Home Page link

CFL vs Incandescent

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Home Repair - - If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Otherwise look here. 

Page 1 of 13       1 2 3 > last >> Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
CFL vs Incandescent bonnie 04-27-2008
| ---> Re: CFL vs Incandescent Percival P. Cas...05-06-2008
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by bonnie on April 27, 2008, 5:11 pm
Given, CFL's are thought to be more energy efficient than incandescent
bulbs. But I heard they use more energy to turn on.

What if it is in a room that is used infrequently, a closet or guest
room for instance. In other words a room in which you would go in and
out of pretty quickly.

How long would a CFL have to be left on to realize the net energy
savings.

thanks for your input,
bonnie



Posted by RBM on April 27, 2008, 5:33 pm

> Given, CFL's are thought to be more energy efficient than incandescent
> bulbs. But I heard they use more energy to turn on.
>
> What if it is in a room that is used infrequently, a closet or guest
> room for instance. In other words a room in which you would go in and
> out of pretty quickly.
>
> How long would a CFL have to be left on to realize the net energy
> savings.
>
> thanks for your input,
> bonnie
>
>I'm not a big fan of CFL lamps to begin with. I find the color of virtually
>every type I've tried, to be annoying. Having said that, they do cost a lot
>less per lumen than incandescent lights. I use them in areas like the play
>room where the kids aren't bothered by them, and the lights are practically
>always on. They are pretty worthless in rooms such as closets, where you
>are in and out in a hurry, simply because it takes a short time before they
>come up to full brightness.



Posted by Pat on April 27, 2008, 5:53 pm
> Given, CFL's are thought to be more energy efficient than incandescent
> bulbs. But I heard they use more energy to turn on.
>
> What if it is in a room that is used infrequently, a closet or guest
> room for instance. In other words a room in which you would go in and
> out of pretty quickly.
>
> How long would a CFL have to be left on to realize the net energy
> savings.
>
> thanks for your input,
> bonnie

Mythbusters did a segment on that. The break-even point was something
like 6/10ths of a second.

The better question is, is this really a question considering that you
aren't going to be able to buy incandescent lights next year.

Posted by Don Klipstein on April 27, 2008, 6:57 pm
Pat wrote:

>> Given, CFL's are thought to be more energy efficient than incandescent
>> bulbs. But I heard they use more energy to turn on.
>>
>> What if it is in a room that is used infrequently, a closet or guest
>> room for instance. In other words a room in which you would go in and
>> out of pretty quickly.
>>
>> How long would a CFL have to be left on to realize the net energy
>> savings.
>>
>> thanks for your input,
>> bonnie
>
>Mythbusters did a segment on that. The break-even point was something
>like 6/10ths of a second.
>
>The better question is, is this really a question considering that you
>aren't going to be able to buy incandescent lights next year.

The ban does not kick in until 2012, and only affects general service
ones of a certain range of brightness. Even then, ones that achieve some
higher efficiency standard are exempt. I got just an hour ago a couple
that I believe will get around that ban by using "halogen infrared"
technology.

These are Philips Halogena Energy Saver. I got them from Home Depot.
They look like ordinary soft white incandescents, of the squarish shape
used by some Philips lightbulbs in North America (and Westinghouse before
they sold their lamp division to Philips).

There is a 70 watt one with light output fully on par with a 1500 hour
(double life) soft white 100 watt incandescent, and a 40 watt one with
light output fully on par with a 60 watt 1500 hour soft white
incandescent. Both of these are rated to last 3,000 hours and are rated
to be fully dimmable.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Posted by on April 28, 2008, 8:53 am
On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:57:41 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

> The ban does not kick in until 2012,

We have many recessed floods on dimmers.
Dimmable CFL's are WAY too expensive right now.
I sure hope that changes before anyt kind of ban on them.

And I hope something improves with the "warmup" time.
I now have all CFL floods in my kitchen. When I'm ready to make
dinner, I have to pre-heat the lights and the oven at the same time.
:)

Page 1 of 13       1 2 3 > last >>
Similar ThreadsPosted
halogen or incandescent March 3, 2007, 12:57 pm
What is the highest wattage incandescent January 9, 2007, 9:57 am
Incandescent that avoids upcoming ban April 27, 2008, 7:49 pm
CFL vs incandescent bulb: Brightness April 28, 2008, 2:45 pm
Non-incandescent freezer light bulb November 23, 2006, 2:28 am
Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps December 23, 2007, 4:28 am
Re: Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps December 25, 2007, 4:04 pm
Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps January 5, 2008, 12:29 am
Incandescent lighting for high ceiling February 10, 2008, 1:12 pm
incandescent bulb on magnetic low voltage dimmer? February 4, 2006, 5:27 pm

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap