Don't have Amazon Prime? Students can get a
free 6-Month Amazon Prime trial with free 2-day shipping, unlimited video streaming & more.
If you're not a student, there's also a
free 1-Month Amazon Prime trial available.
You can also earn cash back rewards on Amazon and Whole Foods purchases with the
Amazon Prime Visa credit card. Read our review to see if it’s the right card for you.
42 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Featured Comments
If anyone doesn't feel like Googling, higher CRI is better quality color, as the post above says, but it also means some increase in power (i.e. less efficient).
Proponents of the law wanted Californians to adopt LED lighting to replace incandescent and CFL but are concerned that if the lights are poor quality, people will say LEDs suck and not make the switch. They argued that this hurt adoption of CFLs when those were new and everyone had incandescent. Yes, higher LED prices will also mean less adoption, but their concern is that lower-quality lighting will hurt more.
Those against the law generally argue that CRI of 80 is good enough, and the increase in LED prices will hurt adoption more than a reduction in quality from CRI 90 -> 80 would have. For obvious reasons, lighting manufacturers generally take this position.
I have no argument either way.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
I wonder why
https://www.homelectric
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.