Ninehigh
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 08:22 PM |
|
|
Changing a light bulb
What are them light fittings called that are in most houses? The ones that dangle from a cord in the middle of the room? Are they available in gu10
fittings?
|
|
|
|
|
balidey
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 08:26 PM |
|
|
pendant ?
Dutch bears have terrible skin due to their clogged paws
|
|
|
greglogan
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 08:33 PM |
|
|
they're called pendants. But why would you want it in gu10? They're not known for being the best lamps.
Women are meant to be loved, not understood.
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 08:33 PM |
|
|
bayonet?
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
slingshot2000
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 08:35 PM |
|
|
Bayonet cap (BC), nothing like a GU10 fitting!
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 08:40 PM |
|
|
I'm just thinking of fitting energy saving lights without blowing that saving on fitting other kinds of, well fittings. But a replacement
pendant is a 2 minute job... Missus's desk lamp has a led gu10 bulb and it's alright
|
|
|
norfolkluego
|
| posted on 25/4/11 at 10:40 PM |
|
|
Get some candles, they'll be brighter
and probably cheaper
and probably environmentally better
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 01:05 AM |
|
|
If you're gonna dangle a single GU10 in the middle of a room, may as well just gaffer tape a torch to the ceiling. Same result - a dark room
with a pool of light on the floor!
Why not just use a normal bayonet/ES pendant and fit an energy saving bulb to it? You can get 100W equivalent ones that are OK (though I'd
hesitate to say equivalent to an old 100W bulb). Depends how big the room is really.
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 01:09 AM |
|
|
I do use energy saving bulbs, I was just thinking that you can get 3 or 4 watt (as opposed to 15 or 60) ones. It was worth asking really..
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 01:33 AM |
|
|
The 3 - 4W bulbs are LED as opposed to flourescent. Yes they are even more efficient but the amount of light is much less too. A decent 4W LED GU10 is
roughly equivalent to a 35W halogen GU10 (or an 8-ish W flourescent GU10 or thereabouts). One on a pendant would not adequately light an average size
room. I've got 5 downlights in the bathroom each fitted with a 4W LED and the room is very well lit. In the two bedrooms and lounge we have fan
light fittings that have three GU10s, and these are fitted with 5W LEDs which dont quite do the job of the standard 50W halogens but are perfectly
adequate. If you're already using compact flourescent energy savers, you wont save much more money switching to LEDs.
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 02:02 AM |
|
|
I did find these that appear to be alright.
I also found this calculator which shows just how much you can save. Tell you
what if you still use them old bulbs (which some in our house are) there's a packet to be saved.
But yeah the difference between 5x11w bulbs and 5x5w bulbs is about £1.50 a month
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 07:15 AM |
|
|
I will hold the lamp and you turn the room........
Im an electrical bod and I hate these low energy supposed to be good for the environment lamps.
The energy to make them and the c**p put in them is scary.....mercury and other such nastys.
All to get a dim light that harks back to candles  and we call this progress ......replacing fittings that are perfectly serviceable all in the
name of energy saving.... these all used energy to make them ect
like bombing for peace great idea.
|
|
|
AndyW
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 07:51 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
I will hold the lamp and you turn the room........
Im an electrical bod and I hate these low energy supposed to be good for the environment lamps.
The energy to make them and the c**p put in them is scary.....mercury and other such nastys.
All to get a dim light that harks back to candles and we call this progress ......replacing fittings that are perfectly serviceable all in the
name of energy saving.... these all used energy to make them ect
like bombing for peace great idea.
I totally agree, Ive heard about the nasty stuff in these energy saving bulbs. And as you say, why replace a perfectly good light with another, thus
creating more electrical waste.
I really dont thing we will change the world by using "energy efficient" bulbs.
Just my opinion
|
|
|
Miks15
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 07:59 AM |
|
|
same point it annoys me when they call electric cars zero emmisions. Yeh ok it might be when its driving along. But what about all the emmisions from
the power plant when the electricity for the car is being generated. Granted itd probably still be less per mile but why not just say that instead of
saying its zero emmisions. Annoys me everytime i see it.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 11:51 AM |
|
|
Nasty stuff like mercury, etc has been banned in RoHS compliant energy saving bulbs (i.e. decent ones - cheap chinese imports who knows?) for years. I
dont think there's anything nasty in LED bulbs anyway. To the OP - yeah there are LED replacements for standard BC/ES fittings available. If you
think an old 60W bulb would light the room in question adequately give those a whirl (bearing in mind that 60W equivalence will be generous to say the
least in my experience).
|
|
|
slingshot2000
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 01:05 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by AndyW
quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
I will hold the lamp and you turn the room........
Im an electrical bod and I hate these low energy supposed to be good for the environment lamps.
The energy to make them and the c**p put in them is scary.....mercury and other such nastys.
All to get a dim light that harks back to candles and we call this progress ......replacing fittings that are perfectly serviceable all in the
name of energy saving.... these all used energy to make them ect
like bombing for peace great idea.
I totally agree, Ive heard about the nasty stuff in these energy saving bulbs. And as you say, why replace a perfectly good light with another, thus
creating more electrical waste.
I really dont thing we will change the world by using "energy efficient" bulbs.
Just my opinion
I am in total agreement with what these to sensible chaps said above !!
Regards
Jon
(I am also an electrical bod)
|
|
|
slingshot2000
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 01:08 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Miks15
same point it annoys me when they call electric cars zero emmisions. Yeh ok it might be when its driving along. But what about all the emmisions from
the power plant when the electricity for the car is being generated. Granted itd probably still be less per mile but why not just say that instead of
saying its zero emmisions. Annoys me everytime i see it.
I also agree fully with this!
And. . . . . . . . . when is somebody going to calculate the losses involved in the transmission of the electicity from the power station to the
charger, the losses in the charging of the battery and include these in the figures for the car ??
Regards
Jon
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 26/4/11 at 01:14 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by slingshot2000
quote:
Originally posted by Miks15
same point it annoys me when they call electric cars zero emmisions. Yeh ok it might be when its driving along. But what about all the emmisions from
the power plant when the electricity for the car is being generated. Granted itd probably still be less per mile but why not just say that instead of
saying its zero emmisions. Annoys me everytime i see it.
I also agree fully with this!
And. . . . . . . . . when is somebody going to calculate the losses involved in the transmission of the electicity from the power station to the
charger, the losses in the charging of the battery and include these in the figures for the car ??
Regards
Jon
hmm, and these hybrids, you don't get energy for nothing, so to use a petrol engine to generate electric, you must be losing some power output
from the engine to charge the batteries. plus some power loss through heat, sound etc (both ways) surely you're better off with just the engine?
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
norfolkluego
|
| posted on 28/4/11 at 01:45 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by blakep82
quote:
Originally posted by slingshot2000
quote:
Originally posted by Miks15
same point it annoys me when they call electric cars zero emmisions. Yeh ok it might be when its driving along. But what about all the emmisions from
the power plant when the electricity for the car is being generated. Granted itd probably still be less per mile but why not just say that instead of
saying its zero emmisions. Annoys me everytime i see it.
I also agree fully with this!
And. . . . . . . . . when is somebody going to calculate the losses involved in the transmission of the electicity from the power station to the
charger, the losses in the charging of the battery and include these in the figures for the car ??
Regards
Jon
hmm, and these hybrids, you don't get energy for nothing, so to use a petrol engine to generate electric, you must be losing some power output
from the engine to charge the batteries. plus some power loss through heat, sound etc (both ways) surely you're better off with just the engine?
Er.... chaps, you're not supposed to mention that kind of suff, might frighten the general public into questioning some of the things that are
'fact', you can't question it (it's a bit like religion)
|
|
|
