Light bulb insanity

[Dan Hintz]

I was thinking of something while wiring in an exterior light on the woodshop yesterday. Circuits are sized for electrical loads, while it's no problem to put lower draw bulbs in an existing circuit, if at some point in the future a circuit that was designed for leds or something, it could be easily overloaded by something as simple as the wrong bulbs. I suppose someone has thought of this, and there is a plan, anyone know what it is?

Yep, it's called a breaker.

[Mark Bolton]

Ethan, I've never seen it printed that the cfl or led bulbs use more power to produce, and I doubt we ever will. Such a story wouldn't be politically correct. Think about it though, a cfl has around 20 parts, most electronic, which use expensive and power hungry processes to produce. Mercury, which must be mined or at least refined, and several gasses that are not free to generate. It also uses petroleum to make the plastic. A led is a plastic jewel, filled with electrical components. There is no average bulb, but it could easily be in the hundreds of parts. All of it's parts are either petroleum based or require mining. A traditional light bulb takes two types of wire, an inert gas or vacuum, some glass and a little conductive metal.

More components=more energy to make. Shipping of the components to the manufacturer alone supports that, so do many other reasons. Price is also an indicator of the energy consumption of the manufacturing process, because the cost of energy is passed on to the consumer. This drives the question that I asked, do the more efficient bulbs actually offset their efficiency in use by the energy used in production?

I have no problem with cfl or led bulbs. I'm glad the technology is being developed, the consumer craves choices. My problem is with the process that they are being forced on us. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to keep incandescents, and some legitimate reasons for the others as well. Why are we being forced one way in a "free" country?

I'll tell you the same thing I told Mike H about the environmental questions. I'd like to keep this friendly, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

One quick thought, the environmentalists tend to refer to the non believers in disparaging ways, ie ludites, flat earth, etc. Keep in mind that we can learn a lot from history. Our earth and sun is temporary at best, and far more powerful than anything humans can even fathom. History is full of ancient civilizations that thought they could control the seasons/weather/sun through many crazy ways. The Mayans for example. We know they were misguided now, how will history view today's environmentalism?

When the gigantic caldera under Yellowstone releases it's energy, it will likely do more to effect the climate, in minutes, then the sum product of all the combined product of humans existence. Is it really humans that control the climate?

http://www.greenmuze.com/blogs/guest...e-of-cfls.html

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Yep, it's called a breaker.

LOL, ok Dan, I asked for that one. It could be a new revenue stream for electricians though, "specializing in blown lighting breakers".

[Steve Rozmiarek]

http://www.greenmuze.com/blogs/guest...e-of-cfls.html

Mark, that was a fun read. I'm sure some wouldn't agree with the conclusions though, but I enjoyed it.

[Mark Bolton]

Mark, that was a fun read. I'm sure some wouldn't agree with the conclusions though, but I enjoyed it.

Steve,
Coming from an off-grid background I have to say I have a bias for CFL's but its from a perspective of consumption as opposed to long term economics. That said, I have absolutely never had the experiences many here say they have with regards to longevity. All of the CFL's and LED's Ive used in my OG home as well as for all of my on-grid customers (home builder) have lasted very well. Futher, we are in a rural area with a lot of voltage fluctuation which is very hard on incandescent bulbs. I have had many customers who only get a month or two out of regular off the shelf incandescent bulbs. My electrical supplier only stocks 130v filaments for this very reason and many customers will ask me to get them bulbs because they simply last longer but they still wont match a CFL.

I have to wonder if these problems with CFL's are of the Wal-mart making. You can only cheapen things down so far and I would bet my stack on that being the case.

I will however agree that your overview makes a lot of sense in that the multitude of components, the amount of plastic, and so on, in a CFL would make them a much bigger expense than many think. I however also seem to never be able to get my head around the concept of scale. For instance how they can make a halogen work light in china, three middle men, and ship it here for 8.99, and they are all still profitable. Its an issue of volume. I wish there were an accurate and reliable accounting of the total picture with regards to CFL's and their total impact on energy. I have to think that the energy saved over the course of millions of homes, which would equal tens and tens of millions of bulbs, is where the math gets "right".

But who knows.

[Tom Stenzel]

I have quite a few CFLs in the house but right now in the basement bathroom I have 9 60 watt incandescent bulbs. Normally the bathroom temperature is in the low 60's F. in the winter, the bulbs ARE the room heater. That changes in the summer.

So when I'm forced to spend good money to upgrade the bathroom to high efficiency lighting, I'll then have to pay more money for a space heater. The resulting energy saving? Um, you tell me but the first number that comes to mind is zero or maybe even less.

That's why I hate these mandated decisions. We're not allowed to use our own intelligence to figure out what's the best solution for our circumstances.

-Tom Stenzel;

[Mark Bolton]

We're not allowed to use our own intelligence to figure out what's the best solution for our circumstances.

-Tom Stenzel;

The problem unfortunately is the vast majority of the population rarely if ever use their own intelligence, hence drowning warnings on 5 gallon buckets and "this is not a toy" on plastic packaging. They simply plod along in a busy and chaotic life oblivious to the swill in their wake (until it washes up on their front doorstep). So those who do try, suffer for the lack of the rest.

Its always been the case that a few, or a group, of people see a problem on the horizon and try to act. Of course not always effectively or correct, its still action the masses simply either dont have time, or choose not to, focus on.

It would be wonderful to live in a world, or even a society, where everyone pondered the true consequences of their actions but our odds of finding utopia are slim.

Its all old hat but air bags, seat belts, smoke detectors, crumple zones, DDT, Asbestos, Lead paint, etc.. All met with great disdain.

[Phil Thien]

Late to the party, but my biggest complaint about alternative technology bulbs has been the color. For the living room and bedrooms, I really prefer that soft white light that incandescent bulbs provide.

This last weekend my wife asked me to take a look at her favorite table lamp because the pull chains on the sockets were broken. This is a lamp that was really designed to use the lower profile halogen bulbs with a medium base. If you use conventional bulbs, the shade doesn't fit well.

So I explained that finding those types of bulbs, in sufficient wattage (brightness) is going to be difficult. So she said, "well, you can get fluorescent bulbs for me, right?"

So I replaced both of the lamp sockets, and then headed off to Menards where I found "Sylvania Living Spaces MicroMini CFL bulbs." They are very small CFL bulbs that (at 13 watts) provide 800 lumens. Now, they take a minute to warm up. But the quality of the light is AMAZING. It is "only" 82CRI, but as far as CFL bulbs go, I'm sold.

I did replace all the bulbs in the kitchen with LED, because I was tried of replacing the floods. The color could be better, but we've grown accustomed to it.

I'm sure in a few years we will look back on this and chuckle. As good as LED bulbs have gotten, they are getting a lot better and a lot less expensive fairly quickly now.

[Pat Barry]

That was funny. Thanks for the chuckles Mark. I needed it after reading the nuclear meltdown posting.

[Ralph Sprang]

Ethan, I've never seen it printed that the cfl or led bulbs use more power to produce, and I doubt we ever will.

I agree you are unlikely to find factual information that CFLs use more power to produce, since in reality CFLs use less power to produce.

Think about it though, a cfl has around 20 parts, most electronic, which use expensive and power hungry processes to produce. Mercury, which must be mined or at least refined, and several gasses that are not free to generate. It also uses petroleum to make the plastic. A led is a plastic jewel, filled with electrical components. There is no average bulb, but it could easily be in the hundreds of parts. All of it's parts are either petroleum based or require mining.

Might want to read up on manufacturing processes. CFL parts do not " use expensive and power hungry processes to produce.". The manufacturing cost of a CFL is around $0.25 in volume - including power, materials, etc. The manufacturing cost of an LED lamp is around $1.00 - and dropping rapidly. (Prices are still high because the perceived value allows them to charge a premium). For that matter, some LEDs are just an LED and a base - call it two components vs the 25 or so for an incandescent lamp.

A traditional light bulb takes two types of wire, an inert gas or vacuum, some glass and a little conductive metal.

Ever looked at what processes are required to produce that wire? To draw a good enough vacuum, then seal the bulb without losing the vacuum? To produce that "conductive metal" and form it as necessary to make the bulb? There is a reason production of an incandescent bulb costs four times the cost to produce a CFL.

Just to be clear, more components does not equate to higher cost or higher power requirements - it's just not that simple.

Regarding mercury, there is mercury in incandescent bulbs, tuna, and some thermometers - all in much, much greater quantities than in a CFL lamp.

It's difficult to get the objective facts, but they are out there if one is willing to dig. Sadly, there are many special interest groups that financially benefit by riling up consumers against CFLs and LEDs (among other topics) and post inaccurate information on seemingly "documented" and credible web pages. Unless and until the consumer wises up and gets technically savvy enough to see through the nonsense, it's unlikely to change.

[David Weaver]

Picked up one of the cree bulbs this weekend, it's just about enough to change my opinion of LED bulbs. For the most part, I'll wait until they're a little cheaper, but the color of the light is great and they produce adequate light (slightly less than the 13 watt CFL that was in the light where I put the cree bulb).

The only trouble with them is what's already been mentioned - they have a dead spot on the top of the bulb, it's not like blackout dead, just not as bright, and I would love to have been able to hang three of them in a hanging fixture in the dining room.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Ralph, I'd love to see the cost analysis you're using, I can't find much out there.

A couple things, an LED is not just one component. To make an individual light emitting diode is a manufacturing process in itself. It's missing a whole layer of construction to say that making an LED bulb requires only a base and an LED.

I agree that more parts don't equal more cost always, but generally they do. A computer costs more than a glass of milk, obviously more parts in the computer. A box of macaroni is cheaper than a brick of gold though, so it's not always about the parts. In the light bulb example though, I think I'm right, more parts equals more cost and more energy used. There is profiteering going on for sure as well, so who knows how cheap LED's will get.

David, I have a exterior light on my woodshop that vibrates slightly in the wind. Because the wind seems to always blow here, the bulbs constantly vibrate. I think it fatigues the filament, which makes them fail quickly, so a week ago I put an LED bulb in it. So far it is working just fine, and in that fixture it will save me money. I also put one in another different type of exterior light fixture on the woodshop (it was a two bulb per pack deal from Home Depot) and the shadow you mentioned is obnoxious. It is at the front entry door, and I liked the front of the building being lit up slightly. It didn't look so much like a dark hulk in the night that way. The LED bulb lights from fixture level down only, completely changed the look. It was a sylvania bulb I think. The Cree's were more expensive, but maybe I should have bought them if they don't do that as bad.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

The problem unfortunately is the vast majority of the population rarely if ever use their own intelligence, hence drowning warnings on 5 gallon buckets and "this is not a toy" on plastic packaging. They simply plod along in a busy and chaotic life oblivious to the swill in their wake (until it washes up on their front doorstep). So those who do try, suffer for the lack of the rest.

Its always been the case that a few, or a group, of people see a problem on the horizon and try to act. Of course not always effectively or correct, its still action the masses simply either dont have time, or choose not to, focus on.

It would be wonderful to live in a world, or even a society, where everyone pondered the true consequences of their actions but our odds of finding utopia are slim.

Its all old hat but air bags, seat belts, smoke detectors, crumple zones, DDT, Asbestos, Lead paint, etc.. All met with great disdain.

Mark, I think you'll agree that lightbulbs are not apples to apples with the list of other disdained advancements that had some sort of immediate personal protection impact.

Interesting thoughts about the intelligence of the populace. I wonder if another way to look at that might be that for the survival of the species, a resistance to change is critical. One of our lifespans is irrelevant in the timeline of a species, so to take several generations to catch on to new ideas is generally probably safer than radical changes. Using any one of the last centuries fascist dictators that the populace blindly followed as an example may be relevant. It's frustrating to those trying to change the status quo, but steering the minds of the general public shouldn't be easy.

[Leo Graywacz]

Regarding mercury, there is mercury in incandescent bulbs, tuna, and some thermometers - all in much, much greater quantities than in a CFL lamp.

There is no mercury in an incandescent bulb. The trick they use to say there is mercury in an incandescent bulb is the smoke stack mercury output of a coal fired plant is calculated and used to fool an ill informed population. And when they compare them to CFL's they neglect to add in the same smoke stack output of mercury produced. Making an apples to orange comparison.

The components that are different in a CFL vs Incandescent are basically the electronics to drive the CFL. They both have glass and a metal base. The incandescent has a tungsten filament while the CFL has an electronic ballast.

Which do you think use more energy and resources to make. A single strand of tungsten or a myriad of electronics?

[Dan Hintz]

On the cost of LED manufacturing...

To figure out the cost of manufacturing something, the easiest off-the-cuff method is to look at how inexpensively a Chinese factory can crank it out. The labor cost itself is minimized, and they will scrimp every possibly scrap of a penny. The energy put into the plant has a nearly direct effect on the LED cost in such a case. Disregarding quality control issues, even the bright LEDs used for lamps cost pennies directly from China (and they're still making a profit)... last I checked, the 100-lumen LEDs are well under $0.50/each. If they can sell them so inexpensively, it can't be that expensive to make.