Florescent light bulbs?

In article <QqKdnYmXOfKvDOrYnZ2dnUVZ_rLinZ2d@web-ster.com>, Tim Wescott wrote:
OG wrote:

"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:Sbidnf-vF-0A7erYnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@web-ster.com...

CoreyWhite wrote:

Al Gore came on Opera yesterday and said we could save 20% of the
energy our light bulbs use if we switched to more expensive florescent
bulbs. These bulbs last longer you know. But are you aware that the
light bulb companies are conspiring to keep florescent bulbs off the
market? They charge you more for them already, but Tesla invented a
florescent bulb that is still burning in the Tesla Museum 50 years
later. If we all used his bulbs we would never have to worry about
screwing in light bulbs. So the answer to the most important question
of the day: How many scientists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Really should be none. Because we don't have to ever change our light
bulbs in an ideal world.

But can anyone tell me how I can get a hold of one of these Tesla bulbs?


If you live out in the boonies where the power fluctuates the florescent
bulbs only last twice as long as 'regulars'. Given how much extra they
cost that's not too good of a deal. Given that they seem to embody more
energy used to produce I suspect that it's not a good deal in terms of
total energy used, either.



If a standard 100W incandescent bulb has a rated lifetime of 1000 hours
it'll use 100Kwh over its life,
The fluorescent equivalent uses 20W and (according to your claim) lasts just
2000 hours, so it uses 40Kwh over its life, which represents at least a 60%
saving.

Right. A florescent bulb costs $9.99, 40kWh costs diddly, and so does
an incandescent bulb.
Click to expand...
How about $5 or less for compact fluorescents?

Although in my experience it takes at least 25, usually at least 26
watts of compact fluorescent wattage to match a 1710 lumen "standard" 100
watt 120V incandescent.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <45784290$0$23642$2e0edba0@news.tweakdsl.nl>, Zak wrote:
qrk wrote:

Instead of using toxic illuminators (our fine city has classified
florescent lamps as hazardous material), Cree has some white LEDs that
are close to the efficiency of florescent lamps. They should last
longer and won't break when a juggling club smacks the assembly.

LEDs aren't there yet, efficiency or color constantness wise, though
they can do very well if directed light or low power is needed.

The efficiency given is often at 25 degrees chip temperature. But with
the chip dissipating a watt or more, the junction temperature is quite a
bit higher.

But a mixture of gallium and arsenic is not very friendly either. We'll
see when LEDs win from gas discharge - or maybe MH lamps take over.
Click to expand...
LEDs are advancing faster, and the latest Cree ones, even at real-world
temperatures, do have efficiency close to that of compact fluorescents
when given 1 watt each.

Problem is, these LEDs probably have cost in the same ballpark as
compact fluorescents, so 15 of them to replace a 60 watt incandescent is
going to be expensive. The color is also not as good as that of compact
fluorescents.

Watch for some mean flashlights to appear with these soon, however! And
watch for further advances in LEDs over the years - I expect to see some
actually practical household lightbulbs with LEDs in my lifetime!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <elf85l$o1f$3@jasen.is-a-geek.org>, jasen wrote:
On 2006-12-07, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:


CoreyWhite wrote:

the pure H20 steam from nuclear power plants is a greeen
house gas

Nuclear power plants don't give off steam.

the cooling towers emit water vapour, which is basically the same stuff.
Click to expand...
So do oil and natural gas fired power plants.

Replace incandescents with compact fluorescents and take other steps to
reduce electricity consumption, and you will reduce the ill effects of
whatever supplies your electricity.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <MPG.1fe54635bdd2bceb989dc9@news.individual.net>, krw wrote:
In article <uWJeh.50916$rv4.37461@edtnps90>, nobody@nowhere.com
says...

"CoreyWhite" <CoreyWhite@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165456161.484403.293980@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...

He is wrong about a lot of his theories. He claims that global warming
is caused only by C02 gasses

No, but Reagan said: "Approximately 80 percent of our air pollution stems
from hydrocarbons released by vegetation."

Cite! He did say that forests contribute to pollution, which is
correct (see: Smokey Mountains).
Click to expand...
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002407.html
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/04/1004/3b.shtml
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2005/08/global_warming_.html
http://plantsci.sdstate.edu/Burris/Burris2.pps
http://www.metla.fi/archive/forest/1997/05/msg00177.html
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/ronaldreag147702.html

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 12:11:14 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 14:03:25 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:
mensanator@aol.com> wrote in message
No, warmer air due to lighting makes the thermostat kick on
less often reducing your consumption of gas or fuel oil.

Sure, but it's still cheaper to buy 1kWh of heat from the gas or fuel oil
company than it is from the electric company!

A more interesting comparison might be how efficiently you can light a
room
with gas!

BOOM! Quite efficiently, but all the light shines at the same time.

Light and heat and improved ventilation

grin> Yep.

Nah - if you learn to light one properly, the deflagration front is
contained within millimeters of the mantle. ;-)

I have watched people fill the auto gas tank. Despite all warnings
I've seen men and women hanging onto a cigarette while doing so.

I think the 'if' in your sentence should be spelled IFF.
Click to expand...
Nah - gasoline doesn't ignite by cigarette - not even the vapor. I
saw some guy who was working on a gas tank; he had taken it out of
the car, and dumped all the gasoline into a 5 gal. bucket (it was
only about an inch or so deep.) He was smoking. I asked, "Is it true that
a cigarette won't light gas?" and he kind of sneered at me, and flicked
his stub into the bucket of gasoline. It went "Fsst!" and went out.

I didn't find out if he poured that quart or so of gasoline (with the
butt in it) back into the tank. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:00:54 +0000, Eeyore wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 14:03:25 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:

A more interesting comparison might be how efficiently you can light a
room with gas!

BOOM! Quite efficiently, but all the light shines at the same time.

Light and heat and improved ventilation

grin> Yep.

Nah - if you learn to light one properly, the deflagration front is
contained within millimeters of the mantle. ;-)

I have watched people fill the auto gas tank. Despite all warnings
I've seen men and women hanging onto a cigarette while doing so.

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.
Click to expand...
24/7, dude - 24/7, they're on the phone.

I guess everybody in the country just wants to be anywhere except where
they are.

One day, while out people-watching, I saw two people in a car stopped
at a red light, both on the phone. I kinda yelled out, "I hope you're not
talking to each other!" They said "no." ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 07:06:10 -0800, Troia wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <457c1d21$0$97249$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>,
Troia <troia.legata@gmail.removethis.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
...
Having watched the current misusage of those things, I would
not be surprised if they use them during sex.

er ... um ... while I never have done so, someone did mention the fact
that they vibrate nicely!

They vibrate, too? Oh, good grief. I guess that would make
the term "phone sex" take on a whole new meaning.

Apparently one can do quite a bit of erotic teasing with a mere phone
call and not saying a word.

What is the purpose of those devices vibrating while you're
talking?

Um, no ... now remember, I've just *read* about this! But apparently it
is not exactly uncommon.

One does not *talk* on the phone. One puts it in a certain place with
relation to the body, the other partner makes a phone call, the phone
does not get answered.

Clearer?

Sort of like a remote-controlled vibrator.


Heh. Reminds me of the story:
Click to expand...

A woman walks into the pharmacy, and askes the proprietor, who was a
very old man, "Do you have C-cell batteries?" He crooks his finger,
as if to beckon, waggles it a little, and says, "Come this way."

She says, "If I could come that way, I wouldn't need the batteries!"

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 12:28:41 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
Troia <troia.legata@gmail.removethis.com> wrote:

One does not *talk* on the phone. One puts it in a certain place with
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
relation to the body, the other partner makes a phone call, the phone
^^^^^^^^^
does not get answered.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Clearer?

Sort of like a remote-controlled vibrator.

I understand the function of a dildo. I was asking about why a phone
vibrates while one is talking.
Click to expand...
Do you ever _read_ the schtuff you're "responding" to?

Sheesh!
Rich
 
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 17:47:11 +0000, NightMist wrote:

Remote control vibrators are available, but they do not have the range
you get with a cell phone. Besides, with a cellphone the lass could
just trot off to the bathroom and give her caller a callback to let
them know that the trick did or did not work. No doubt while hoping
it was not her mother callng unexpectedly.
Click to expand...
Mom would never know - she'd hear that "brrrrrt" as long as the girl
didn't answer. I guess in that case it would depend on how long Mom
would wait for the girl to pick up. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 02:39:01 +0000, Eeyore wrote:
David Brown wrote:

And what is the problem with using cellphones while filling petrol? There
has (according to what I recently read somewhere) been absolutely no
evidence of mobil phones being a problem at petrol stations.

Mobil ? phones !
Click to expand...
I guess the guys at the Exxon station might object a little there. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:21:31 +0000, Eeyore wrote:
krw wrote:
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

Yup, and ya know what? I haven't heard of a single instance of a
filling station blowing up because of it, have you?

Mt comment is about ppls' propensity to do what they're asked not to do.

This only shows tour willingness to be controlled, like the good
Eurosheep you are.

You're being ridiculous. I think a sea-change may be in progress btw.
Click to expand...
Yes, and here's the instructions on how to survive it:
http://www.godchannel.com/4steps.html

Good Luck!
Rich
 
Don Klipstein wrote:
In article <1165510662.059970.151110@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
mrdarrett@gmail.com wrote:
The local Big Lots had a sale once: 4-pack of 25W (roughly equivalent
to 100W incandescent) compact fluorescents for $2. I bought about 10
packages (40 bulbs).

They're white lights, too - not the yellow ones that you commonly find.
Only other brand I know of that gives white light is Sylvania (hard to
find - from Lowe's) - and we've tried a bunch.

Not sure if there's a Big Lots in your area, but it's worth a shot.

Various color compact fluorescents are available from online sellers
such as bulbs.com.

Also, Home Depot recently started selling N:Vision brand ones that come
in 3 different colors in most wattages:

"Soft White" - the usual 2700K.

"Bright White" - 3500K, a "whiter shade of warm white". That is my
favorite.

"Daylight" - which for these is 5500K, very slightly bluish to sometimes
appearing pure white, not as bluish as 6500K.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
Click to expand...
I like the Sylvania bulbs too, but can find them easily at a local
pharmacy and some supermarket chains (in the Pacific NW.)

-- Troia
 
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:


jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 14:03:25 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:

A more interesting comparison might be how efficiently you can light a
room with gas!

BOOM! Quite efficiently, but all the light shines at the same time.

Light and heat and improved ventilation

grin> Yep.

Nah - if you learn to light one properly, the deflagration front is
contained within millimeters of the mantle. ;-)

I have watched people fill the auto gas tank. Despite all warnings
I've seen men and women hanging onto a cigarette while doing so.

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

Graham
Click to expand...
And why not, since the cellphone/gas thing is an urban legend?

http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/gasvapor.asp

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
 
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 00:59:55 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

In <el5gn2dbsmnsjfiv02jfovsu8n69rasfhh@4ax.com>, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 11:43:31 +0000, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Helmut Wabnig wrote:

snip
The purported longer life is simply a lie.

That's not my experience. I've never seen one claiming to have *13* times the
life though. 6 times, 9 x , 12 x and 15x for different brands and models but
never 13 x.

It's been my limited experience the compact fluorescents do _not_ last
as long. I have a pair of sockets for my living room that are near
each other in the ceiling (20 feet up, yes I have room for two floors
in that room.) When I first bought the place, there were two
incandescents already there. One eventually went out and I replaced
it with a compact fluorescent... twice... before the other one finally
expired (it was also incandescent.) They are on the same circuit and
attached to the same light switch so they are either both on or both
off, always.

Is this a recessed ceiling fixture?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. Those 1970's style swivel things with a brass finish. I
use a very long rod to reach up that high, with a suction cup on the
end of the extention that is moistened to grip.

Those build up heat and are hard on compact fluorescents.
Click to expand...
At <20 watts, though? These are 65-watt-equivalent-lumen types, with
the standard shaped bulb outside for gripping correctly. The coiled
glass envelope, phosphor-rare-earth coated, is in the interior of that
outer glass, flatish surfaced bulb that fits my grip. The
incandescents were 65 watts apiece and must have generated a lot more
heat up there in years gone by (and in my comparison incandescent that
I placed there.)

For that matter, some compact fluorescents brag
about being specifically rated to use in recessed ceiling fixtures. Such
includes the 15, 20 and non-dimmable 23 watt ones of Philips SLS series.
Philips did say that the 25 and the dimmable 23 are not rated for use in
recessed ceiling fixtures.
Click to expand...
I'll look more closely. This switch I'm using here is a dimmer type,
too. This could be another confounding issue, in my case.

That's only one example case here in the house. I've
been tracking this elsewhere around the home, because of that
experience, and it seems consistent that I cannot get the same life
out of a compact fluorescent as I do a similar-rated (in lumens)
incandescent. Not 4 time, not 2 times, not equal. But decidedly less
and perhaps about half.

I can say where and when compact fluorescents appear to me prone to
short life:
Click to expand...
Thanks.

1) When on-time is short. As I hear it, "standard conditions" for life
expectancy include 3 hours per start. So I expect a fair chance of short
life expectancy compared to incandescents in motion sensor lights,
closets, restrooms used mainly for short trips, and refrigerators.
Click to expand...
We keep the livingroom lights on, usually with the dimmer set to full
(I don't often dim), for more than 3 hours a day. And usually, most
of it in one sitting (evening.)

2) Higher wattage CFL in small enclosed fixture, due to heat buildup.
Click to expand...
These are as described above.

3) If the CFL is a problem-prone one, such as (according to my
experience) 25 watt spirals of GE and LOA brands made around 2001, LOA
45 watt ones, and LOA "Q-Lites" from the early 1990's. Also I have seen
"dollar store" ones have a significant rate of spectacular infant
mortality, as well as never achieving claimed light output (sometimes
low by a factor of 3) and sometimes not achieving stated color.
Click to expand...
Getting these bulbs from Costco and they are branded as described in
an earlier post.

4) I hear of a few complaints of the Commercial Electric 42 watt spiral
dying young when operated base-up. I suspect the problem here is heat.
Click to expand...
Could be, but I've cracked two from the living room ceiling lights and
looked at the electronics and used my nose. They seem unburned. But
I could do a better post-mortem than I have. Have to wait another
cycle, though.

I have other situations around the house with a single switch (no
dimmers) and several fixtures, where I can add to the testing process.
Some are one end up, some the opposite. I'll start keeping logs.

What first got me onto this whole thing was that I bought this place
and moved in, early 2002. When we took over, there were two
incandescents in the livingroom ceiling. I replaced it with a new
CFL, fresh bought because I had to look for those funny ones that I
could mount at such a height via this pole contraption. Later, that
very CFL went dead on me. The incandescent was still working. And it
was the one the prior owners had placed there. So I replaced it,
again. The next CFL burned out, too, before the incandescent finally
went. With two CFLs dead in the same socket, an incandescent still
running for some time yet, I began to have my very first questions
about it. (This period of time was, perhaps, a calendar period of two
years.)

Since then, I've found this experience in a few other places around
the house, as well. Not as clear, to me. But definitely where I have
replaced a CFL a 2nd time (meaning that I am _positive_ that the
incandescent nearby is lasting longer) before having to replace the
incandescent. Some of these are older incandescents (from the earlier
owner, some are ones I've had in boxes and used recently.) I don't
think I've purchased _any_ incandescents since moving here, so all of
them are made prior to 2002.

That was my motivation and my experience leading me to begin, for the
first time, to wonder about whether or not these things actually do
last as long as they say or if perhaps the incandescents last a lot
longer than they say. Thinking backwards on this, I have to say that
the CFLs I've had 'go bad' on me must have failed to meet their hours,
rather than the incandescents lasting so much longer than rated. The
CFLs are, looking at the packaging, rated for 8,000 hours. So that's
almost a full year of _ON_ time. And I _know_ for certain that they
failed in less operational hours than that. The incandescent in the
living room lasted perhaps two years of use after we moved it and I
don't know how long, before that. That _may_ be just about its rated
life, given our use. Or perhaps a little better, though I'm guessing.
But it is way below the CFL's rating.

It is turning out, I think, that perhaps CFLs are more limited in the
areas they can be effectively used, as rated. If you are saying that
some are rated for my ceiling use, and some aren't, this is something
I've never needed to worry about before regarding incandescents -- so
this is new information to me. And it complicates the buying process
for CFLs, while not complicating it for incandescents.

Interesting, though.

Thanks,
Jon
 
In article <pan.2006.12.12.00.51.04.455519@example.net>, Rich Grise wrote:

<SNIP stuff about people smoking at gas stations>

Nah - gasoline doesn't ignite by cigarette - not even the vapor. I
saw some guy who was working on a gas tank; he had taken it out of
the car, and dumped all the gasoline into a 5 gal. bucket (it was
only about an inch or so deep.) He was smoking. I asked, "Is it true that
a cigarette won't light gas?" and he kind of sneered at me, and flicked
his stub into the bucket of gasoline. It went "Fsst!" and went out.

I didn't find out if he poured that quart or so of gasoline (with the
butt in it) back into the tank. ;-)
Click to expand...
I know gasoline usually cannot be ignited by a cigarette, but the
temperature of the burning tobacco is not always the same! Also, gasoline
formulations vary, and so may the temperature required to ignite the
vapor.

On the other hand, diesel's vapors do not reach a flammable
concentration in ordinary situations - toss a burning match into a bucket
of diesel and it will go out. (Then again, I prefer to not bet my life
or lack of a hospital visit that the forces of Murphy's Law won't find a
way to make something go wrong.)

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In <200612071837.kB7Ib12J161398@walkabout.empros.com>, Michael Stemper says:
In <1165452585.592905.307650@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, CoreyWhite says:

These bulbs last longer you know.

"Last longer and use less energy" v. "cost more". This is what's
called a "trade-off".

But are you aware that the
light bulb companies are conspiring to keep florescent bulbs off the
market?

They're doing a damn poor job. Not only can I buy them at Home Depot,
Target, Menard's, and my local grocery store, but my parents and
grandparents were able to do so as well.

They charge you more for them already,

Okay, so they're not keeping them off the market then. Glad to have
you confirm that.

but Tesla invented a
florescent bulb that is still burning in the Tesla Museum 50 years
later.

It sounds as if they're worth more if they'll last longer. (It seems
to me that I've heard that there is a light bulb, made by Edison, that
has been continuously burning since he made it. I can't find a citation
for it, though.)
Click to expand...
Edison did not make it, but other than that it's true:

http://www.centennialbulb.org/

Its energy efficiency is probably horrible.

European 230V lightbulbs operated at 120V can easily last a century, but
with something like 1/4 of the energy efficiency of 120V incandescents
operated at 120V, maybe even a little less!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <1165512745.193619.36660@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>,
dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

I very much am reading this for good, measured experiences. I see
Osram mentioned and I haven't tried theirs. I may have to search for
them and see. But Philips is not on my 'good' list, right now. At
least, not those Marathon units sold through Costco.

Jon

I've gotten excellent service from most brands of CFL, which I've
relied on nearly exclusively for the past many (8-9?) years. Mine are
mostly ceiling-mounted, down-facing, without enclosures (thus avoiding
early death by self-heating).

Some brands, frequently cycled, failed very prematurely. Others have
lasted me years and years of daily use even in the bathroom, where the
light's constantly going on and off.

For me, the bulbs are flat out cheaper to buy, even costing 5x,
because they outlast incandescents by a greater factor. On top of
that, using, for example, a 13W CFL in place of a 75W incandescent
saves roughly 62W x 5,000 hours = 310KWh of electricity over the life
of the bulb, which would've cost me 310KWh x 12.8 cents, or about $40.
CFLs are much cheaper to operate.
Click to expand...
Usually it takes at least 18 watts of CFL to match the luminous output
of a 75 watt incandescent, unless the incandescent is "super long life"
rated to last at least 3500 hours or "industrial service" or the like,
or an off-brand one like those available at dollar stores (includes
Sunbeam and Polaroid in my experience).

I would like people to beware that some claims of how much less wattage
can be consumed by using a CFL are on the optimistic side. My experience
says on an average CFLs need 30% of the wattage of the incandescents that
they are replacing, 25% minimum usually, to match the light output of
the incandescents.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <el96v0$8qk_001@s856.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <el5gn2dbsmnsjfiv02jfovsu8n69rasfhh@4ax.com>,
Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote:
snip

I very much am reading this for good, measured experiences.

Mine seem to last a longer than incandescent but I've never
kept logs. The light isn't as good as incandescent so I
use a combination in the lamp that I use the most. I would
like to use the flurescent in the ceiling lights but all
warnings say not to use them if recessed.

I have noticed that turning them on sometimes creates a burst of
EMF which causes a loud static if I have the radio on. I do
not know if this is going through the house wiring or the air.

Another odd behavior of the flourescent is the reaction of
my radio's display to it. The radio display brightens or
dims depending on whether it thinks it's daytime.
Incandescent causes the display to brighten; fluerescent does
not.
Click to expand...
That makes me suspect that the sensor is a phototransistor that senses
only infrared, or maybe infrared to mid-red. Compact fluorescents do not
produce much at wavelengths longer than their 611 nm orange-red very
narrow phosphor band.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In <el5gn2dbsmnsjfiv02jfovsu8n69rasfhh@4ax.com>, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 11:43:31 +0000, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Helmut Wabnig wrote:

snip
The purported longer life is simply a lie.

That's not my experience. I've never seen one claiming to have *13* times the
life though. 6 times, 9 x , 12 x and 15x for different brands and models but
never 13 x.

It's been my limited experience the compact fluorescents do _not_ last
as long. I have a pair of sockets for my living room that are near
each other in the ceiling (20 feet up, yes I have room for two floors
in that room.) When I first bought the place, there were two
incandescents already there. One eventually went out and I replaced
it with a compact fluorescent... twice... before the other one finally
expired (it was also incandescent.) They are on the same circuit and
attached to the same light switch so they are either both on or both
off, always.
Click to expand...
Is this a recessed ceiling fixture? Those build up heat and are hard on
compact fluorescents. For that matter, some compact fluorescents brag
about being specifically rated to use in recessed ceiling fixtures. Such
includes the 15, 20 and non-dimmable 23 watt ones of Philips SLS series.
Philips did say that the 25 and the dimmable 23 are not rated for use in
recessed ceiling fixtures.

That's only one example case here in the house. I've
been tracking this elsewhere around the home, because of that
experience, and it seems consistent that I cannot get the same life
out of a compact fluorescent as I do a similar-rated (in lumens)
incandescent. Not 4 time, not 2 times, not equal. But decidedly less
and perhaps about half.
Click to expand...
I can say where and when compact fluorescents appear to me prone to
short life:

1) When on-time is short. As I hear it, "standard conditions" for life
expectancy include 3 hours per start. So I expect a fair chance of short
life expectancy compared to incandescents in motion sensor lights,
closets, restrooms used mainly for short trips, and refrigerators.

2) Higher wattage CFL in small enclosed fixture, due to heat buildup.

3) If the CFL is a problem-prone one, such as (according to my
experience) 25 watt spirals of GE and LOA brands made around 2001, LOA
45 watt ones, and LOA "Q-Lites" from the early 1990's. Also I have seen
"dollar store" ones have a significant rate of spectacular infant
mortality, as well as never achieving claimed light output (sometimes
low by a factor of 3) and sometimes not achieving stated color.

4) I hear of a few complaints of the Commercial Electric 42 watt spiral
dying young when operated base-up. I suspect the problem here is heat.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In <1165506765.704497.14510@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Kevin White wrote:
On Dec 7, 1:28 am, Bob Kolker <nowh...@nowhere.com> wrote:
...
diddly + diddly
--------------- << 1
$9.99

I'll stick with incandescents.
An incandescent 100 watter will last 3000 hours. That is 300,000 watt
hours or 3KwHr. If you have ten in the house that is 30kwHrs.

You can cut that down to 10kwHrs. The main saving is on lifetime.

The more light you use, the more you save on both the replacement cost
and the operating cost.

Bob Kolker

I think you need to check your arithmetic.

3000 hours at 100W is 300,000 Watt Hours or 300KWHrs (Three Hundred).
At the rates I pay that will cost about $60 for the electricity. A CF
lamp over the same period would use about $15 worth.

In addition it is unlikely that an incandescent would last 3000 Hours -
they are normally designed to last about 1000 Hours.

It is a tradeoff of life vs efficiency for an incandescent - you can
make an incandescent last as long as you want by lowering the filament
temperature, but the efficiency drops of dramatically. At the other
end of the scale from domestic lighting, incandescents for photographic
work give off a lot of light but only last a few hours.
Click to expand...
The lifetime-efficiency tradeoff in incandescents does get done in the
longer life direction also.

There are "industrial service" ones rated to last 3500 hours in
addition to having a more vibration-resistant filament, and light
output is down something like 25-30%. There are traffic signal ones rated
to last 8,000 hours, and light output is down something like 35% compared
to 750-1000 hour incandescents. Bed, Bath and Beyond sells incandescents
rated to last 10,000 hours, with an even further compromise in efficiency
and light output. Some traffic signal incandescents are 130V versions,
and at 120V their life expectancy would be about 20,000 hours - with
energy efficiency at 120V a little over half that of 750 and 1,000 hour
120V incandescents of similar wattage.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top