lee1 writes "A law in the US that is due to take effect in 2012 mandates such tough efficiency
standards for lightbulbs that it has been assumed, until recently, that
it would kill off the incandescent bulb. Instead, the law has become a
case study of the way government regulation can inspire technical
innovation. For example, new incandescent technology from Philips that
seals the traditional filament inside a small capsule (which itself is
contained within the familiar bulb). The capsule has a coating that
reflects heat back to the filament, where it is partially converted to
light. The sophisticated ($5.00) bulbs are about 30% more efficient than the
old-fashioned ($0.25) kind, and should last about three times as long.
So they are less economical than compact fluorescents, but should emit a
more pleasing spectrum, not contain mercury, and, one supposes, present
the utility company with a more desirable power factor."
by Anonymous Coward
on Tuesday July 07, @04:14AM (#28605291)
There was an article a month or so ago about how this guy used lasers to (I'm guessing) increase the surface area on the filament, thus increasing efficiency by something like 40%.
The article claims that it would be cheaper, and brighter than a compact-fluorescent, and the manufacturing process is simple. Additionally, the nature of the way they're increasing the light output allows for selective modification of certain areas of the spectrum; increasing certain parts of the spectrum and decrease other parts would make for a cleaner, notably whiter light.
Philips already has production tungsten halogen bulbs with standard bayonet and screw fittings ('EcoClassic 50' here in the UK) that only use about 50% of the power required by conventional tungsten lamps:
Right now these are only available in lower wattages, and the 100W replacement still draws 70W like those in the NYT article ('EcoClassic 30' over here). But it looks like existing technologies should be able to bring down the power consumption of this class of bulbs across the board. Lots of details, teardowns of current devices and predictions of future developments here:
like cost of production. I'm sure people are looking into the manufacturing process. once (if) it becomes economically competitive you'll see it in marketable products. not before.
I agree. The bulbe in my garrage are 150w equiv CFs. I can notice the warm up time, but it's about 15 seconds... on bitter cold days, maybe it's 30 seconds and sometimes they flicker to come on for a couple of seconds. The CFs in my other rooms produce quality light and I don't even notice their spin up time (aside from a half second delay after I throw the switch).
Getting quality light is all about buying the right color spectrum. Cheap bulb, cheap light. The SAME is true of incandescent, accepting that a cheap incandescent is a fraction of the price (up front cost), but can actually cost significantly more over an equivalent life (multiple replacements, plus energy costs).
LEDs still are not there yet (coming strong though). When LED can produce equivalent lumenns in acceptible color ranges for under $5 a bulb (maybe 5 years?) we'll see them starting to replace CF.
The mercury content in CF has also been not only dramatically reduced, but is actually not really a concern. It's not liquid mercury, it's a compund, and contamination is extreemely easy to remove with a simple vaccum. Also, placing them in landfill sis completely safe. There has NEVER been a single proven leak of mercury for any landfill. Though i agree they should be recylcled, same with all glass and all metal, and some plastics (and that's about it!) it's not a major issue.
I'm still working on replacing all my bulbs (there are over 90 in my current home, and another 16 outside, and I've only been there 6 months, give me time...), but I'm completely content buying good quality CFs. Actually, for 1 light, I'm completely happy using a pair of LED lights, even considering the cost, as it's 20 feet off the floor and in a bad spot for a ladder... I'll get to that one only after the current lights blow out...
i had about 40 CFs in my last home. The only sockets that did not have CFs were a few halogents outside, and a few rooms i used dimmers in (which there are now dimmable CFs...)
[Context: There have been some improvements in the efficiency of incandescent lighting, but it might not be enough to make them escape proposed federal bans.]
I'm wondering what the hell the federal government is doing mandating what kinds of light bulbs we can buy and use?!?!
In order for me to answer that question in a way that you would most easily understand, I'd like you to answer the following question first: who pays to clean up the pollution caused by the power plants that generate electric power for the bulbs?
who pays to clean up the pollution caused by the power plants that generate electric power for the bulbs?
It should be charged back to the power plants in question, and therefore be built into the cost of the electricity.
We're a lot further along that than we used to be 40 years ago, the plants capture a lot of the pollution rather than emitting it*. We're still not all the way.
As for the efficiency, I think that a 30% improvement is just enough to keep them available under the proposed bans, like what California proposed.
Can't find a link, but I remember the law requiring bulbs to be something like 30% more efficient, they weren't banning incandescents by name.
Of course, I also saw on a couple of the sites I checked that there was a proposal against CRT TVs. My old 32" CRT TV(Energy Star rated for it's time) takes less energy, as measured by a meter, both as a unit and per square inch of visible screen, than my new 42" LCD TV(also Energy Star).
*And make a bit of change selling the valuable commodities that would be pollution if just released
"In order for me to answer that question in a way that you would most easily understand, I'd like you to answer the following question first: who pays to clean up the pollution caused by the power plants that generate electric power for the bulbs?"
My answer: Who cares? If you're implying that the federal govt. cleans up after current power plants, I'd say that was none of their business either. Where exactly in the constitution is that a mandated power of the federal govt?
You can never shift the burden away from the Taxpayers for a utility. By definition a Utility is needed by all (or so close to all as to be insignificantly different). Any increase in overhead (Fuel, Taxes, Regulations, Environmental Stewardship, Waste handling, etc) will be passed on to the consumer to pay as part of their utility bill.
Cap and Trade will make my electric bill go up, not decrease the profits or pay of executives at the power company. Now, I'd be willing to eat that cost if everyone else were going to have to as well, but that won't be the case. Manufacturers that can, will move their power intensive operations over seas to countries that don't participate in the cap and trade system. It'll save them money, lose the US jobs, and drive down the business of companies that cannot/willnot relocate somewhere else.
This is the fundamental aspect of business that many in washington do not understand. Any move you make to increase operating costs in the US will simply result in the gradual movement of those industries affect to other countries that are less expensive to operate in.
Unless you can get the UN to jam this system down the throats of every industrialized manufacturing country, it's just going to make the US economy worse while helping the economy somewhere else. Not a big problem while the US was booming, but definitely counter productive under the current situation.
The moment I find these in stores I am IMMEDIATELY buying a few and replacing every bulb attached to a dimmer switch in my house. Ask anyone with a light dimmer who switched to CFL's, and this'll immediately be their biggest caveat with the tech.
The moment I find these in stores I am IMMEDIATELY buying a few and replacing every bulb attached to a dimmer switch in my house. Ask anyone with a light dimmer who switched to CFL's, and this'll immediately be their biggest caveat with the tech.
The 'dimmer' cfls actually work pretty well, and the ones I have, have a better color temperature when dimmed than when full-on. Dimmed incandescents do very poorly when dimmed, shifting a lot of the energy into infra-red that you just can't see. Sure, you could save 25% of the power by getting 50% of the usable light*, but is that really efficiency?
*actually, I suspect it might be worse than that. That's just my first guess without doing any calculus.
I live in Edmonton Alberta, Canada where 8 months of winter is fairly common. Here our old incandescent bulbs have 100% efficiency because the heat generated does not go to waste:-)
You would find less overall electricity usage by switching to CFL and using the difference in power to run a heat pump. Worst case scenario, the ground doesn't have any heat to give you and your pump defaults to standard resistance heating, which is where you are now. All other scenarios are improvements on that.
Unless, of course, you're not currently using electric resistance heating as your main heat supply. In which case, by answering the question, "why not," you will also know why you're not saving anything by relying on your lamps as auxiliary heat.
It looks to me instead like the energy efficiency advantage for compact fluorescent bulbs is smaller. Recall that the incandescent bulb is much cheaper than its rivals at the moment. So if the energy efficiency of the rivals isn't significant enough, the incandescent can be the better choice. So yes, even though the original poster wasn't entirely right, the incandescent bulb has greater viability in a region which normally is very cold.
Well partially true... Alberta has some vast reserves of oil and natural gas, but just like oil it is sold at international market rates. They don't sell it any cheaper to albertans just because its extracted here.
Stick a halogen light bulb inside an incandescent light bulb. That's what they sell around here to replace incandescent bulbs once they're no longer sold. Nice spectrum, no warm-up time, longer lifetime than the incandescent bulb it replaces, 30% less energy used compared to the incandescent.
I'm sorry but this so called new technology is a farce. 30% improvement in efficiency over 5% efficiency is still just 8% overall. At $5 apiece, which is way more then a CFL, which goes around $2.5 to $3.3 apiece, and it's 75% efficiency, I'm going for CFL.
Gotta tell ya, I replaced all the lights in my house with the newer fluorescent bulbs, both white and warm, over a year ago and I can now no longer stand the light output of the incandescent bulbs; it seems too harsh. Go figure. I guess humans just adapt.
The white light works very well in rooms like the bathroom, toilet, shed and kitchen. The warmer lights almost everywhere else. People really need to stop throwing tantrums.
I got tired of incandescent bulbs failing, and the low light output of CFLs. I just installed a couple of high output fluorescent tubes in the dungeon, and now it's much easier to see what you're doing. People need to just get over this "warm" light nonsense.
A TOTAL ban on incandescent lamps? I think not. You can't put CFL's in the 'fridge. They won't work in ovens. They don't work worth a damn with dimmers (I've tried several "dimmable" CLF's, they have a range of maybe 20%). Until they make CFL's or way cheaper LED bulbs equal to 60-100W incandescent lamps that work with a dimmer, I'll keep the "Edison bulbs" in my dimmable fixtures, even If I have to buy black market lamps from Korea.
Cripes, the infamous light bulb efficiency gimmick again. What's next, we gonna tie light bulb usage to Global Warming?
Seriously, any of you ever actually take a measurement of your electric usage in your house? Instead of screwing with 60W of light you use really only part of the day, take a look at your A/C unit. Older A/C units under 10 SEER drawing 20A or more will suck $80 - $120/month out of your wallet while new ones will draw less than 1/2 of that (7 - 10A). A dryer that runs 2 hours a day (not hard for a family of four) will run over $30/month pulling 20A. Own a pool? Average 1HP pump will suck another $25 - $35/month from your wallet if you run it according to what you've heard is "the norm". Geek running a server farm out of your home powered 24/7? Had a measly el-cheapo Dell headless tower that ran me $10/month by itself.
Point here is there's a HELL of a lot MORE we can fine tune and adjust lifestyles around to save a hell of a lot more than that 60W light bulb that you don't even turn off when you leave a room anyway.
Technology for Al Gores sake is not always necessary.
I agree on your cynicism towards people disposing trash properly. However I do think that governments aren't making it easy enough for people to have no excuses. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not saying it's a complicated equation, but in order for this to work it should be "as easy" to dispose of your light bulbs properly as it is with regular waste. In some places this is true, but that's far, far from all.
On the other hand, mercury is toxic forever. It never, ever, becomes safe, no matter how long you wait. When the glass breaks it'll poison you just as well in a million years as it does today.
No, no, you're missing the beauty of it. Instead of using normal mercury, there should be a mandate for light bulbs to use mercury-194, which has a half-life of 444 years. A perfectly-manageable timeframe for waste storage.
Another cool thing is that the bulb lights up without even being plugged in. It actually generates energy rather than consuming it.
But here's the really cool thing: according to Wikipedia, Hg-194 decays by electron capture into Au-194. That's right, in 400 years half of the mercury in your light bulb will have turned to gold. Replace all of your household lamps with Hg-194 compact fluorescents, and you won't even want to throw your burned-out light bulbs away in the first place!
It's amazing how many seemingly-intractable environmental problems would go away if people would just think outside the box a little.
Occasionally a crackhead^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H mod will be so impressed by a funny post that they will award it karma-bearing insightful mods as opposed to karma-less funny mods. Alternatively, they're so dumb they believed it, which is not as unlikely as it used to be.
Seems people already know how to use their water in the most efficient manner.
Planting a lawn in the middle of a fscking desert is not using water in an efficient manner, no matter how many days per week you're allowed to water it.
by Anonymous Coward
on Tuesday July 07, @04:28AM (#28605353)
Uh.. you can't just stick the bulb in the recycle bin. You have to dispose of it in the proper recycle bin. (and live in a community that has a proper recycle bin for mercury containing bulbs. Mine has a "special dispensation" for CFLs, so if I want my bulbs recycled I have to go out of my way to make sure it happens. Way out of my way. either a 30 minute drive to home depot which I think might work, or an hour and a half drive to the recycle company. by appointment. on specific days only.)
Relaying on public to dispose it properly even if the public generally cares is not going to solve the issue. In Germany we have schemes that pay for empty bottles returned to the shop and I still manage to get flat tyre on my back fairly frequently due to all the glass splitter and that even though there are people that actually collect the bottles to get some cents for their own beer. Considering the fact that disposing toxic trash is a big business here which cought attention of organized criminals long
There's already a crapton of mercury in the environment. So much in fact, that it's becoming dangerous to eat too much fish. They absorb it, it never leaves their system, and then you eat them.
The question is: Do you spew more craptons of mercury into the environment by using incandescent lamps (since you need more power and hence need to burn more mercury-containing coal), or by using CFLs?
The craptons of mercury spewed by the power plant can, in principle, be scrubbed and recaptured.
But hey, the craptons of mercury tossed into landfills by Joe Six-Pack can, in principle, be reclaimed when you end up drinking it. So it all works out in the end, I guess.
The displeasing spectrum IS, after all, what prevents most people from buying fluorescent lights. Also, the whole fact that they DON'T FIT in many ceiling lights because they are bloody too long and weird.
by Anonymous Coward
on Tuesday July 07, @04:36AM (#28605413)
The "mercury" issue should be easily solved by disposing the bulbs in the correct way
Breakage - accidents happen in the home, office and...... car(?) OK forget the car for now. the is the list of steps to safely dispose of broken CFL coils (bulbs) -
Before Clean-up: Ventilate the Room
1. Have people and pets leave the room, and don't let anyone walk through the breakage area on their way out.
2. Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more.
3. Shut off the central forced-air heating/air conditioning system, if you have one.
Clean-Up Steps for Hard Surfaces
4. Carefully scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or cardboard and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag.
5. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
6. Wipe the area clean with damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes and place them in the glass jar or plastic bag.
7. Do not use a vacuum or broom to clean up the broken bulb on hard surfaces.
Clean-up Steps for Carpeting or Rug
8. Carefully pick up glass fragments and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag.
9. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
10. If vacuuming is needed after all visible materials are removed, vacuum the area where the bulb was broken.
11. Remove the vacuum bag (or empty and wipe the canister), and put the bag or vacuum debris in a sealed plastic bag.
Disposal of Clean-up Materials
12. Immediately place all cleanup materials outside the building in a trash container or outdoor protected area for the next normal trash.
13. Wash your hands after disposing of the jars or plastic bags containing clean-up materials.
14. Check with your local or state government about disposal requirements in your specific area. Some states prohibit such trash disposal and require that broken and unbroken mercury-containing bulbs be taken to a local recycling center.
Future Cleaning of Carpeting or Rug: Ventilate the Room During and After Vacuuming
15. The next several times you vacuum, shut off the central forced-air heating/air conditioning system and open a window prior to vacuuming.
16. Keep the central heating/air conditioning system shut off and the window open for at least 15 minutes after vacuuming is completed.
Huh, 2 tablespoons of Mercury weigh a pound? What planet are these guys living on? They're off by a factor of _ten_ (22 tablespoons of Mercury weigh about a pount, assuming 15 ml per Tsp).
huh? you need to go back to either a science class or a math class.
density of mercury = 13.534 g/cm^3 (cm^3 = milliliter) 1 pound = 453.59237 grams 1 pound of mercury = 453.59237 / 13.53400 = 33.5150266 ml 33.5150266 ml = 2.26655574 US tablespoons
Not just more pleasing, but more healthy too... My eyes get tired a lot more easily under fluorescents, just as an example. A lot of people get migraines, etc. I'm not saying fluorescents aren't good for some uses, but taking away all other choices is not right either.
I think your concern should be more that pro-government regulation fanatics will read this and think it's an example of proper government regulation. From the "anti-government deregulation fanatic" point of view, the main problem with regulating light bulbs is why should government have anything to do with it. Replacing a $0.25 bulb with a $5 bulb is not a good use of government power. People can do that on their own, if it suits them.
Nor is there a need to reduce electricity consumption. If demand drive
Replacing a $0.25 bulb with a $5 bulb is not a good use of government power. People can do that on their own, if it suits them.
no they can't - no-one in their right mind would buy a roughly equivalent 25c bulb for $5, and as a result, the manufacturers would not even bother trying to make and sell them. Net result: 25c bulbs are the only option.
Sometimes you need some external stimulus to provoke a change in a stable environment, like sticking your finger in still water.
Similarly, saying "the market will provide more power stations", well yes it will - eventually, in the meantime while the market is getting to the point where more power is required, you're suffering brownouts. Besides, it is often in the market's interest to let you suffer like that as they you will pay more.
Sometimes you need more forward planning and organisation than market forces allow.
These 2 factors are why we need and have governments, if only life was as simple as you think, we'd be living in a utopia.
Sometimes you need some external stimulus to provoke a change in a stable environment, like sticking your finger in still water.
So? If you don't have a reason to change this stable environment, then you don't need an external stimulus.
Similarly, saying "the market will provide more power stations", well yes it will - eventually, in the meantime while the market is getting to the point where more power is required, you're suffering brownouts. Besides, it is often in the market's interest to let you suffer like that as they you will pay more.
You're not suffering brownouts, if people are paying the proper price for electricity and its supporting infrastructure. The market doesn't have "interests". You mean electricity generators who are a subset of the market participants. And you don't pay more for electricity, if they're not delivering it to you.
Sometimes you need more forward planning and organisation than market forces allow.
Sure there is such a need. But there isn't a superior mechanism to the market for providing th
Government regulation causes more problems than it solves. California's "deregulated" energy market was regulqated so that there was no incentive to provide reliable excess capacity.
Mythbusters covered your question a while back. It turns out that the startup energy for fluorescent bulbs was equal to about 23 seconds of runtime. So if you're going to be leaving the room for more than 23 seconds, turn off the bulb.
lasers? (Score:5, Informative)
There was an article a month or so ago about how this guy used lasers to (I'm guessing) increase the surface area on the filament, thus increasing efficiency by something like 40%.
http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=3385 [rochester.edu]
Maybe both can be used for a super-lightbulb?
-xed
not just that (Score:3, Interesting)
The article claims that it would be cheaper, and brighter than a compact-fluorescent, and the manufacturing process is simple. Additionally, the nature of the way they're increasing the light output allows for selective modification of certain areas of the spectrum; increasing certain parts of the spectrum and decrease other parts would make for a cleaner, notably whiter light.
Re:lasers? (Score:5, Informative)
Philips already has production tungsten halogen bulbs with standard bayonet and screw fittings ('EcoClassic 50' here in the UK) that only use about 50% of the power required by conventional tungsten lamps:
http://www.lighting.philips.com/gl_en/news/press/innovations/2008/home_ecoclassic.php?main=global&parent=4390&id=gl_en_news&lang=en [philips.com]
Right now these are only available in lower wattages, and the 100W replacement still draws 70W like those in the NYT article ('EcoClassic 30' over here). But it looks like existing technologies should be able to bring down the power consumption of this class of bulbs across the board. Lots of details, teardowns of current devices and predictions of future developments here:
http://www.eceee.org/press/B_Class_lamps/BClassHalogens_and_beyond-eceeeReportDecember12.pdf [eceee.org]
Parent
Re:lasers? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"maybe I'm missing something"
like cost of production. I'm sure people are looking into the manufacturing process. once (if) it becomes economically competitive you'll see it in marketable products. not before.
Re:lasers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:lasers? (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. The bulbe in my garrage are 150w equiv CFs. I can notice the warm up time, but it's about 15 seconds... on bitter cold days, maybe it's 30 seconds and sometimes they flicker to come on for a couple of seconds. The CFs in my other rooms produce quality light and I don't even notice their spin up time (aside from a half second delay after I throw the switch).
Getting quality light is all about buying the right color spectrum. Cheap bulb, cheap light. The SAME is true of incandescent, accepting that a cheap incandescent is a fraction of the price (up front cost), but can actually cost significantly more over an equivalent life (multiple replacements, plus energy costs).
LEDs still are not there yet (coming strong though). When LED can produce equivalent lumenns in acceptible color ranges for under $5 a bulb (maybe 5 years?) we'll see them starting to replace CF.
The mercury content in CF has also been not only dramatically reduced, but is actually not really a concern. It's not liquid mercury, it's a compund, and contamination is extreemely easy to remove with a simple vaccum. Also, placing them in landfill sis completely safe. There has NEVER been a single proven leak of mercury for any landfill. Though i agree they should be recylcled, same with all glass and all metal, and some plastics (and that's about it!) it's not a major issue.
I'm still working on replacing all my bulbs (there are over 90 in my current home, and another 16 outside, and I've only been there 6 months, give me time...), but I'm completely content buying good quality CFs. Actually, for 1 light, I'm completely happy using a pair of LED lights, even considering the cost, as it's 20 feet off the floor and in a bad spot for a ladder... I'll get to that one only after the current lights blow out...
i had about 40 CFs in my last home. The only sockets that did not have CFs were a few halogents outside, and a few rooms i used dimmers in (which there are now dimmable CFs...)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm wondering what the hell the federal government is doing mandating what kinds of light bulbs we can buy and use?!?!
In order for me to answer that question in a way that you would most easily understand, I'd like you to answer the following question first: who pays to clean up the pollution caused by the power plants that generate electric power for the bulbs?
Re:lasers? (Score:5, Insightful)
who pays to clean up the pollution caused by the power plants that generate electric power for the bulbs?
It should be charged back to the power plants in question, and therefore be built into the cost of the electricity.
We're a lot further along that than we used to be 40 years ago, the plants capture a lot of the pollution rather than emitting it*. We're still not all the way.
As for the efficiency, I think that a 30% improvement is just enough to keep them available under the proposed bans, like what California proposed.
Can't find a link, but I remember the law requiring bulbs to be something like 30% more efficient, they weren't banning incandescents by name.
Of course, I also saw on a couple of the sites I checked that there was a proposal against CRT TVs. My old 32" CRT TV(Energy Star rated for it's time) takes less energy, as measured by a meter, both as a unit and per square inch of visible screen, than my new 42" LCD TV(also Energy Star).
*And make a bit of change selling the valuable commodities that would be pollution if just released
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My answer: Who cares? If you're implying that the federal govt. cleans up after current power plants, I'd say that was none of their business either. Where exactly in the constitution is that a mandated power of the federal govt?
If they were interested in clean
Only on paper (Score:5, Insightful)
Cap and Trade will make my electric bill go up, not decrease the profits or pay of executives at the power company. Now, I'd be willing to eat that cost if everyone else were going to have to as well, but that won't be the case. Manufacturers that can, will move their power intensive operations over seas to countries that don't participate in the cap and trade system. It'll save them money, lose the US jobs, and drive down the business of companies that cannot/willnot relocate somewhere else.
This is the fundamental aspect of business that many in washington do not understand. Any move you make to increase operating costs in the US will simply result in the gradual movement of those industries affect to other countries that are less expensive to operate in.
Unless you can get the UN to jam this system down the throats of every industrialized manufacturing country, it's just going to make the US economy worse while helping the economy somewhere else. Not a big problem while the US was booming, but definitely counter productive under the current situation.
Parent
Dimmer Savior! (Score:5, Insightful)
The moment I find these in stores I am IMMEDIATELY buying a few and replacing every bulb attached to a dimmer switch in my house. Ask anyone with a light dimmer who switched to CFL's, and this'll immediately be their biggest caveat with the tech.
Re:Dimmer Savior! (Score:4, Interesting)
The moment I find these in stores I am IMMEDIATELY buying a few and replacing every bulb attached to a dimmer switch in my house. Ask anyone with a light dimmer who switched to CFL's, and this'll immediately be their biggest caveat with the tech.
The 'dimmer' cfls actually work pretty well, and the ones I have, have a better color temperature when dimmed than when full-on. Dimmed incandescents do very poorly when dimmed, shifting a lot of the energy into infra-red that you just can't see. Sure, you could save 25% of the power by getting 50% of the usable light*, but is that really efficiency?
*actually, I suspect it might be worse than that. That's just my first guess without doing any calculus.
Parent
Canada eh! (Score:5, Insightful)
Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
You would find less overall electricity usage by switching to CFL and using the difference in power to run a heat pump. Worst case scenario, the ground doesn't have any heat to give you and your pump defaults to standard resistance heating, which is where you are now. All other scenarios are improvements on that.
Unless, of course, you're not currently using electric resistance heating as your main heat supply. In which case, by answering the question, "why not," you will also know why you're not saving anything by relying on your lamps as auxiliary heat.
Parent
Re:Wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Your missing the part where heat rises. Unless you are pointing a fan at your light bulbs you are only warming a small section of your ceiling.
Re:Canada eh! (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
30% efficiency gain is even easier: (Score:4, Informative)
Stick a halogen light bulb inside an incandescent light bulb. That's what they sell around here to replace incandescent bulbs once they're no longer sold. Nice spectrum, no warm-up time, longer lifetime than the incandescent bulb it replaces, 30% less energy used compared to the incandescent.
I'm sorry but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I'm sorry but... (Score:5, Informative)
hum, hum...
Incandescent: 2.0-2.2% efficiency
Halogen: 2.4-2.9% efficiency
Compact fluorescent: 8â"11% efficiency
We are far from your 5% and 75% efficiency...But your point is valid but not so staggering...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy#Examples_2 [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
Gotta tell ya, I replaced all the lights in my house with the newer fluorescent bulbs, both white and warm, over a year ago and I can now no longer stand the light output of the incandescent bulbs; it seems too harsh. Go figure. I guess humans just adapt.
The white light works very well in rooms like the bathroom, toilet, shed and kitchen. The warmer lights almost everywhere else. People really need to stop throwing tantrums.
LED Lamps (Score:3, Informative)
LED are already here, costs still high but they beat flourescents bulbs in life span and energy consume, and lightup instantaneously.
Strip lights (Score:3, Insightful)
I got tired of incandescent bulbs failing, and the low light output of CFLs. I just installed a couple of high output fluorescent tubes in the dungeon, and now it's much easier to see what you're doing. People need to just get over this "warm" light nonsense.
Lame (Score:3, Funny)
What ever happened to microwave lighting that I saw on TV over a decade ago that was going to kick ass???
and where is my flying car and VR sex slave.
o.. and why does my car from 1997 get the same MPG as all the new ones that don't have massive arrays of lead acid battery's?
The light bulb is lame. I want my damn sharks with flipp'en lasers and you need to get off my LAN son....
Similarly... (Score:3, Insightful)
The last major gas mileage increase in North American cars came as a result of legislation.
CFL's can't be used everwhere (Score:3, Interesting)
A TOTAL ban on incandescent lamps? I think not. You can't put CFL's in the 'fridge. They won't work in ovens. They don't work worth a damn
with dimmers (I've tried several "dimmable" CLF's, they have a range of maybe 20%). Until they make CFL's or way cheaper LED bulbs equal to 60-100W incandescent lamps that work with a dimmer, I'll keep the "Edison bulbs" in my dimmable fixtures, even If I have to buy black market lamps from Korea.
Light Bulbs...The LEAST of our worries (Score:5, Insightful)
Cripes, the infamous light bulb efficiency gimmick again. What's next, we gonna tie light bulb usage to Global Warming?
Seriously, any of you ever actually take a measurement of your electric usage in your house? Instead of screwing with 60W of light you use really only part of the day, take a look at your A/C unit. Older A/C units under 10 SEER drawing 20A or more will suck $80 - $120/month out of your wallet while new ones will draw less than 1/2 of that (7 - 10A). A dryer that runs 2 hours a day (not hard for a family of four) will run over $30/month pulling 20A. Own a pool? Average 1HP pump will suck another $25 - $35/month from your wallet if you run it according to what you've heard is "the norm". Geek running a server farm out of your home powered 24/7? Had a measly el-cheapo Dell headless tower that ran me $10/month by itself.
Point here is there's a HELL of a lot MORE we can fine tune and adjust lifestyles around to save a hell of a lot more than that 60W light bulb that you don't even turn off when you leave a room anyway.
Technology for Al Gores sake is not always necessary.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The "mercury" issue should be easily solved by disposing the bulbs in the correct way
easily...with a majority of dumb people disposing trash in the very street whenever they can ?
haha....you are so naive it is not even funny.
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
A modest proposal (Score:5, Funny)
On the other hand, mercury is toxic forever. It never, ever, becomes safe, no matter how long you wait. When the glass breaks it'll poison you just as well in a million years as it does today.
No, no, you're missing the beauty of it. Instead of using normal mercury, there should be a mandate for light bulbs to use mercury-194, which has a half-life of 444 years. A perfectly-manageable timeframe for waste storage.
Another cool thing is that the bulb lights up without even being plugged in. It actually generates energy rather than consuming it.
But here's the really cool thing: according to Wikipedia, Hg-194 decays by electron capture into Au-194. That's right, in 400 years half of the mercury in your light bulb will have turned to gold. Replace all of your household lamps with Hg-194 compact fluorescents, and you won't even want to throw your burned-out light bulbs away in the first place!
It's amazing how many seemingly-intractable environmental problems would go away if people would just think outside the box a little.
Parent
Re:A modest proposal (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:A modest proposal (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:5, Insightful)
Planting a lawn in the middle of a fscking desert is not using water in an efficient manner, no matter how many days per week you're allowed to water it.
Parent
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:4, Interesting)
Uh.. you can't just stick the bulb in the recycle bin. You have to dispose of it in the proper recycle bin. (and live in a community that has a proper recycle bin for mercury containing bulbs. Mine has a "special dispensation" for CFLs, so if I want my bulbs recycled I have to go out of my way to make sure it happens. Way out of my way. either a 30 minute drive to home depot which I think might work, or an hour and a half drive to the recycle company. by appointment. on specific days only.)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There's already a crapton of mercury in the environment. So much in fact, that it's becoming dangerous to eat too much fish. They absorb it, it never leaves their system, and then you eat them.
The question is: Do you spew more craptons of mercury into the environment by using incandescent lamps (since you need more power and hence need to burn more mercury-containing coal), or by using CFLs?
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:4, Insightful)
The craptons of mercury spewed by the power plant can, in principle, be scrubbed and recaptured.
But hey, the craptons of mercury tossed into landfills by Joe Six-Pack can, in principle, be reclaimed when you end up drinking it. So it all works out in the end, I guess.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:5, Informative)
The "mercury" issue should be easily solved by disposing the bulbs in the correct way
Breakage - accidents happen in the home, office and ...... car(?) OK forget the car for now. the is the list of steps to safely dispose of broken CFL coils (bulbs) -
Before Clean-up: Ventilate the Room
1. Have people and pets leave the room, and don't let anyone walk through the breakage area on their way out.
2. Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more.
3. Shut off the central forced-air heating/air conditioning system, if you have one.
Clean-Up Steps for Hard Surfaces
4. Carefully scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or cardboard and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag.
5. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
6. Wipe the area clean with damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes and place them in the glass jar or plastic bag.
7. Do not use a vacuum or broom to clean up the broken bulb on hard surfaces.
Clean-up Steps for Carpeting or Rug
8. Carefully pick up glass fragments and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag.
9. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
10. If vacuuming is needed after all visible materials are removed, vacuum the area where the bulb was broken.
11. Remove the vacuum bag (or empty and wipe the canister), and put the bag or vacuum debris in a sealed plastic bag.
Disposal of Clean-up Materials
12. Immediately place all cleanup materials outside the building in a trash container or outdoor protected area for the next normal trash.
13. Wash your hands after disposing of the jars or plastic bags containing clean-up materials.
14. Check with your local or state government about disposal requirements in your specific area. Some states prohibit such trash disposal and require that broken and unbroken mercury-containing bulbs be taken to a local recycling center.
Future Cleaning of Carpeting or Rug: Ventilate the Room During and After Vacuuming
15. The next several times you vacuum, shut off the central forced-air heating/air conditioning system and open a window prior to vacuuming.
16. Keep the central heating/air conditioning system shut off and the window open for at least 15 minutes after vacuuming is completed.
a great way to spend the afternoon, huh?
Parent
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:5, Insightful)
Compare that to the method for incandescent bulbs:
1) sweep broken bulb pieces into adust pan and dump in the garbage
Plus I don't have to turn off my central air each time I clean the floor after that.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:only 30% more efficient? (Score:4, Informative)
Huh, 2 tablespoons of Mercury weigh a pound? What planet are these guys living on? They're off by a factor of _ten_ (22 tablespoons of Mercury weigh about a pount, assuming 15 ml per Tsp).
huh? you need to go back to either a science class or a math class.
density of mercury = 13.534 g/cm^3 (cm^3 = milliliter)
1 pound = 453.59237 grams
1 pound of mercury = 453.59237 / 13.53400 = 33.5150266 ml
33.5150266 ml = 2.26655574 US tablespoons
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nor is there a need to reduce electricity consumption. If demand drive
Re:Government Regulation (Score:5, Insightful)
Replacing a $0.25 bulb with a $5 bulb is not a good use of government power. People can do that on their own, if it suits them.
no they can't - no-one in their right mind would buy a roughly equivalent 25c bulb for $5, and as a result, the manufacturers would not even bother trying to make and sell them. Net result: 25c bulbs are the only option.
Sometimes you need some external stimulus to provoke a change in a stable environment, like sticking your finger in still water.
Similarly, saying "the market will provide more power stations", well yes it will - eventually, in the meantime while the market is getting to the point where more power is required, you're suffering brownouts. Besides, it is often in the market's interest to let you suffer like that as they you will pay more.
Sometimes you need more forward planning and organisation than market forces allow.
These 2 factors are why we need and have governments, if only life was as simple as you think, we'd be living in a utopia.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sometimes you need some external stimulus to provoke a change in a stable environment, like sticking your finger in still water.
So? If you don't have a reason to change this stable environment, then you don't need an external stimulus.
Similarly, saying "the market will provide more power stations", well yes it will - eventually, in the meantime while the market is getting to the point where more power is required, you're suffering brownouts. Besides, it is often in the market's interest to let you suffer like that as they you will pay more.
You're not suffering brownouts, if people are paying the proper price for electricity and its supporting infrastructure. The market doesn't have "interests". You mean electricity generators who are a subset of the market participants. And you don't pay more for electricity, if they're not delivering it to you.
Sometimes you need more forward planning and organisation than market forces allow.
Sure there is such a need. But there isn't a superior mechanism to the market for providing th
Oh rubbish (Score:3, Insightful)
Government regulation causes more problems than it solves. California's "deregulated" energy market was regulqated so that there was no incentive to provide reliable excess capacity.
Re:Silly questions (Score:4, Informative)
Mythbusters covered your question a while back. It turns out that the startup energy for fluorescent bulbs was equal to about 23 seconds of runtime. So if you're going to be leaving the room for more than 23 seconds, turn off the bulb.
-b
Parent