Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: lighting again Re: Re: Communications [was lighting]

Subject: [OM] Re: lighting again Re: Re: Communications [was lighting]
From: Jan Steinman <Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:45:00 -0700
> From: David Thatcher <davidt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> PS I'm not being awkward.

Yes, you are!

I submit, with no more proof than you've presented, that the  
manufacture of CFBs have negligible incremental impact over the  
manufacture of incandescent bulbs. Finely stranded tungsten doesn't  
grow on trees! And the base of an incandescent is typically a big  
lump of solder, unlike the swaged and riveted CFB bases.

Come up with some figures, and so will I. But until you do, you're  
just "being awkward."


:::: I think our [energy] policy is called "aircraft carriers." --  
Irwin Steltzer, 1987 ::::
:::: Jan Steinman http://www.VeggieVanGogh.com ::::



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz