Comments on: A Safer CFL Now on the Market

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 23:32:07 +0000

I don’t mind CFL bulbs. There are worse lighting options. I once worked in a place with high pressure sodium vapor lighting. This is the most horrid lighting I’ve seen used indoors. It’s bad enough used as street lighting. That workplace so overdid the lighting that I had a significant year-round “farmer tan”! Until I bought a watch and discovered a tan line where I wear it I thought the “perma-tan” was a result of an experiment I did in the 1980s.

Don’t like CFL bulbs? OK. But it could be worse!

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 06:38:51 +0000

Yes and how much do these “Armor LIte” light bulbs cost!?? Again it’s a question of money and the government or anyone else not having the right to tell me what kind of lighting I’m required to use and then enforcing it by eliminating my ability to get the ones that I DO want. It’s just like them getting rid of the tetraethyl lead in the gasoline. That was actual GAS!! It started well, ran great , gave good mileage and was cheap. Now this “witches brew” they try to pawn off as fuel is horrible. No mileage out of it, hard starting, all the fuel system components have to be plastic because of the corrosive nature of the fuel (which means when something breaks, which it does, being plastic) you can’t repair it you have to replkace a WHOLE component at some rediculously high price. Yeah this whole stinking environmental movement has be WONDERFUL!! :-(

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 22:56:47 +0000

100% agree Private Citizen. I hate the CFL’s too. As far as recycling them, do what I do: put them in a solid color trash bag, back over them with the car (instant compaction) and pitch them in the trash. I agree that the government has NO RIGHT to tell me what kind of lighting I can use. As I’ve stated elsewhere, it boils down to the fact that you can get incandecents 4/1.00 at the dollar store as opposed to (minimum) 2.00 to 4.00 apiece for the damned CFL’s. Obviously the bulb manufactureres weren’t making the profit they wanted, so they got the government to enact this BS legislation. The amount of current the cfl’s save is inconsequential, payback takes YEARS , if at all, and they look like hell in my fixtures. Plus, some of my fixtures won’t even accept them, which neans MORE expense because I will have to replace the fixtures. All this because some tree-hugger wants to “stop global warming” which is BS anyway, and “save the spotted frog” or some other such nonsense at MY expense.

By: Private Citizen

Private Citizen — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:33:44 +0000

I hate fluorescent lighting! They are hard on the eyes, do not give equivalent light for their stated watt-power, and have to be recycled. Give me a break. Those of us in rural America don’t have recycling centers anywhere near us, and I’m not going to use the gas and put wear and tear on my car to drive to a distant city large enough to have a recycler just to dispose of fluorescent bulbs.

But my biggest complaint in the nerve of the federal government telling me what kind of lighting I may use, and eventually making it impossible to use the kind I want. I like incandescent partly because it does give off heat. In winter time this makes a comforting difference.