Light cans in lid
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/479b183b30c472ee78a1e49c9b776081?s=52&d=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.greenbuildingadvisor.com%2Fapp%2Favatars%2F200x200%2Ft.png&r=g)
Sorry this got posted first as an answer!
In the case of a retro and the cans were not direct contact what would you think about making a chicken wire basket/dome around the can and mounding the insulation around it? Other burning question is I would think since compact floresent bulbs don’t get as hot as incandesent the problem of close can contact with insulation may not be a problem at all, what do you think?
GBA Detail Library
A collection of one thousand construction details organized by climate and house part
![](https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/app/themes/greenbuildingadvisor/dist/img/modules/detail-library/thumb1.png)
![](https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/app/themes/greenbuildingadvisor/dist/img/modules/detail-library/thumb2.png)
Replies
For heat reduction, LED lights far surpass fluorescent bulbs and save considerable energy too-- Brighter LEDs are slow in coming to market, due to vested market forces. As i remember it took compact fluorescent bulbs about 20 years to commercialize brighter and warmer-tone bulbs at low cost. As to cementitious embedding of light-cans... I would be sure to check with your code people first and solve this before hand-- Once a bulb emits heat, it needs a provided escape route. So some sort of heat dissipator towards the room-space should be allowed. Overly insulated light bulbs are likely to overheat beyond approved specs. That is perhaps why inefficient products will disrupt the good intentions of going green. Cement-- In common-sense terms only, i can say that i have found ordinary portland cement or masonry cement can easily be mixed with vermiculite. High temperature insulating can thus be obtained easily, with ordinary materials. Yet a refractory mineral wool is much easier to work with, provide one does not cook those less efficient bulbs. Bo Atkinson