I know you may find some lab thermometers with mercury in them but
they are even being phased out.



And you are comparing a GOOD dimmable with the low priced, low
performing, crappy lighting CFL's designed to be put in an ad to get you
into the store.


They are pretty much all made in China. \
If I do go for the Sylvania CFL the reliability numbers get worse.
Their regular CFL is 12000 hours vs 8000 (66% )for the dimmable and it
is still 13w vs 14.
They are $3 and change each vs almost $10.
You still need a special dimmer. (inductive load rated)

I made no assumption or verse about where they were made. So, tell me,
how does $3 versus $10 get you to the "7 times as much"?

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 09:04:44 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 16:53:21 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

Which addition of the code is this in and what section? Does it specify
that the addendum was because of CFL's?

What are you talking about?

The required neutral is specified in NFPA70 (NEC) article 404.2(C).

This came about because the 2 wire devices do not work with LEDs and
CFLs. They work OK with incandescents.
You need a neutral for a 3 wire device and these electronic bulbs
require a 3 wire switching device of you want automatic operation.

That automatic control ends up being encouraged by several energy
codes including the ICC codes and LEEDs.

Some of the ICC references for occupancy sensors


505.2.1.1 Classrooms and meeting rooms.
A control device shall be installed in classrooms (except shop
classrooms, laboratory classrooms, and preschool through 12th grade
classrooms), conference/meeting rooms and employee lunch and break
rooms that automatically turns lighting off within 30 minutes of all
occupants leaving a space. These spaces are not required to be
connected to other automatic lighting shutoff controls.

05.2.2 Automatic lighting shutoff.
Buildings larger than 5,000 square feet (465 m2) shall be equipped
with an automatic control device to shut off lighting in those areas.
This automatic control device shall function on either:
1. A scheduled basis, using time-of-day, with an independent program
schedule that controls the interior lighting in areas that do not
exceed 25,000 square feet (2323 m2) and are not more than one floor;
or
2. An occupant sensor that shall turn lighting off within 30 minutes
of an occupant leaving a space; or



505.2.1.2 All other spaces.
Each control device shall be activated either manually by an occupant
or automatically by sensing an occupant and be capable of overriding
any time-of-day scheduled shut-off control for no more than four hours
in accordance with Section 505.2.2.1. Spatial control shall be limited
as shown in Table 505.2.1.2:


Folks out there in the Peoples Republic of California have even
stricter "Title 24" requirements.
The familiar T12 florescent tube has been banned for years.

And has NOTHING to do with CFL's. NOTHING.

The code also says 50% of the lighting has to be high efficiency (CFL
or LED) and that includes residential

This is true and totally a different subject. What I asked how does the
code passages you've provided have anything to do with CFL's
specifically.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 00:52:42 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

It is just that politically correct "if it just saves one life"
thing
you lefties seem to embrace everywhere else.

Right. I don't agree with a "greenie" code - so I'm a "lefty."
Yup, you sure enough drank the kool-ade.

It appears you are veering to the right when it might cost you money

Get real. You can't even define "lefty" or "righty," so it's senseless
to use them as epithets. But that's an effect of the kool-ade.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 13:26:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 09:02:33 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...


And while the dimmable doesn't last as long, 4/5ths of the
life of a standard CFL isn't bad, and better than an incandescent by a
LONG shot. You've been hoodwinked by FOX, like the Mercury in them,
which is 100 to 600 times less than a fever thermometer.

You haven't been able to buy a mercury thermometer for decades and one
would last a lifetime. CFLs are consummables. Virtually every one of
them will end up in the environment somewhere.

No, they don't. And yes you can.

Who sells a mercury fever thermometer?

Notice, if you will, 13 states have them outlawed. That leaves 37 states
that they still can be sold. That plus, do you think that everyone in
those 13 states just got rid of the ones they had?

http://tinyurl.com/br5pjjl

I ask again, where do you buy them?

Just about anywhere.

http://tinyurl.com/d66cc3b

http://tinyurl.com/cbtcqmf

http://tinyurl.com/d2l78hr

http://tinyurl.com/bps8eub

Need more?



And what about other thermometers that are in use?

I haven't even seen a mercury thermometer in 30 years. These days
people use electronic ones.
Once they are gone, they are gone.
We are making about a billion new CFLs.
122 CFLs have as much mercury as one thermometer (using the cite you
gave and .6g per thermometer vs .005g in a CFL.).

Thermometers are just another of your straw men.

See above. Strawman, eh?


I know you may find some lab thermometers with mercury in them but
they are even being phased out.



And you are comparing a GOOD dimmable with the low priced, low
performing, crappy lighting CFL's designed to be put in an ad to get you
into the store.


They are pretty much all made in China. \
If I do go for the Sylvania CFL the reliability numbers get worse.
Their regular CFL is 12000 hours vs 8000 (66% )for the dimmable and it
is still 13w vs 14.
They are $3 and change each vs almost $10.
You still need a special dimmer. (inductive load rated)

I made no assumption or verse about where they were made.

That was silly of you, wasn't it. Virtually all of them are made in
China

So?

You also assume the $1.20 lamp is significantly worse than the $3 one.



So, tell me,
how does $3 versus $10 get you to the "7 times as much"?

Because you can buy cheaper regular CFLs but I couldn't find the
dimmables cheaper. I assume they have them.
You still ignore the fact that most existing dimmers specifically say
you can't use them with an inductive load. They may work, they may
not, they might just burn up. Hopefully the fire will be contained
inside the box ... or at least that is what U/L says.

Oh, I get it, you just dreamed up a number! I still want to know how
your $3 versus $10 gets you to "7 times as much".

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 13:27:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 09:04:44 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 1 May 2013 16:53:21 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

Which addition of the code is this in and what section? Does it specify
that the addendum was because of CFL's?

What are you talking about?

The required neutral is specified in NFPA70 (NEC) article 404.2(C).

This came about because the 2 wire devices do not work with LEDs and
CFLs. They work OK with incandescents.
You need a neutral for a 3 wire device and these electronic bulbs
require a 3 wire switching device of you want automatic operation.

That automatic control ends up being encouraged by several energy
codes including the ICC codes and LEEDs.

Some of the ICC references for occupancy sensors


505.2.1.1 Classrooms and meeting rooms.
A control device shall be installed in classrooms (except shop
classrooms, laboratory classrooms, and preschool through 12th grade
classrooms), conference/meeting rooms and employee lunch and break
rooms that automatically turns lighting off within 30 minutes of all
occupants leaving a space. These spaces are not required to be
connected to other automatic lighting shutoff controls.

05.2.2 Automatic lighting shutoff.
Buildings larger than 5,000 square feet (465 m2) shall be equipped
with an automatic control device to shut off lighting in those areas.
This automatic control device shall function on either:
1. A scheduled basis, using time-of-day, with an independent program
schedule that controls the interior lighting in areas that do not
exceed 25,000 square feet (2323 m2) and are not more than one floor;
or
2. An occupant sensor that shall turn lighting off within 30 minutes
of an occupant leaving a space; or



505.2.1.2 All other spaces.
Each control device shall be activated either manually by an occupant
or automatically by sensing an occupant and be capable of overriding
any time-of-day scheduled shut-off control for no more than four hours
in accordance with Section 505.2.2.1. Spatial control shall be limited
as shown in Table 505.2.1.2:


Folks out there in the Peoples Republic of California have even
stricter "Title 24" requirements.
The familiar T12 florescent tube has been banned for years.

And has NOTHING to do with CFL's. NOTHING.

The code also says 50% of the lighting has to be high efficiency (CFL
or LED) and that includes residential

This is true and totally a different subject. What I asked how does the
code passages you've provided have anything to do with CFL's
specifically.

The code sections mandate electronic switching devices and they will
require that 3d wire we were talking about.
Try to keep up

There is NOTHING, and I repeat NOTHING in the code exclusive to CFL's OR
anything that is a direct cause of CFL's. NOTHING.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 14:12:00 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 00:52:42 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

It is just that politically correct "if it just saves one life"
thing
you lefties seem to embrace everywhere else.

Right. I don't agree with a "greenie" code - so I'm a "lefty."
Yup, you sure enough drank the kool-ade.

It appears you are veering to the right when it might cost you money

Get real. You can't even define "lefty" or "righty," so it's senseless
to use them as epithets. But that's an effect of the kool-ade.



I have been talking to you for a couple of years and you usually do
not see a government intrusion you don't like.

What "intrusions?" Government dropping the hammer on gun sales to
criminals and whack jobs, which you think is just dandy?
It's you who here defending the NEC, not me. You're ok with government
imposing neutral wires on everybody's wall switches because YOU like
using lighting controls. How precious.
Outside of taxes, NEC is probably the biggest government enforced
"intrusion" into peoples lives.
What are these government "intrusions" you're talking about?
Chlorinated water? Obsoleting inefficient incandescent light bulbs?
An ordinance about riding your horse down the street?
Sorry, none of that bothered me a whit.
For Christ's sake, aren't you in a HOA? Is that the "government" you
speak of? I'm not in a HOA. Won't have that. I value my freedom.
Except for taxes, local codes generated by the likes of NEC, and
car/traffic laws, I don't even know the government exists.
Same for most law-abiding citizens. What problems are you having?
You sound like a paranoid, or an outlaw.

On Thu, 2 May 2013 17:17:42 -0500, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 14:12:00 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 2 May 2013 00:52:42 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

It is just that politically correct "if it just saves one life"
thing
you lefties seem to embrace everywhere else.

Right. I don't agree with a "greenie" code - so I'm a "lefty."
Yup, you sure enough drank the kool-ade.

It appears you are veering to the right when it might cost you money

Get real. You can't even define "lefty" or "righty," so it's senseless
to use them as epithets. But that's an effect of the kool-ade.



I have been talking to you for a couple of years and you usually do
not see a government intrusion you don't like.

What "intrusions?" Government dropping the hammer on gun sales to
criminals and whack jobs, which you think is just dandy?
It's you who here defending the NEC, not me. You're ok with government
imposing neutral wires on everybody's wall switches because YOU like
using lighting controls. How precious.
Outside of taxes, NEC is probably the biggest government enforced
"intrusion" into peoples lives.
What are these government "intrusions" you're talking about?
Chlorinated water? Obsoleting inefficient incandescent light bulbs?
An ordinance about riding your horse down the street?
Sorry, none of that bothered me a whit.
For Christ's sake, aren't you in a HOA? Is that the "government" you
speak of? I'm not in a HOA. Won't have that. I value my freedom.
Except for taxes, local codes generated by the likes of NEC, and
car/traffic laws, I don't even know the government exists.
Same for most law-abiding citizens. What problems are you having?
You sound like a paranoid, or an outlaw.



You should really take out the corncob.

John H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

Never did.

Tim wrote:
On May 1, 5:10 am, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 5/1/13 12:58 AM, wrote:







On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:10:08 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
A study out Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences examined attitudes about energy efficiency in liberals and
conservatives, and found that promoting energy-efficient products and
services on the basis of their environmental benefits actually turned
conservatives off from picking them. The researchers first quizzed
participants on how much they value various benefits of energy
efficiency, including reducing carbon emissions, reducing foreign oil
dependence, and reducing how much consumers pay for energy; cutting
emissions appealed to conservatives the least.
The study then presented participants with a real-world choice: With a
fixed amount of money in their wallet, respondents had to “buy” either
an old-school lightbulb or an efficient compact florescent bulb (CFL),
the same kind Bachmann railed against. Both bulbs were labeled with
basic hard data on their energy use, but without a translation of that
into climate pros and cons. When the bulbs cost the same, and even when
the CFL cost more, conservatives and liberals were equally likely to buy
the efficient bulb. But slap a message on the CFL’s packaging that says
“Protect the Environment,” and “we saw a significant drop-off in more
politically moderates and conservatives choosing that option,” said
study author Dena Gromet, a researcher at the University of
Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business.
Got that? With all other factors being equal, conservatives were less
likely to buy the exact same lightbulb if you told them it would help
the environment. They didn't have any more aversion to buying
energy-saving lightbulbs than anyone else, unless the package pointed
out that this particular lightbulb was slightly less earth-screwing than
the other one. Tell them that, and they were more likely to go for the
other one.
http://tinyurl.com/c6pmf4b
A lot of people assume "save the planet" equates to "too expensive to
sell on it's own merits"
In the case of CFLs I think they were poorly marketed in the first
place. People bought them for luminaires that they were not suitable
for and they got a bad reputation.
They don't "dim", they don't like living "base up" in an enclosed can
and they don't work well in load powered switching applications like 2
wire motion detectors or timers.
The ironic thing is these are the things energy aware customers are
likely to have.
The study demonstrated that conservatives and liberals were equally
likely to buy either bulb, but conservatives were less likely to buy the
energy savings lightbulb if you told them it would help the environment.
*That* is the point here.
I have a bunch of the newer bulbs. I have them all over my shop. about
16 100 watters. I don't know if they really save that much over an
incandescent, but I don't have to change them out nearly as often.

But the cost of the bulb over the cost of energy isn't really a
savings. when you figure it costs somewhat more to make one than it
does an incandescent it also costs more to buy, so... I really
dont' think they're that great of an all around 'bargain'. over a
standard or a florescent .

But they work...
100W incandescent bulbs are still available. Look for "rough service"
or "commercial duty".