View Full Version : Light Bulbs



ljbab728
07-13-2011, 12:14 AM
http://beta.news.yahoo.com/house-gop-fails-turn-off-light-bulb-standards-225917255.html

I plan to have years worth of light bulbs hoarded when this goes into affect. The new bulbs are hopeless when producing light.

Thunder
07-13-2011, 12:25 AM
Stupid.

CFL don't really save money. Not any that we can notice. The electric companies will continue to skyrocket the costs. They will also complain that too many people are using CFL, which uses slightly less energy that will result in revenue decline for them in order to warrant more cost increases.

Another fail for Hussein.

lake hefner breeze
07-13-2011, 01:28 AM
Here is what you have to go through to clean up after one cfl bulb gets broken: http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup-detailed.html

Otherwise, risk mercury poisoning.

CRAZY.

kawititnow
07-13-2011, 05:08 AM
I'm not a fan of the CFL's. They take to long to "warm up", they put out a "pinkish" light, and as lake hefner breeze mentioned you almost need a HazMat suit to clean up a broken one. Not to mention what that does to our landfills...

After seeing this chart (http://www.designrecycleinc.com/led%20comp%20chart.html) I'm really excited about LED light bulbs.

SoonerDave
07-13-2011, 07:42 AM
CFL bulbs are the Prius of the Eco Green Hysteria "It's Eco So It Must Be Good" movement. Since our government is too busy telling us what light bulbs to buy rather than to solve our economic mess, we're stuck for the short term with throwing away a perfectly good, safe, simple, cheap technology in favor of a mercury-filled Rube Goldberg contraption as an alternative. It's a monument to the hypocrisy of the environmental movement to push people to CFL's over conventional incandescent bulbs.

If you want a real alternative, LED-based bulbs are the easily preferable over the CFL disasters. It'll take a few more years to continue ramping up production and minimizing costs, but they'll push CFL's out over time IMHO. I'm sure once that happens, the eco-extremists will find that LED's harm some form of microscopic plant life and therefore must be banned at all costs to save humanity....okay, okay, sorry for the sarcasm, but this kind of nonsense just drives me nuts...

bretthexum
07-13-2011, 08:31 AM
The pollution that's possible with CFL's is waaay less than the pollution created with using the extra energy from powerplants. Way way WAY less.

I agree though, can't stand the pinkish light. We went and got mostly LED's for the house now. Electricity bill is almost cut in half.

ctchandler
07-13-2011, 09:19 AM
Sometime in 2003, before I had heard about the incandescent change over, I bought a lot of "Full Spectrum" cfls. They are a little pricey, but they don't have the pinkish hue. GE and others make an incandescent with a similar look but I have forgotten what they call it. LEDs are the future but I haven't found any that were bright enough at a reasonable price. Where did you buy yours?
Thanks, C. T.

The pollution that's possible with CFL's is waaay less than the pollution created with using the extra energy from powerplants. Way way WAY less.

I agree though, can't stand the pinkish light. We went and got mostly LED's for the house now. Electricity bill is almost cut in half.

USG'60
07-13-2011, 11:26 AM
Would one of you scientists help me out. When I was a kid back in the 50s Mercury was a coveted commodity to us kids. We would rub it on dimes and make them like mirrors. We would have races with balls of it. We found all kinds of ways to play with it. We would carefully save our stash in a bottle until it had all eventually been "used up" or lost in the races or what ever. Why aren't all guys, at least :-), in my age group eaten up with Mercury poisoning. In short, I'm asking, is it as dangerous as we are told?

SoonerDave
07-13-2011, 11:40 AM
USG, I think your point is well taken.

Mercury poisoning is one of those things that come under the heading of "over enough time, given enough exposure" you could have things like respiratory and circulatory problems. The big issue is that mercury is a "heavy metal" that doesn't pass through the body very conveniently. Direct handling gives an opportunity for mercury to be absorbed through the skin, or for residue to be accidentally ingested.

I've always held that most of the things we're supposed to be hysterical about, like asbestos, or even the old Alar "scare" back in the 80's, were and are horrendously overblown for commercial and, sadly, political motives. But given that we have a perfectly safe, proven technology - the incandescent light bulb - it is the height of lunacy to suggest that it is somehow safer to mandate its replacement with a costlier alternative that we know contains a compound that doesn't do a body good.

Here's a link to some general info about mercury and mercury poisoning (http://www.elcosh.org/en/document/559/d000541/mercury-fact-sheet.html?utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=adwords&utm_campaign=adwords&gclid=CPvKjerr_qkCFRpNgwodPDTOzw)

USG'60
07-13-2011, 11:57 AM
Thanks, and I feel the same way about the asbestos issue.

Just the facts
07-13-2011, 12:01 PM
FYI - many of the CFL bulbs on the market today don't meet the new efficiency standard either (I wish I could find the article I read just a few weeks ago). I am in the process of going solar on an experimental basis so electrical usage has taken on a whole new meaning to me.

RealJimbo
07-13-2011, 12:15 PM
[QUOTE=bretthexum;447765]The pollution that's possible with CFL's is waaay less than the pollution created with using the extra energy from powerplants. Way way WAY less.

Your source for this information? Rationale?

Just the facts
07-13-2011, 03:06 PM
Because traditional power plants don't power CFLs. CFLs are powered by pixie dust and fairy wishes. Do you ever wonder what happens to all the electricity the electric company produces (or tries to produce) but doesn't get used?

Bunty
07-13-2011, 05:29 PM
I'm not a fan of the CFL's. They take to long to "warm up", they put out a "pinkish" light, and as lake hefner breeze mentioned you almost need a HazMat suit to clean up a broken one. Not to mention what that does to our landfills...

After seeing this chart (http://www.designrecycleinc.com/led%20comp%20chart.html) I'm really excited about LED light bulbs.

You need to do a better job of shopping for CFL bulbs. They don't all have a pinkish light. But I wonder if LED light bulbs will be bright enough.

Thunder
07-13-2011, 05:42 PM
You need to do a better job of shopping for CFL bulbs. They don't all have a pinkish light. But I wonder if LED light bulbs will be bright enough.

Yeah, this is my first time ever to read about pinkish CFL light. I have never seen those....not now, not ever.

LED lights are now extremely bright. You'll have to find them online. For example, LED lights are now capable of supporting Saltwater tanks (those corals need extreme lighting) and LED lights are now capable of supporting Freshwater aquariums. Many kits are being sold online or people can retro-custom make one. Another example, LED lights at the new Del City OnCue is powered with LED lights and is extremely bright.

They are not widely available in the stores, but they are plentiful online.

bluedogok
07-13-2011, 06:10 PM
We have lighting reps come through our office on a weekly basis and about 90% of the time they are showing of LED light fixtures, they have improved dramatically in just the past 3 years and the costs keep coming down. I know that if we were doing the build out on our office now instead of three years ago the majority of the lighting would be LED instead of fluorescent based.

SoonerDave
07-13-2011, 07:56 PM
We have lighting reps come through our office on a weekly basis and about 90% of the time they are showing of LED light fixtures, they have improved dramatically in just the past 3 years and the costs keep coming down. I know that if we were doing the build out on our office now instead of three years ago the majority of the lighting would be LED instead of fluorescent based.

This. LED technology has been steadily improving over the last several years, and they're only going to get better, brighter, and cheaper. Fortunately, economies of scale should push pointless CFL's out of the way as the bad choice they are in due course.

Thunder
07-13-2011, 08:01 PM
Just remember, in the future as more households transition to mostly LED lighting, the electric companies will raise prices. Will it save anyone money? Not really. Only temporarily until the companies complain about lack of revenue to fund this and that. I have seen how much of a joke OG&E would have info and tips on saving energy costs, but their secret agenda is to get just enough people to do these things to lower energy costs so that they (OG&E) can have a valid complaint to raise prices. I think its what they want...pump out less electricity and gain more money in return.

BBatesokc
07-13-2011, 08:10 PM
...their secret agenda is to get just enough people to do these things to lower energy costs so that they (OG&E) can have a valid complaint to raise prices. I think its what they want...pump out less electricity and gain more money in return.

"Ah! It's a profit deal!" (in your best Steve Martin voice)

Double Edge
07-13-2011, 08:26 PM
The mercury pollution break down for incan, CFL and LED:

http://www.myledlightingguide.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=19

Answer...it depends on how clean your power source is and if you recycle your CFLs or not. (The comparison does not give weight to greenhouse gases that would be saved by using CFLs, which is another argument in favor of CFLs.) If you recycle and buy coal power, thank you. If you use say, hydro and toss your lamps in the landfill, you aren't really helping by using the CFLs.



Mercury spew from power plants by state:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/17/90576/report-mercury-pollution-from.html

LEDs are most def the way to go if and when they can bring the price down.

In other lamp news...I got a price increase notice from GE today via a supplier that fluorescent lamps are going up about 25% in the immediate future due to worldwide demand for materials.

Questor
07-13-2011, 09:59 PM
The cfl law was passed by the republican congress several years ago and signed by bush. This latest debate is an attempt to reverse that, not the other way around.

That being said I actually like the cfls. It only takes about 13 watts to generate the same light that an old 65 watt bulb used to, and at least the ones I buy last a lot longer so I don't have to go through the hassle of changing them out as often.

Also there's a website out there that lists all bulbs and their color temperature. If I remember correctly 6500K is the value that looks most like incandescent light (eg not blueish or pink). I used the site to pick brand of bulb with light very similar to the old bulbs. Works great. Dont know the site off hand but I'm sure you can google it.

Larry OKC
07-13-2011, 10:21 PM
I have mixed feelings about the CFLs (haven't tried the LEDs so can't comment on that part).

I think they DO require less electricity and less heat output (warming up the room which can lead to the A/C kicking on more often etc).

But in my experience, they do NOT last as long as they claim. I replaced 2 lamps (one on each end of the couch), with a name brand CFL bulb and the equivalent 'regular" kind. The packaging claimed it would last 8 years or something like that. It didn't come anywhere close to that and lasted a total of 2 weeks longer than the regular bulb (both less than a year). Both fixtures are connected to the same plug and come on/off for identical periods of time. Saved the packaging/receipt and got it replaced but same results with the replacement. tried a different brand, same results. just hard to justify the significant cost difference in the bulbs when you don't see a similar cost savings on the electric bill.

Also, i noticed that the light output is not equal as packaging claims. In order to get the same lighting level, I had to increase the wattage 'equivalent at least 2 steps above what the packaging indicated (which also increased the cost of the bulb & required a different lamp harp as the bulb no longer fit the fixture (too tall).

I haven't really noticed a difference in quality of the light or "color"

However, my dining room fixture requires the "amber" colored "regular" bulbs and because of the custom, hand made blown glass shades, bright enough CFLs simply won't fit and I haven't found yellow tinted ones. So I am going to have to stock pile a closet full of regular Amber ones I guess.

bluedogok
07-13-2011, 10:56 PM
Also there's a website out there that lists all bulbs and their color temperature. If I remember correctly 6500K is the value that looks most like incandescent light (eg not blueish or pink). I used the site to pick brand of bulb with light very similar to the old bulbs. Works great. Dont know the site off hand but I'm sure you can google it.
6500K is Daylight, a regular incandescent is around 2700K.

Since I am still at work waiting on renderings......here is a light color chart that I use for reference.


ANSI ANSLG C78.377-2008
Specifications for the chromaticity of solid state lighting products

Nominal CCTs: Kelvins
Incandescent White: 2700K
Warm White: 3000K
White: 3500K
Cool White: 4000K
Cool White 2: 4500K
Sun White: 5000K
Sun White 2: 5700K
Daylight: 6500K
Flexible CCT: 2700K - 6500K

ctchandler
07-14-2011, 06:58 AM
Thanks Bluedogok, My full spectrum cfl is Sun White (5000k). I like the light it puts out.
C. T.
6500K is Daylight, a regular incandescent is around 2700K.

Since I am still at work waiting on renderings......here is a light color chart that I use for reference.

venture
07-14-2011, 07:06 AM
The cfl law was passed by the republican congress several years ago and signed by bush. This latest debate is an attempt to reverse that, not the other way around.

I think people keep forgetting this part.

Larry OKC
07-14-2011, 12:15 PM
Speaking as a Repub, Repubs can screw things up just as easily as the Dems. Neither party has the market cornered on that. LOL