Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site alberta.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!alberta!makaren
From: makaren@alberta.UUCP (Darrell Makarenko)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Efficient long-life light bulbs?
Message-ID: <402@alberta.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 6-Feb-85 10:55:21 EST
Article-I.D.: alberta.402
Posted: Wed Feb  6 10:55:21 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Feb-85 04:16:28 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: U. of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
Lines: 17

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR LIGHT BULB ***

  We've discussed whether it is better to buy long-life lightbulbs
  or regular ones; diodes in the circuit; 130 vs 120 volt bulbs;
  G.E. vs other brands; the efficiency of long life bulbs;
  whether it is more economical to have a 75% efficient infinite
  life bulb or a 100% efficient 1000 hr bulb; whether turning the
  bulb on and off causes it to burn out faster; whether A.C or D.C.
  is better for the bulb; whether you should hang your bulbs rightside
  up, upside down or sideways; ...... . . . . .

  but the question remains

  Is it possible that the light bulb industry does have the technology
  (or could develop it) to manufacture a longer-life bulb without a 
  descrease in energy efficiency but purposely makes them to burn out 
  at 1000 hr so that people will have to buy new ones?  No. Couldn't be!