Newest fluff, at least in Building Automation, is to also have them connected to the "cloud" to siphon off the data centrally... And most of those networks are still tightly controlled vlans because they communicate openly without encryption.
the problem is LED are made of a weird combo of two bulbs, look at the real spectrum of them, like a unicorn snail or something.....
Most white LEDs are fluorescent lights, they're just not tubes. They are UV LEDs and the plastic lens is doped with phosphors which absorb the UV and then emit visible light. There are also RGB LEDs, but IME they are seldom used in any light which doesn't have a color-changing feature.
No, must are blue light LEDs, as they can be produced in big numbers (thanks Nakamoto) and are good enough for the job (coating them for the downshift in colours).
UVs are used for some appliances (e.g. shopping), but they are actually less efficient and more expensive.
Coating produces a wider spectrum, while the LEDs are monochromatic, so RGBs are not used for white light because they make even shittier light than cheap blue-light-converting ones.
Dimming or switching the light completely off is a lot more useful.
Philips made a large studys with a lot of different light sources and all had an impact.
@Ranger, 3000K and LED does not help, they still have peak emissions at around 420 - 450 nm, with the exception of some high-end products.
Using Green or Amber coloured LEDs might help, but as seen above, some species also react to this kind of lightings, so only using light where it is absolutely needed would do more for the enviroment.
Ok, I worked some time in my past with lighting professionally, mainly in Measurement of General Lighting Appliances.
So what is actually banned now: two additional types of high voltage halogen reflector Lamps. Does this mean you get now halogen lighting anymore?
No, you still get low voltage (12 V usually) lamps with and without integrated reflector. These might be subject of another ban in the future, but chances are that they will stay with us in the future.
First of, if anyone has additional questions, feel free to get in touch, I will try to answer to the best of my knowledge.
I'll try to give some insight to the random topics I saw here.
Why banning this lamps?
You can read the exact parts here https://ec.europa.eu/energy/si...
The EU started off with banning most of the Halogen Incandescent used with mains voltage (eg. 230 V or 110 V). The Low Voltage Variants are not banned by this. The mains voltage lamps are practical but shit. The tungsten filament is thinner and longer compared to the low voltage variants and not as sturdy, which means that they have a lower colour temperature, worse optical characteristics, shortend lifetime and even worse efficacy.
Some basics on lighting:
What we perceive as light is electromagnetic radiation with a general wavelength range of 380 nm (blue) to 780 nm (red). We do not have a uniform distribution of the sensitivity. In measurement a fixed distribution is used to describe this sensitivity (v(lamda)), with Peak sensitivity at 555 nm (green).
Mixing light of several different bandwidths then gives the Impression of Colour, there are several systems for describing colours, in lighting the most common used is the CIE "triangle"/"horseshoe".
In general Lighting CCT (Correlated color temperature) is used to describe shades of white. When using Incandescent Lamps this is the actual temperature of the filament, with tungsten being one of the metals that can withstand 3000 K for a prolonged period. As Fluorescent Lamps / LED / HID Lamps use other methods for light generation a Correlated Colour Temperature is used. This takes the emitted spectrum of a lightsource and converts it into a value that has some resemblance of a Colour Temperature, it is still not the actual Colour Temperature.
Commonly this is coupled with a value called CRI (Colour Rendering Index) which compared the given spectrum to either an synthetic incandescent or daylight spectrum. So by default Incandescent lamps should have a CRI of 100.
White LEDs:
There are no white LEDs. The most common construction today is a blue LED coated with phosphors which convert the blue light to longer wavelengths, similar to a fluorescent lamp. Close to all "white" LED Lamps has a blue peak at about 450 nm, their CCT / CRI depend on the coating used, sometimes in COBs (Chip on Board) red LEDs are added to boost the CRI.
Blue Light Hazard:
Light/Radiation is not good for eyes, but dosage makes poison. Modern Incandescent Lamps/Fluorescent/HID Lamps have effective UV Block Coating and blue light is generated there in low dosage by design, but especially Fluorescent and HID might be blue light hazard. LEDs in general lighting mess with us on several levels. Their peak at 450 nm messes with our chronobiology and the the blue light causes more cell damage. Incandescent Lamps and daylight have a more uniform distributed spectrum and our bodies were designed for latter. So nothing compares actually to daylight and it is far from understood what light controls in our body (e.g. we now know about 12 different functional spectra in our organism, from seeing, to chronobiology, to cell regeneration).
Lifetime:
In general the lifetime of a LED is superior, but LED Lamps used on mains are complicated beasts and have a lot more components which might die long before the LEDs. Also LEDs don't like to be driven outside their designed range. They will degrade fast when used with to much current of not enough cooling, while cooling does not rally matter for most incandescent Lamps.
Dimming:
Dimming LEDs on mains is, from my point of view, stupid, don't do it. They don't really work, they will strain the dimmer and both will fail early.
Basically all LEDs Lamps have no Power Factor Correction and have huge current peaks, so in general they are bad mojo for a Dimmer and are a challenge for the electricity nets.
With a converter you can dim LEDs fine, using PWM, Constant Current Reduction (CCR) or hybrids and control over a different channel.
As my boss put it, you wouldn't throttle your car by blocking the fuel line.
There are more pros/cons, (flicker etc.) but I hope I could give some insight to all of this.
It is probably a multitude of courses.
Beside CO2 we have another massive pollution, especially indoors, that is artificial lighting. It messes on a lot of scales with our bodies, most prominently with our sleep patterns.
Sleep has a direct and immense effect on our mental capabilities. There are a lot of studies out there, some even featured on
Another point, from a pure personal perspective, that our culture also shifted (again) away from favoring intelligence and cooperation over personal success.
Would be very interesting to see how a post-factual society factors into such tests.
This was not even the reason to give throw it under the bus. Most of the specific use cases were already moved to linux, they had reimplements their forms systems to use libre office and some of the software that could only be used on windows was available over remote desktop, their own client was a modified Ubuntu LTS Version and they were on their way to implement a Linux Groupware Solution (Kolab, I think) to get exchange functionality, especially for the higher ups, as they wanted to have it on their smartphones.
Then MS started to move their Headquarters to Munich and the city council to lobby to replace linux. They asked Accenture (!!!) to check, if change was necessary and the non-public part of the report told that the IT Mismanagement was a much bigger factor than any hardware/OS/Tools Issue at hand.
The public part was used to make Limux scapegoat for everything and tasking Microsoft to create a single client solution, damn the cost.
The cost must be ridicules, because now their solution and the cost are "secret", but some people already estimated what the new hardware for windows 10 might cost (as they could use Limux on very very old machines) and that covers not even all the cost for new software licenses for stuff they had already build in Limux.
This is more politics and corruption than technical merit.
At least Venus has an atmosphere to neutralise a lot of the radiation.
They salvaged in-house tech for this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So probably it will rest on rails and be moved / levitated by linear motors. Since ThyssenKrupp has longstanding experience with elevator system they should be able to design one with security in mind.
There might be a difference between thinking and acting. And if >50% of you populace act in a way that is considered illegal you should rethink the law.
It must not even be the demise of western civilisation.
Europe had tons of homemade terrorism till the nineties (RAF, IRA, etc. to name a few), in which people made a lot less fuss about and a lot less radical ideas of security profiling then today were thrown out in courts based on human rights (Rasterfahndung for example).
Yes, terrorism is bad, but without finding and countering its root cause, even the most intrusive security measures will not stop terrorism, it might even amplify it through a multitude of causalities. The current way of dealing with terrorism, which is statically seen over the last 50 years just a minor event, especially in europe, is completely overblown and a waste of resources better spent elsewhere.
Second that.
First, Central Europe took millennia and lots of wars to get to the current point, with one whole generation of peace and lots of populists damning the same without knowing war.
Second, most western europe countries messed up the development of most arabic and african regions to a point where tribalism was seen as favourable because it was easier to govern when the different tribes warred each other instead of the oppressor and after these empires dissolved the US used similar tactics to fight against communism. Often enough these horrendously backfired (e.g. iran).
The whole situation in the east is based on western decision and politics even in the recent history without the will to invest the time and the effort to build stable nation states or to integrate them into supra-national constructs.
In Germany it took about 20 years and lot of money to create a stable democracy after WW2, with tons of infrastructure and lot of educated people, so half a century would be minimum for everything else after getting bombed into submission.
I don't think anyone would try to kill Snowden because he might have an insurance that might really hurt.
On the other hand, Obama not pardoning Snowden might be a late gift to trump. Today Germany's highest court ruled on a possible commitee hearing of Snowden and if Trump thinks about abandoning NATO someone else might think quite loudly to invite him to a hearing and grant him asylum afterwards.
Probably...
But conditions are different with the fins as well. Their welfare state already gives a lot of services and not everything is money.
Sweden and Finland have system that do not only favor giving monetary service, but a lot of it is in additional education, so this really might save them some cost, because the real benefits of their system lays elsewhere.
West Germany had a lot of this as well,
Just look at the Spiegel-Scandal, Rasterfahndung, especially after the RAF had a couple of hits. Not to the extend of the Stasi, but sometimes not far off. And then there is still the scandals around the Verfassungschutz and the BND.
It's not the first time, that Interior Minister put measures like that on the agenda, but most likely it wont proceed. Some very intelligent people put a lot of thought in Human Rights Conventions and our courts honor them most of the time, beside a lot of pressure build in the press and NGOs. Best example for that is the data retention law, which is already in its second incarnation after the first one got hammered by the Federal Courts, and this one has quite good chances to get hammered, too.
"Never give in. Never give in. Never. Never. Never." -- Winston Churchill
