Florescent light bulbs?

[Joel Kolstad]

I think you need to listen again. Fluorescent bulbs save 80% compared to
incandescent bulbs.

My experience is more like 60%, but I could believe that with large scale
installations and careful attention to design you might come closer to 80%.

For the cheap flurescent bulbs there is a possible problem because they take
a few minutes to achieve full brighness

Some of them are better than others in this respect; you can obtain full
brightness almost immediately (a few seconds) if you're willing to sacrifice
efficiency and/or lifespan a little.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

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.

Should be the other way around. Fluorescent should last much longer than
expected.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

I like Al Gore's scifi movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" where he preaches
about the myth of global warming from the backseat of his armoured,
7mpg limousine.

Cite?

 

[OG]

I think you need to listen again. Fluorescent bulbs save 80% compared to
incandescent bulbs.

For the cheap flurescent bulbs there is a possible problem because they
take
a few minutes to achieve full brighness, so they are not so good for a
basement / loft area where you usually want 100% brightness from the first
moment, but in areas where the light is generally 'on', you'll make big
savings.

I have a rule of thumb that each bulb saves about £10 / $20 each year if
they are 'main' lights for an area.

80%?? No way!! That is like a FREE ENERGY MACHINE!!! Are you telling
me that we can take what's left over from the 20% of the energy it
uses, and use it to power the rest of the appliances in our house?? WHO
NEEDS SOLAR POWER!!!

====================
Yes, it offers a real saving . Not all the energy in your house is used for
lighting, but something like 20-30 % of your energy bills are for lighting,
so you could reduce that to 4-5%, That is the direct equivalent of chopping
16 - 24% off your bill . We have 3 standard incandescent bulbs in our house
( 1 in the fridge, 1 in the oven and 1 in the microwave) all the rest are
fluorescents, and we save about £100 / $200 a year as a result.

 

[OG]

Should be the other way around. Fluorescent should last much longer than
expected.

Yes, he said they last twice as long as incandescents - is this possibly
because incandescents have an average life expectancy longer than 1000 hours
where average voltages are lower.? If so, and if fluorescents in the
boondocks have their usual 8,000 hours, the saving is restored back to more
or less 80%.

 

[Joel Kolstad]

The only real solution
is to curb population, because even if we all switch to florescent
light bulbs there will be 10 million more americans than there are
today in just a few years. But you don't here al gore talking about
celibacy do you?

Probably about the only thing harder than raising taxes would be passing
legislation to prohibit or restrict reproduction.

That being said, at least in developed nations population growth is pretty
low. The real problem -- and Gore does kind of mention it in the movie, as I
recall -- is that getting all the population of places like China up to
U.S./European standards of living is going to require a *phoenomenal* amount
of energy with commensurate increases in pollution.

If you take the viewpoint that global warming is real, from a certain point of
view the fact that China ratified the Kyoto protocol -- even though it's not
required to actually enforce any real emissions controls at present -- was a
much bigger win than the loss of the U.S. not ratifying it.

 

[Jim Thompson]

I like Al Gore's scifi movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" where he preaches
about the myth of global warming from the backseat of his armoured,
7mpg limousine.

Make sure you MISS the movie about the Marshall University football
team killed in a plane crash in 1970.

(My home town.)

How can you make a movie about a plane full of jocks, flown by
Southern Airlines pilots who'd never landed at Huntington before?

They flew into the side of the mountain, forgetting that the airport
was on top ;-)

"Attack of the Killer Tomatoes!" was more interesting ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[David T. Ashley]

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?

Al Gore seems rather literate.

I'm guessing he can spell both "fluorescent" and "Oprah" correctly.

And you?

 

[Eeyore]

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

Nuclear power plants don't give off steam.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

80%?? No way!!

Very much so.

That is like a FREE ENERGY MACHINE!!!

No it's not !

Graham

 

[CoreyWhite]

80%?? No way!! That is like a FREE ENERGY MACHINE!!! Are you telling
me that we can take what's left over from the 20% of the energy it
uses, and use it to power the rest of the appliances in our house?? WHO
NEEDS SOLAR POWER!!!

====================
Yes, it offers a real saving . Not all the energy in your house is used for
lighting, but something like 20-30 % of your energy bills are for lighting,
so you could reduce that to 4-5%, That is the direct equivalent of chopping
16 - 24% off your bill . We have 3 standard incandescent bulbs in our house
( 1 in the fridge, 1 in the oven and 1 in the microwave) all the rest are
fluorescents, and we save about £100 / $200 a year as a result.

But does it cost less to actually buy the bulbs? I don't remember how
much Al Gore said a package of florescents costs.

 

[Eeyore]

My experience is more like 60%, but I could believe that with large scale
installations and careful attention to design you might come closer to 80%.


Some of them are better than others in this respect; you can obtain full
brightness almost immediately (a few seconds) if you're willing to sacrifice
efficiency and/or lifespan a little.

Apparently the amount of mercury in them affects that too. The more the better of
course ! I have several that are true 'instant start' types.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Actually, the savings may be negative.

A fluorescent closet light is LESS efficient than an incadescent when
total lifteime costs are considered.

In general, fluorescents make sense if the lamp is continuously run more
than four hours a day.

A reasonable guess is that fluorescents are only cost effective in ONE
HALF of most home light sockets.

Utter nonsense.

I can buy a 6000 hour CFL for 49p and an incandescent bulb is ~ 30p. Over 6000
hours the incandescent light bulbs alone are going to cost £1.80, giving a net
saving of £1.31 to the CFL even before electricity use is factored in.

It's save all the way with CFLs.

Graham

 

[firefey]

Utter nonsense.

I can buy a 6000 hour CFL for 49p and an incandescent bulb is ~ 30p. Over6000
hours the incandescent light bulbs alone are going to cost £1.80, giving a net
saving of £1.31 to the CFL even before electricity use is factored in.

It's save all the way with CFLs.

Graham

science asside, economics are what will eventually determine the
maximum efficency of light bulbs. if a company makes bulbs that last
significanly longer than their counterparts, that company will do well
for a short term but eventually less bulbs will be needed and thus less
will be bought. when less are bought, less are made. when less are
made, less people are needed to make them. when less people are
needed, the company moves to a third world country and pays a three
year old 50 cents a week to make light bulbs. efficiency of use is
great, and alternative energy is a must, and not turning the planet
into a dust bowl is a worthy goal. but environmentalism and economics
must find a way to coexist.

 

[[email protected]]

80%?? No way!! That is like a FREE ENERGY MACHINE!!! Are you telling
me that we can take what's left over from the 20% of the energy it
uses, and use it to power the rest of the appliances in our house?? WHO
NEEDS SOLAR POWER!!!

Why don't you just build the Tesla machine featured
in the film "The Prestige"? Then you can have everything
free, not just energy.

 

[John O'Flaherty]

Actually, the savings may be negative.

A fluorescent closet light is LESS efficient than an incadescent when
total lifteime costs are considered.

In general, fluorescents make sense if the lamp is continuously run more
than four hours a day.

A reasonable guess is that fluorescents are only cost effective in ONE
HALF of most home light sockets.

There are a few places where they're not cost effective at all. I have
a kitchen sink fixture that has two horizontal 60 W incandescents in
it. It probably runs more than four hours a day. The CFs I tried in it
failed in a couple of months, one after the other, probably because of
heat buildup and maybe the horizontal orientation.
Another factor is winter. I have electric heat, and I figure I don't
save anything from CFs in wintertime, because, except for a bit of
light that escapes from the windows, the house doesn't care if it's
heated by hot air from the furnace or energy released from light bulbs.
They should be much more economical in neutral or cooling season,
though.

 

[Don Lancaster]

Should be the other way around. Fluorescent should last much longer than
expected.

Except that the fluorescent quality control is terrible.

Around here, they burn out MORE often than incandescents.

--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: [email protected]

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

 

[Don Lancaster]

CoreyWhite wrote:




Nuclear power plants don't give off steam.

Graham

No, but all of their electricity is radioactive.
Woud YOU want radioactive electricity in YOUR house?


--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: [email protected]

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

 

[Bob Kolker]

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?

I got my flourescent bulbs with standard sockets at the local Ace
Hardware Store. You can also get them at Home Depot and even at CVS
Pharmacy.

Every lightbulb in my house is florescent except for the ceiling
floodlights.

Bob Kolker

 

[Sorcerer]

| Sue... wrote:
| > 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?
| >
| >
| > We save only 20 percent compared to incandescents ?
| >
| > There must be something about Tesla stories that
| > magnetically attracts funny maths.
| >
| > Sue...
| >
| Actually, the savings may be negative.
|
| A fluorescent closet light is LESS efficient than an incadescent when
| total lifteime costs are considered.
|
| In general, fluorescents make sense if the lamp is continuously run more
| than four hours a day.
|
| A reasonable guess is that fluorescents are only cost effective in ONE
| HALF of most home light sockets.


Your "reasonable guess" is fucking stupid.
http://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/variant_detail.asp?var=3012