Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 75 of 75

Thread: End of an era - GE closed last light bulb plant in US

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Kentucky
    Posts
    3,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Curt Harms View Post
    I think you'll be able to buy halogen bulbs for at least a while. More $ though. I wonder if someone will come out with a 100 watt heat source with an Edison base. More than a few light bulbs are used as you are using them, as a heat source.
    bulbs are use for the heat [or was ] on the farm [newly hatch chickens ] and in the hospital nursery and I almost forgot that the dope plants need the heat from a bulb

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Anaheim, Ca
    Posts
    908
    Those are High Pressure sodium bulbs they are still made (so all the medical marijuana growers can stay in business)
    Craig Matheny
    Anaheim, Ca
    45 watt Epilog Laser, 60 watt Epilog Laser,
    Plasma Cutter, MiG Welder
    Rikon 70-100 Lathe
    Shop Smith V510, To many hand Tools and
    Universal Repair Kit (1- Hammer and 1- Roll of Duck Tape)

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    2,367
    The phillips bulbs that are yellow when off are fantastic. Lots of light, quite natural looking, and very little energy use. They are a little expensive, so I just wait for sales.
    Paul

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,441
    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Wiggins View Post
    I keep thinking about situations where you might WANT the inefficiency of an incandescent bulb to create a little heat, like a coffee can dryer for dowels. I had a friend who used a light bulb for heat inside his well pump cover so the pump wouldn't freeze up in the winter.
    I understand that they replaced some traffic lights with LEDs but in the winter, they were covered with snow and ice so you could not see them..... I was told that they then installed heaters....

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Monroe, MI
    Posts
    11,896
    OK, but with very minor controls you could turn those heaters on when the temperature inside the housing dropped below freezing, and when the sun is beating on them even in winter, I bet that's a lot less time than even 1/3 of the year. Plus crews aren't having to change bulbs on a regular basis.


  6. #66
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Grottoes, VA.
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Pitonyak View Post
    I understand that they replaced some traffic lights with LEDs but in the winter, they were covered with snow and ice so you could not see them..... I was told that they then installed heaters....
    I'd be curious to know the details of the heaters they used... with all the other stupid stuff I see locally concerning traffic lights, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the heaters stayed on constant all winter long. I certainly hope that isn't the case. There are so many ill programed traffic lights in all the cities here in the Shenandoah Valley, it isn't the least bit funny. Sensored lights that take multiple minutes to change when theres no traffic from the other direction, lights that change instantly for people coming of side streets that make a right turn and they could have simply made a right on red, etc, etc. I laugh in disgust when I hear the term "traffic engineer".

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Toronto Ontario
    Posts
    11,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Pitonyak View Post
    I understand that they replaced some traffic lights with LEDs but in the winter, they were covered with snow and ice so you could not see them..... I was told that they then installed heaters....
    They don't have any heaters here on the LED traffic lamps...........However it may be too cold most of the winter to worry about it.

    We don't heat antennas most of the time when it's snowing either, unless it's near zero and the snow is sticking.......Rod.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    4,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin W Johnson View Post
    I laugh in disgust when I hear the term "traffic engineer".
    Your first clue that there's a problem is that everyone involved in traffic control (elected officials, police, engineers, construction workers, etc.) call a certain implement an "automatic traffic control device" or "automatic traffic signal". The rest of the driving public calls them, "stoplights".
    Jason

    "Don't get stuck on stupid." --Lt. Gen. Russel Honore


  9. Actually if I remember correctly back when I was doing electrical work for a living the light bulbs for traffic lights were rated at 130 volts were as a standard light bulb for your house is spec'd out at 120 volts. Since most houses average about 122 to 125 volts the light bulbs with the higher voltage rating will last much longer.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    5,427
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Roehl View Post
    Your first clue that there's a problem is that everyone involved in traffic control (elected officials, police, engineers, construction workers, etc.) call a certain implement an "automatic traffic control device" or "automatic traffic signal". The rest of the driving public calls them, "stoplights".
    Just about every type of engineering has different names for objects. This doesn't mean engineers are bad just because they use different names for things than the public does.

    I believe the main problem with traffic engineering is lack of money. Many major highway interchanges locally are diamonds due to lack of money to build a proper interchange. A road project currently under way has built some of the bridges for only two lanes even though there are future plans to go three lane. The project is under a very tight budget so I guess they decided saving a a million now is worth spending more money down the road to widen the bridges. The same project also eliminates a bunch of ramps to save money. Do you really think the traffic engineers would have eliminated those ramps if they had their way and the money to do it right?

    The budget for the above mentioned project was originally $140 million and had all the bells and whistles and I think it even had new ramps that were missing when the highway was built years ago. Unfortunately, the project got pushed back until after 2030 due to lack of money. Someone decided around 2009 that the bridges in the area needed replacement and they had the money to do so. They came up with $40 million for the project. The project was totally redesigned and they cut it to the bare bones. The project will improve traffic flow, but not as nicely as the original project. Local residents are quite upset as the missing ramps mean tons more local traffic. They even widened an existing bridge over the highway to handle the extra local traffic.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Saint Helens, OR
    Posts
    2,463
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Elfert View Post
    The project is under a very tight budget so I guess they decided saving a a million now is worth spending more money down the road to widen the bridges. The same project also eliminates a bunch of ramps to save money. Do you really think the traffic engineers would have eliminated those ramps if they had their way and the money to do it right?
    Pennywise, pound foolish. Selling infrastructure is either very easy or virtually impossible. Just depends on who the winners and losers are.
    Measure twice, cut three times, start over. Repeat as necessary.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Grottoes, VA.
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Elfert View Post
    Just about every type of engineering has different names for objects. This doesn't mean engineers are bad just because they use different names for things than the public does.
    I don't believe that was what he was saying at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Elfert View Post
    I believe the main problem with traffic engineering is lack of money.
    I disagree. There are far too many examples of ill designed roadways and intersections that would have cost no more to have configured them correctly. And when it comes to stoplights being programed correctly, there is no additional cost. We as a nation simply need more people in those postions to give a damn about proper traffic control. I can't imagine that they don't drive the very roads in which they are responsible for the signals, and that they can't figure out that sitting 3 minutes for signal change for a sensored light that has no other oncoming traffic is a problem. Likewise, having one car roll up from a side street causing a light to change instantly, only to make a right turn that could have been made on a red light. A simple 30 second delay in triggering that light would move traffic way more efficiently.

    Around here, one locality has even started programing lights to make the left turn a delayed green (letting straight traffic go first, then giving the left arrow) rather than an advanced green, but only for one direction. The traffic going left the other way get an advanced green. So you have traffic going south that gets an advanced green for left turns and the south bound straight thru traffic gets to go, then the left turn turns red, then the north bound straight traffic gets to go. Then the south bound turns red, and the north bound left turn traffic finally gets the green. It's absolutely the dumbest traffic light programming I've seen.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin W Johnson View Post
    I disagree. There are far too many examples of ill designed roadways and intersections that would have cost no more to have configured them correctly. And when it comes to stoplights being programed correctly, there is no additional cost. We as a nation simply need more people in those postions to give a damn about proper traffic control. I can't imagine that they don't drive the very roads in which they are responsible for the signals, and that they can't figure out that sitting 3 minutes for signal change for a sensored light that has no other oncoming traffic is a problem. Likewise, having one car roll up from a side street causing a light to change instantly, only to make a right turn that could have been made on a red light. A simple 30 second delay in triggering that light would move traffic way more efficiently.

    Around here, one locality has even started programing lights to make the left turn a delayed green (letting straight traffic go first, then giving the left arrow) rather than an advanced green, but only for one direction. The traffic going left the other way get an advanced green. So you have traffic going south that gets an advanced green for left turns and the south bound straight thru traffic gets to go, then the left turn turns red, then the north bound straight traffic gets to go. Then the south bound turns red, and the north bound left turn traffic finally gets the green. It's absolutely the dumbest traffic light programming I've seen.
    Agree 100%.

    It seems amazing to me that with all the other advances in technology, we can't get the lights working better.

    How much gas are we burning, as a nation, sitting at stop lights? Even small improvements in traffic control would yield huge savings in energy.

    And they just installed a new stoplight near my home so trucks could make it onto a larger street more safely. But it seems to trigger if a squirrel wants to cross the street. I'm stopping there all the time, with no cross traffic in sight.

    I really do think it is a "we don't give a carp" attitude, under cover of "you don't understand traffic control, this is how it should work."

    Nonsense.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Grottoes, VA.
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Thien View Post
    Agree 100%.

    How much gas are we burning, as a nation, sitting at stop lights? Even small improvements in traffic control would yield huge savings in energy.
    Excellent point that I forgot in my post. I've said that very thing many, many times. I feel sure the gallons burned at lights when there is no oncoming traffic is astronomical.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    5,427
    There are still a lot of traffic lights that don't even have loop detectors. Many of the signals in Downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota are still mechanically timed. You can hear the noises from the cabinet on the street corner. Most of them haven't been re-timed in years because it costs money. First they have to do a traffic study and then somebody has to analyze the traffic study to determine the proper timing. Public works is so underfunded we are lucky they haven't installed stop signs to save money on the electricity for the signals.

    The city recently got a $16 million federal grant to put in a new computer system for traffic light control. Hopefully this means more loop detectors and new electronic timers for the lights.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •