Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 02:12 PM

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=10923

Posted by: Bloggo Sep 2 2009, 02:20 PM

Yep, Illuminating article eh!

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 02:27 PM

Personally I can't tell the difference with the low energy lights.

Light is light - isn't it?

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 03:11 PM

I know people who cannot see the need for the new type of bulbs and consider that they give a poorer light than ye olde 100w bulbs and who also think it's another government conspiracy. They also, of course, do not believe in global warming.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 2 2009, 03:44 PM

I think it will take more than a swiz set about by the EU to tackle Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGM). The light given off by Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL) is quite poor also.

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 03:58 PM

I tend to think a lot of it is the natural human instinct of resistance to change.

Also, global warming or not, they use less energy for the same amount of light so that can't be bad.

Fluorescent tubes, which use the same technology, have been around for years.

Posted by: user23 Sep 2 2009, 05:17 PM

A local businessman profiting from global warming?

He's gone right down in my estimation.

Posted by: Blake Sep 2 2009, 05:32 PM

And mine. I went there and bought something last Saturday; I wish I had not now.

SHAME ON YOUR BARRY FORKIN; WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO HELP DEFEAT CLIMATE CHANGE??

Posted by: Darren Sep 2 2009, 06:04 PM

I know where I'm going tomorrow.

Good old unelected European bureaucrats. The logic does not stand up.

A 100w CFL gives out the equivilent of about 60w filiment light. The wattage revers to the power as light is measured in Lumens. Therefore you need more to provide the same light levles

Filiment tubes do not contain mercury and other heavy metals. If a CFL breaks, that mercury (in dust form) goes everywhere.

Filiment bulbs can be recycled easily. CFL's require special treatment as they are classed as hazardous waste.

People with certain photosensitive conditions cannot use CFL and even normal tubes can cause painful migranes. Filiment bulds do not as the light is constant, not a series of rapid flickers.

Dimmer switches cannot use CFL as they are designed to work at a set power level. Dimmers can cause them to explode.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 2 2009, 06:05 PM

A £1 each!?!

for something costing him about £0.10? Naked profiteering at its capitalist best.

Mr Forkin said that, in his experience, the low energy bulbs were a “con” because they still required regular changing and often cost 12 times the price of a normal bulb.
£12 ? I don't think so. We have nothing but energy saving lamps ( A bulb is something you plant ) in our house.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 06:09 PM

Yeah - but what would you do if, as one of the very few indies left in Newbury, you wanted to stay in business?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 2 2009, 06:12 PM

Charge a fair price. Not hike the price just because he has the only supply.

Posted by: user23 Sep 2 2009, 06:12 PM

Not rip off my customers to such a large extent and help destroy the planet in the process, that's for sure.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 06:16 PM

You call them lamps, - just to be different - so good for you. In Oz, they call them globes, witness going to a shop and asking for bulbs the first time - that's just what you were offered - flower bulbs. In the UK think they will be known as bulbs for a long while yet, though.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 06:19 PM

Since he's local - why not go round and tell him?

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 06:20 PM

The wattage i.e.100W in an incandescent lamp refers not to the light output but to the electrical power consumed by the device.

The 100W equivalent given for a CFL refers to the amount of light given out by the lamp is equivalent to a 100W incandescent.

A 100w equivalent CFL uses approximately 20W of electrical power.

Dimmer switches cannot cause the CFL to explode.
They just need a certain voltage to light and this is not achieved at the lower settings of a dimmer switch.
They just give out a constant level of light and will trigger when the dimmer is turned up to reach a sufficient voltage.

One thing I've noticed though is that most, if not all, of the boxes my low energy bulbs have come in say they cannot be used in enclosed light fittings.
So we have a problem there unless we get rid of all such fittings!

Posted by: Sarah Sep 2 2009, 06:21 PM

Well said.

I know several people, who because they find the initial quality of light from energy saving bulbs so poor, leave lights switched on all day to avoid the first few dim minutes. If this happens nationwide, we could be doing even less to save energy at the end of the day.

I'm afraid I'll also be stocking up.

Posted by: Strafin Sep 2 2009, 06:36 PM

And energy savers take a lot more manufacturing, and have a higher carbon footprint, so anyone not using the old style lamps are as guilty of destroying our earth, for us and our children.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 06:38 PM

Same advice to you, I'm afraid - if you feel that strongly about it, and we're definitely not talking about the Tesco's of this world, what's stopping you taking a few minutes out to go in and tell the geezer what you really think?

Posted by: Darren Sep 2 2009, 06:39 PM

Very intersting report on CFL

http://www.thebriefingroom.com/archives/2008/08/mercury_in_cfls.html

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 06:44 PM

Ooeeerrr!

We're all in the kack now then.

Better all get off to Barry's first thing in the morning!

But hang on............. what happens when he runs out?

(I wonder how much he will sell the last bulb for )

Probably go underground.....................'ere Barry, 'ow much can you do me a 100W incandescent for....under the counter like?

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 06:55 PM

Pssss - I've got some stashed by my electric meter - 10 sovs a throw, no questions asked, ok?

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 06:57 PM

Could make a killing on ebay

Posted by: Strafin Sep 2 2009, 06:59 PM

In my lounge I have 2 Sainsburys basic 60w lamps attached to dimmers. In my spare bedroom, and main bedroom, I have energy saving Phillips lamps, on regular switches. All went in at the same time, guess which ones I have replaced since they went in. So I have used twice as many energy savers, surely this can't be better?

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 07:00 PM

So what you are saying is Mr. Forkin is actually HELPING the environment by stocking these bulbs?

Surely someone somewhere has done a great deal of research into both types of lamp before recommending we ditch the incandescent?

I'm confused now.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 07:06 PM

Does anyone else remember installing in a fit of frugality, I suppose, the 30 watt bulbs which were readily obtainable in the 80s - the 1980s that is? No wonder my eyesight is rubbish nowadays....

Posted by: On the edge Sep 2 2009, 07:15 PM

Can go back further, my Gran used 25 watt bulbs - on the stairs and in the bedrooms. Not that they were ever used! She was 'wired up' in the mid 60s - having survived with gas lights - one in lounge one in kitchen. Didn't do her much harm; a school teacher and an avid reader.

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 2 2009, 07:19 PM

Barry stocks candles too.

(Not sure if they are the low carbon variety.)

Posted by: JeffG Sep 2 2009, 07:23 PM

He also stocks in-line power connectors for people (like me) who slice through the cable with their hedge cutters. Apparently he sells loads

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 07:35 PM

Time for the classic fork candles sketch then - or forkins sketch - now?

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 2 2009, 07:38 PM

having worked in the electrical contracting trade, I can tell you they are lamps.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 2 2009, 07:40 PM

Having nerver been in his shop in the 31 years I have lived in Newbury, I'm not about to start. He knows what he's doing, anyway.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 07:41 PM

So why does everbody else call them bulbs?

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 2 2009, 07:42 PM

Nerver - surely you ain't frightened of him?

Posted by: Sarah Sep 2 2009, 08:23 PM

And I suppose dumping the millions of bulbs still in warehouses around the country would be doing that?

Does it really matter who sells them?

Some people who wax lyrical about energy saving light bulbs do little else to save energy. It never occurs to them to turn down the thermostat, switch off TV sets in empty rooms, use the washing line instead of the tumble dryer and recycle whenever possible.

Posted by: GMR Sep 2 2009, 08:27 PM

I've got loads of 100 and 60 watt bulbs in my house (stored) and I use energy savers.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 2 2009, 08:30 PM

Try recycling them by giving them to neighbours.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 2 2009, 08:32 PM

If I'm being really honest - the only reason I ever fitted energy saving bulbs was because the old 'candle type' ones kept blowing - admitted the very cheapest type!

Posted by: GMR Sep 2 2009, 08:36 PM

They all use the new type. Besides i am sure i will use them eventually in the next couple of hundred years.

Posted by: spartacus Sep 2 2009, 09:26 PM

Or they wax lyrical about how using energy savers could save the world... then bugger off to New Zealand to watch the whales or look at receding glaciers (flying Club Class of course and helping dump megatons of aviation filth into the atmosphere) Although that does help give a nice red sunset sometimes....

These minor tweaks are all cobblers really without the really BIG decisions being made.

I've got a 100W bulb in the dining room.... but it's on a dimmer switch and only comes on full blast when I need it.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 3 2009, 12:53 AM

It uses the same power regardless how dim the light is.

Posted by: JeffG Sep 3 2009, 08:56 AM

I immediately thought Ohm's Law when you said that. But I suppose if it's a simple rheostat in the dimmer then although the bulb/lamp is dissipating less, the rest is given off as heat in the rheostat. However, if it's an electronic 'chopper' device, then the energy used would be less.

Prepared to be corrected on this

Posted by: badmummajamma Sep 3 2009, 02:40 PM

This is ridiculous. Did you not read the article?

Barry Forkin is merely meeting demand with supply. How can you think ill of Mr Forkin for giving hundreds of customers what they want?

If no one still wanted conventional "lamps" then he wouldn't stock them. Where's the scorn for the hundreds still buying them?

I'm jealous, I wish I had his foresight.

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 3 2009, 02:46 PM

Throughout this whole thread I have never thought or said ill or Mr. Forkin.

I was just questioning the use of or desire for the old bulbs when we are being "sold" the new ones by the government on the basis of they are better for the environment.

I agree, someone will have to sell the old ones off until there are none left.

Posted by: badmummajamma Sep 3 2009, 02:57 PM

Rats, sorry Biker - I accidentally pressed reply instead of quote. Forum newbie error. Forgive me.

It was supposed to quote User 23's comments about Barry on page 1 of the thread.

Posted by: badmummajamma Sep 3 2009, 02:58 PM

This one.

Posted by: user23 Sep 3 2009, 05:02 PM

One could say the same of those selling booze to under age kids. Do you condone this too?

Where do you stop, drug dealers also are giving customers what they want.

In these two examples morals are put aside in the name of profit.

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 3 2009, 05:05 PM

Good comparison I agree.

Only difference is the two you name are illegal.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 3 2009, 06:26 PM

Has any one of you brave people actually gone along to confront Barry yet?

If I had been accused by somebody of something on a par with selling booze to underage kids, I would at least like to meet my accuser, rather than them hiding away behind a cloak of anoynmity - especially as the accuser is, presumably, local

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 3 2009, 07:45 PM

I think the point trying to be made was that supply and demand is not always an excuse for selling things.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 3 2009, 07:52 PM

Maybe, Biker 1, but it would be nice for one of those slagging him off to come on here and say so, otherwise some people might assume they've done (as Arthur Daley once so eloquently put it) a bottle job...

Posted by: Sarah Sep 3 2009, 08:20 PM

I think the point is, that comparing selling light bulbs quite legally, to selling drink and drugs illegally is totally ridiculous.

Posted by: user23 Sep 3 2009, 08:25 PM

Yes, I'm not suggesting he's doing anything illegal, just morally grey at best, in terms of the environment and the amount of mark-up he's making from the people of Newbury. The people buying the goods are in effect addicts as they're buying something harmful at a highly inflated price.

Surely most people's consciences would have stopped them taking advantage of these addicts.

Posted by: spartacus Sep 3 2009, 08:29 PM

Well bugger me! I never knew that!! Here's me assuming that my dimmers were a good energy saving move all those years ago....I may as well have turned the bloody lights on full anyway....


What a DIMwit

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 3 2009, 08:36 PM

Seems going by this forum then that Barry is right as quoted in the NWN that 9 out of 10 people think that incandescent bulbs are better all round. (Or at least that they prefer them).

I wonder why CFL's have one the battle then?

Posted by: Sarah Sep 3 2009, 09:13 PM

EU directive, and nearly as good as some of the Health and Safety ones.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 3 2009, 10:50 PM

Actually I wasn't right, well, I would have been right years ago ( remember reading a thing on the box of the dimmer saying that it doesn't cut much power).

What I have found is that a dimmed bulb will use more electricity per candela than an equivalent static 'circuit'.

But over all, you are helping the polar bears, but it would be better to use a lower wattage light bulb.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 3 2009, 10:56 PM

Frankly, it is business.

Most people don't have to buy the bulbs, where as a pusher knows an addict (that he has groomed) 'needs' his fix.

I think BF is just using his initiative and fair play to him. It is about time he had a break, bearing in mind how the council's plans have allegedly adversely affected his business.

Posted by: JeffG Sep 4 2009, 08:19 AM

Looks like neither of you read my reply #42.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 4 2009, 11:48 AM

Yes I did, why?

Posted by: JeffG Sep 4 2009, 01:28 PM

OK. Just thought you might have been tempted to comment


Well, logic says that has to be true, since any extra bit of equipment is going to lower the efficiency. Still, a dimmer circuit is probably going to be preferable to choosing from a box full of bulbs of different wattages to suit the occasion.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 4 2009, 02:09 PM

I understand that, it is just that as I was quoted, I wanted to acknowledge that I was misguided - partially.


Your right, but if one is always on 'half' beem, then perhaps a lower wattage would be better - perhaps!

Posted by: blackdog Sep 4 2009, 04:52 PM

Isn't that the post where you get Ohm's law wrong? A rheostat reduces the current in a circuit in order to dim a bulb. As the voltage remains the same there must be a power saving.

Posted by: user23 Sep 4 2009, 05:26 PM

Most people don't have to buy drugs, and they don't.

As far as dealers and addicts go, no offence but that's pretty wide of the mark. Most people who get into drugs do so through peer pressure, not through "grooming" by a "pusher".

Nice attempt to bring the council into yet a another thread, by the way.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Sep 4 2009, 06:51 PM

Tell us, please, since you seem to feel so strongly on the subject - have you been round to have a chat with Barry yet? If not, like the old reposte to a dodgy answer at a job interview - so what's stopping you?

Posted by: Sarah Sep 4 2009, 07:55 PM

Barry's not a monitor.

Posted by: GMR Sep 4 2009, 08:14 PM

I am surprised Barry Forkin is still going; especially where he is situated. I didn't think anybody got any business in that part of outer-town.

Posted by: Darren Sep 4 2009, 08:22 PM

Simple, you can go in there, get advice as well as the product you need instead of the product a chain think you want. It's a bit like an old fashion sweet shop. If it's not on display, no doubt it's in a little drawer somewhere round the back.

Posted by: GMR Sep 4 2009, 08:37 PM

To be honest you can get stuff in there that you can't get anywhere else. I've got a very old lawnmower and I couldn't get a blade for it so I tried there and he had one in stock.... cost a bit though.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 4 2009, 08:41 PM

Would have cost you a lot more if you'd had to buy a new mower, so be grateful.

Posted by: Darren Sep 4 2009, 08:46 PM

He also saved the Toomers name when they were across the road and went out of business.

Posted by: GMR Sep 4 2009, 09:05 PM

That's true.

Posted by: GMR Sep 4 2009, 09:06 PM

As suppose he is doing well... that is the main thing.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 4 2009, 09:15 PM

It can't be easy for the independents to make a living, as the Supermarkets now seem to sell everything, their buying power is so great that the little man can no longer compete.

Posted by: GMR Sep 4 2009, 09:25 PM

That is true, what also makes it harder is that it is tucked just outside the town away from human beings.

Posted by: JeffG Sep 5 2009, 10:43 AM

Oops! You're right of course. However it's less efficient since some power is dissipated as heat in the rheostat. So you don't save as much power as you would by replacing the bulb with one of lower wattage.

Have I scraped out of that one?

Posted by: JeffG Sep 5 2009, 10:46 AM

He is closer than the town centre for roughly half of Newbury.

Posted by: GMR Sep 5 2009, 11:32 AM

Well.... that is true, however, when people venture into town how many actually go down Bartholomew Street? Most, as far as I know, go via Sainsbury's or the Clock tower end. It would be interesting to find out how business is compared to the Northbrook street part.

Posted by: JeffG Sep 5 2009, 11:45 AM

Personally, if I walk into town the shortest route is straight past Barry Forkin's. However, I do believe the Bart Street traders have had problems in the past although it usually appears pretty busy to me.

If I were to go as far North as the Clock Tower, I would make sure I had a backpack and survival rations for the long trek back

Posted by: GMR Sep 5 2009, 01:56 PM

I think that is how people see it coming from the other direction, so they don't bother.