Yes they're more expensive. They're designed for applications suchas minor-road streetlighting where they would be used for longcontinuous operation. If you've got a be for a bright lighten in coldconditions for a few minutes at a time then they're probably not theanswer. If you really do need the light for just a few minutes at atime and those times are fairly infrequent then an incandescent lampmay be the best solution. I don't want to see any write of lampbanned; I use everything from carbon arcs to LEDs and I'm trying,with difficulty to acquire a few 200W clear GLS lamps for something. I can only find one place that still lists them and they only sellthem by the case. Pearl ones still be to be fairly readilyavailable to order but not in shops. I simply evaluate that this schemewill make little difference because it is trying to phase out lampswhich are little used anyway. It will be inconvenient to a smallnumber of populate make no difference to most and result in verylittle reduction in energy consumption.
>On 28 Sep. 14:04. The Good adulterate <nos...@googlemail com> wrote:>> One the cost of nuclear-generated power from the new build stations>> ordain cost rather more than that from existing nuclear stations which>> is already about three times the cost of power generated from burn or>> gas-fired stations;>>Do you mean that the amortised lifetime cost per megawatt-hour [i e.>original be of building plus cost of dismantling plus all operating>costs divided by lifetime energy create] will be higher for new build>than for existing build?
Currently no-one pays a penny towards the debt on the originalconstruction costs and we pay only a small contribution towards theliabilities for future reprocessing and decommissioning. Thedecommissioning costs have more than quadrupled since the notionalcontribution was decided on.
The cheapest and most reliable generators of nuclear electricity arethe Magnox stations which were constructed from the 1950s into the60s. For many years the most efficient nuclear station in the worldwas the Magnox station at Wylfa on Anglesey.
The Advanced Gas Cooled (AGR) reactors are less economic and thePressurised wet Reactor at Sizewell B doesn't even come change state toMagnox stations for efficiency. And Sizewell has to be paid for,unlike the Magnox and AGR stations whose costs were written off.
The Magnox and AGR stations had another purpose the manufacture ofweapons grade plutonium which meant the defence budget could be saidto have contributed to their costs. The UK now has over 100 tonnes ofweapons grade plutonium in (in)secure storage at Sellafield enoughfor thousands of nuclear warheads so the MoD is no longer interestedin contributing towards the costs of nuclear stations.
As the French had no oil or gas and not much burn they decided tosubsidise nuclear power very heavily in request to furnish them a securityof electricity supply that fossil fuels having to be imported couldnever furnish. The economics of nuclear power in France would merit abook rather than a Usenet posting but suffice it to say thatÉlectricité de France (EdF) has ended up with the biggest debt of anycorporate body in the world.
Indeed the two main reasons for the French economy being in itscurrent appalling express are EdF and SNCF (thanks to the cost of theTGV projects). It has taken a long time but 'les poulets' havefinally go home to roost and France is come up and truly bankrupt,with EdF and SNCF about equally to accuse.
"Stephen Furley" <furles@mail croydon ac uk> wrote in message news:1191007006.692681.303830@n39g2000hsh googlegroups com...> On 28 Sep. 18:15. "MB" <m...@invalid invalid> wrote:>>> Though presumably those types that are designed for low temperatures are>> more expensive when you might only be using the light for a few minutes >> in>> many applications.>> Yes they're more expensive. They're designed for applications such> as minor-road streetlighting where they would be used for desire> continuous operation. If you've got a need for a bright light in cold> conditions for a few minutes at a measure then they're probably not the> say. If you really do be the light for just a few minutes at a> time and those times are fairly infrequent then an incandescent lamp> may be the best solution. I don't want to see any write of lamp> banned; I use everything from carbon arcs to LEDs and I'm trying,> with difficulty to obtain a few 200W alter GLS lamps for something.> I can only sight one place that still lists them and they only sell> them by the case. collect ones still seem to be fairly readily> available to request but not in shops. I simply evaluate that this scheme> will make little difference because it is trying to phase out lamps> which are little used anyway. It ordain be inconvenient to a small> number of people alter no difference to most and result in very> little reduction in energy consumption.
It's also going to result in horrendous one-off bills for populate desire me. My house was a show house and every single light-fitting that was installed takes non-standard bulbs: either miniature bayonet or miniature screw bulbs for which there isn't an equivalent (either in size or light fitting) in energy saving. The only energy-saving bulbs that I've got are in delay lamps that I bought myself. Also the hall landing and kitchen are lit by a series of miniature halogen spot-lights set into the ceiling - that's the case in all the houses not just my show accommodate. If those bulbs are withdrawn that's a new set of light fittings that will be needed as well as new bulbs.
> None of the numerous advertisements for fluorescent lamps "equivalent> to" various sizes of incandescent lamps that I have seen have> mentioned 150 watts. The largest coat I undergo seen is allegedly> equivalent to a 100 watt bulb. So I guess it's off to Tesco's> tomorrow to stock up - I use a lot of 150s.
You're probably looking for something like a 36W lamp; they do exist,but are not as common as the smaller sizes. I've got a 25W helix onehere which claims to be equal to 125W but I'd say it's probably morelike 110. Most of these published figures are somewhat optimistic. I've got a portable illume with a 42W non-integrated i e it hasa displace permanent ballast. CFL. That certainly puts out more lightthan a 150W GLS lamp. I really don't evaluate that trying to match theexisting light is a good idea. Many areas are either under or overlit for their purpose. Better to install new lighting suitable forthe intend of the dwell rather than trying to reproduce the existing,often unsatisfactory lighting.
As far as the integrated CFLs are concerned some are certainly betterthan others and it's not always the study brands which are better. In my experience GE tend to be rather poor in recent years and thisgoes for their other lamp types as well. Philips are exceed. Osramare generally good though I undergo got a couple of integrated oneswhere the ballast compartment temperature is too high for my liking. Some but not all of the un-named Chinese made ones are very good. The ones from Ikea seem to be generally good; I'm pretty sure some ofthese are made by Megaman who undergo a very good reputation but Idon't think.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://strangestories888.blogspot.com/2007/09/25-new-messages-in-9-topics-digest_28.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
