# CFL bulbs



## RNLA (Feb 9, 2011)

I will probably take some heat for this but I have to say I'm pissed. I walked in to my local ACE today guy says "can I help you?" I say, "no thanks I got it handled" He goes through the "if you need any help" stuff and goes on his way... I get some grass seed and then I head over to the lighting section and start to look at the bulbs. The same guy comes over and begins to give me a CAUTION that you know they'er going to all CFL bulbs... and how it is going to be law. So I ask, don't you think it should be my choice to burn a regular bulb or CFL? He says NO! I went down hill fast and advised him I did not need his help to make a decision. He seemed equally offended that I might do something to use more power than I should... I already have used CFLs for a good while, I also do not like being smothered by a salesman. I will be talking to the manager about this person not letting his personal opinions and habits enter his professional duties. He should not be telling some one who he does not know how to buy or what to buy! >:-(


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 9, 2011)

It's light bulb sales disease, apparently quite contagious. 

A couple of weeks ago I was at the Home Despot looking for a particularly weird appliance bulb or an acceptable substitute. When their bulb guy offered to help, I politely declined. After his third offer to help, I got a bit testy with him and he left. 

The next thing I know, another guy comes by an offers to help. I got kind of frosty with him, and he left in a bit of a huff. Less than a minute later, employee number three comes by asking if I need help, which was the fifth unwanted interruption in my thought process. At that point I lost it and told him in no uncertain terms that five friggin times was too many and just leave me the hell alone. I don't need any <censored> help.

A little while later, when I left empty handed, I noticed a small knot of employees watching me. I'm pretty sure I could see one of them mouthing in what I'm sure was a barely audible voice, "That's him." I resisted the temptation to _"salute"_ them on the way out.


----------



## semipro (Feb 9, 2011)

I'm with you guys.   

I do appreciate that they're trying to be helpful but.... I think I know my local big box stores better than the employees.

Sometimes I wish they they would offer you a "leave me the hell alone" sign when you walk in the door... or may just a yellow armband that I can wear that indicates that to the employees. 

Our local HD has even started posting greeters at the front door some of which I recognize from the various departments.  It really pisses me off to think I may not find help in a department because the employee is working the front door.


----------



## yooperdave (Feb 9, 2011)

it's going to be a law that we have to use cfl's?  i knew that incadescents were going to be dropped in manufacturing, but now their going to have bulb police??? puh-leez!

 wasn't the whole digital broadcast of tv signals jammed down our throats without anyone paying attention to the normal joes and catering only to the lobbiests??  is this the same thing only with the spin of cfl versus incadescent?  gotta love it


----------



## RNLA (Feb 9, 2011)

The CFLs are really a saving measure and I was about to purchase eight of the soft white flood lights for our can lights 4 in the kitchen and 4 in the living room. The guy screwed up a nearly fifty dollar sale and in excess of fifty with my grass seed and night light... I was also going to buy a few other things. I was really surprised to hear of the conspiracy thing though, thanks for the info! :gulp:


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 9, 2011)

yooperdave said:
			
		

> it's going to be a law that we have to use cfl's?  i knew that incadescents were going to be dropped in manufacturing, but now their going to have bulb police??? puh-leez!
> 
> wasn't the whole digital broadcast of tv signals jammed down our throats without anyone paying attention to the normal joes and catering only to the lobbiests??  is this the same thing only with the spin of cfl versus incadescent?  gotta love it



No law that I know of says you can't use incandescents if you have them. You just won't be able buy them.

Digital TV is a good thing. There has to be a standard, and the old analog standard was woefully out of date. The change over has freed up a lot of spectrum, which is being made available for pressing telecommunications needs, such as additional wireless broadband frequencies. 

Coupons for free converter boxes were made available by an act of Congress so that ordinary joes wouldn't be forced to buy new TV's, even though they had years to acquire a new digital set. _That_ was a waste of money IMHO.


----------



## yooperdave (Feb 9, 2011)

WhitePine said:
			
		

> yooperdave said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



as far as the digital thing goes, no-one around here likes it as we are too remote to receive digital broadcasts from any tv stations. the "old analog standard" worked. now there are areas that can't get the digital signal...whether you have the converter box or not. (a lot of people did get them in anticipation of interrupted service...surprise) the only way to get tv now is from dish or direct. used to be free, now we pay. so all the pressing telecommunications needs that were freed up are still freed up.

i understand that in more densely populated areas, such as out east, this new system works better. as far as the tv thing goes, i now have a cottage with no tv and have only missed it a very limited number of times.

i didn't mean to blow open a conspiracy theory!!


----------



## RNLA (Feb 9, 2011)

I quit watching TV 10 years ago so I would have more time to cut wood :wow: Do I have to buy a special TV to get free broadcasts? I have thought about getting a new TV so I could leave it running. This way I could make up the amount of energy I saved by using CFLs and my power bill would stay the same! Does that make it OK? Could I go back to the ACE store and tell the guy I am saving jobs by using CFLs and digital TV 24/7?


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 9, 2011)

yooperdave said:
			
		

> as far as the digital thing goes, no-one around here likes it as we are too remote to receive digital broadcasts from any tv stations. the "old analog standard" worked. now there are areas that can't get the digital signal...whether you have the converter box or not. (a lot of people did get them in anticipation of interrupted service...surprise) the only way to get tv now is from dish or direct. used to be free, now we pay. so all the pressing telecommunications needs that were freed up are still freed up.
> 
> i understand that in more densely populated areas, such as out east, this new system works better. as far as the tv thing goes, i now have a cottage with no tv and have only missed it a very limited number of times.
> 
> i didn't mean to blow open a conspiracy theory!!



Sorry to hear you can't get a signal anymore. Have you tried one of the very high gain fringe area UHF antennas? I installed one of these, along with a mast mounted preamp. We get a good signal from the big city shooting through trees and a ridge line.  

http://www.antennasdirect.com/store/91XG_HDTV_Antenna.html


----------



## homebrewz (Feb 9, 2011)

From what I understand (which means what I skimmed on wikipedia), in the US its not so much that incandescent bulbs are being phased out, its that light bulb efficiency standards are being increased.

With high speed internet and hearth.com, I don't need TV.. I spend enough time on here anyway. Though, for those without a dish and still in search of a free signal, the stuff mentioned above will definitely help (good antenna, preamp). Getting the antenna up high is very important as is using a decent coaxial cable.


----------



## fdegree (Feb 9, 2011)

Based upon my experience with CFL's...they do not last much longer than incandescent...they do cost more than incandescent...they probably use less electricity than incandescent.  I have not tried to do the math, but I wonder if the the reduced electricity offsets the added cost when considering their similar life span.

As for digital TV...the problem I have with this is, now that TV has gone digital, the government is selling the analog frequencies...not sure if they are selling the digital ones too.  How can they sell something that they don't own?


----------



## btuser (Feb 9, 2011)

I changed over to all cfl about 4 years ago (except for the fridge) and there was about a $20 difference in the elect bill right away.  Of course, once people stop using as much electricity PSNH will be inclined to raise the rates, just as the DWP has done when we all went to low water use fixtures.   Power and water useage for Americans is on the way down, but that won't save us from everybody else on the way up.  Even if we conserve our costs will go up.


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 9, 2011)

fdegree said:
			
		

> As for digital TV...the problem I have with this is, now that TV has gone digital, the government is selling the analog frequencies...not sure if they are selling the digital ones too.  How can they sell something that they don't own?



The radio spectrum is considered public property. It is managed cooperatively world wide by national governments. Cooperative management is a necessity, since radio waves don't respect borders. A number of treaties exist to set up the rules for the management. 

The US Government has decided, perhaps unwisely, to auction off spectrum to the highest qualified bidder. It isn't actually sold. Rather, licenses to use the spectrum are sold to the highest qualified bidder. Prior to the auction process, licenses were simply awarded for a fixed fee, or in some cases, no fee. 

The auctions are only conducted for certain radio services, such as cellular and PCS radio services. The vast majority of licenses are not auctioned.


----------



## maverick06 (Feb 9, 2011)

I use the CFL, but i still need to use the regular bulbs for all the outdoor timers (the timers need about 60W to work). So the dumba working in the store can politely inform you of the difference then walk away. He doesnt make the laws in the country... he makes minimum wage.


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 9, 2011)

fdegree said:
			
		

> Based upon my experience with CFL's...they do not last much longer than incandescent...they do cost more than incandescent...they probably use less electricity than incandescent.  I have not tried to do the math, but I wonder if the the reduced electricity offsets the added cost when considering their similar life span.



All fluorescent lamps require a ballast (current limiting device). In the case of the CFLs, the ballast is built into the bulb. In junk CFLs from you know where, the ballast fails early, negating any cost savings from the reduced energy consumption. As far as I know, the government in its wisdom has mandated reduced energy consumption while *not* mandating the reliability needed to produce an actual cost saving or total cost equality.

There is also a small amount of energy consumption numbers fraud accompanying many, if not all, fluorescents. The ballast, which produces no light, only heat, consumes a little bit of power. A flourescent light's energy consumption is the total of that consumed by the bulb and and that consumed by the ballast. Prior to CFLs, the ballast was separate from the bulb, being part of the fixture. Since the bulb manufacturers could not know how much power the fixture's ballast consumed, only the bulb's consumption was considered in the wattage rating.

The CFL manufacturers have gleefully continued the "tradition," because, after all, it's a tradition, no matter that each and every CFL rating understates the actual power consumption of the bulb.

Once again, the American consumer is being screwed by a combination of inept government action and unethical corporate governance.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 9, 2011)

I still want to go back to the store just to screw with the guy who tried to "EDUCATE" me on the proper energy use for the average joe. I will behave for the moment and go about my other 6.5 million projects that I do not need advice on how to do it the right way CFLs will be purchased but only at a place where they have those yellow arm bands to tell the sales guy to leave you alone, I will wear 2! :cheese: Thanks Semipro.


----------



## semipro (Feb 9, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> I still want to go back to the store just to screw with the guy who tried to "EDUCATE" me on the proper energy use for the average joe. I will behave for the moment and go about my other 6.5 million projects that I do not need advice on how to do it the right way CFLs will be purchased but only at a place where they have those yellow arm bands to tell the sales guy to leave you alone, I will wear 2! :cheese: Thanks Semipro.



I'm actually thinking of making that armband (or something else) suggestion to HD and Lowes.  What the heck? 


My father in law really growls about how terribly CFLs work in his motion detecting outdoor lights.  Though we don't usually agree on much he's right about that.  That's not a good application for CFLs that need to warm up to full brightness.


----------



## maverick06 (Feb 9, 2011)

CFL are really a great lightbulb... but

1) use them in a correct fixture. Some CFL cannot be used in a enclosed fixture, some need to be oriented in a certain direction. 

2) put them in  a light that stays on for a while, one that doesnt cycle frequentlly. 

3) Dont use them below 40F or they dont work too well. 

4) only use them with clean power, when the lights flicker, buzz, or you have a brown out, these bulbs die right away. 

5) some cheap bulbs work great, some are hottible). 

6) be careful of the color temperature, otherwise you wont be happy with the color. 

7) dont use them in a drop light or something that will bounce around. 

I have had lots that die quick (cheap and expensive) and lots that are going years later (cheap and expensive). No doubt they are way cheaper to operate than a regular lightbulb. 

I think LED might be a better option, even less power used, and hopefully a longer life.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 10, 2011)

So on the LED bulbs, do they have a "soft white" indoor version or are my wife and I going to look like 1% milk? I can just barely take the "soft white" CFLs in our floor lamp and table lamp.


----------



## Amaralluis (Feb 10, 2011)

I used to think that CFL were crap but to save money I had replaced almost all my indoor lightning with GLOBE 13W CFL when it came out. They were not instant start, had a yellish color and not very bright.

I was at costco the other day and saw a pack of 10 LUMINUS 13W CFL for $12.00. I thought why not, might as well replace those old 60W bulbs lingering in the house.

HOLY CRAP was my reaction when I installed one and tried it out. Instant start, very white light color, looks natural and is it bright! 
Even with the lady got home the first thing she said was "Did you do something to the lights?".
I ended going back to Costo and bought 2 more packages to replace all the bulbs in the house. They are better than regular incandescent and only use 13W.
Also these bulbs have a lead free base. Dont know about longevity thou but so far it impressed me.


----------



## maverick06 (Feb 10, 2011)

Great news! 

As for the LED, I had one very cheap one and it was blue. But if you do more research before you buy it, or test it out at the store, you will probably be able to get one that works well. The LED christmas lights are nearly indistinguishable from the regular lights. I have high expectations. 

The LED's should last 100,000 hrs... but as with th eCFL, who knows how good the guts of the system are that drive the LED's.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 10, 2011)

Yeah we tried the CFLs when we first saw them years ago and hated them. Then a couple years back we rented a duplex and the power bills were enormous so we put in the CFLs that were "soft white" in every fixture. We did notice a good reduction in the bill I was convinced. Just as anything though we did pay for the cost of the bulbs. The overall life span is a relative thing and I'm not convinced for the price you pay.


----------



## James Gautsch (Feb 10, 2011)

Last time I received CFL speech I ask two questions, "What is the proper way to dispose of them?  Dose your company have a recycling program for them?, since they contain a small amount of mercury in them. 
Salesman: Blank look, "Ah never thought about that."
Me: "Well maybe you should ask your company if they are going to implement a recycling program, or, ask the sales reps for the CFL's what is their recommendation for disposing of them.  Or even better ask your Congress person, since they have all the answers."
Salesman: Blank look turned around and left.


----------



## burnham (Feb 10, 2011)

WhitePine said:
			
		

> fdegree said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 Thank you.  Not only do the CFL bulbs use more power than they advertise, but they also can put some funky harmonics across the neutral wire.  I was at a code seminar about six months ago, and there was talk of going to a 130% neutral conductor.  We currently use a 70% derating factor, but it could be thrown out the window if the whole country switched over to CFLs.  To me, that talk seemed kind of on the extreme end of the spectrum, but there certianly is a big downside to these bulbs that nobody ever seems to address.   Hopefully LED tecchnology can progress quickly enough to do away with the flourescent lamps.


----------



## homebrewz (Feb 10, 2011)

I went nearly all CFL's about 5 years ago and have replaced about 2 since then. I noticed a difference in the power bill right away. I think they cost me about $3 to $4 per bulb, but its been my experience that I've more than made up for that in power savings. That's really interesting about the extra power draw and the cheap ballast ones. Anyway, the light that some types of CFL's give off is not very pleasing.. kind of a bluish light. I can't remember what they were called on the package.. it took a little trial and error, but I did find ones that gave off a light similar to incandescent bulbs. 

The ones that have burned out I save up and wait for the annual hazardous waste recycling day in our area. They take them there. Since about 50% of power in the US comes from the burning of coal, IMO, the small amount of mercury vapor in CFL's is small in comparison to the amount that is released by burning more coal for the additional power needed for incandescent bulbs. 

LED's will use much less power than even CFL's, but a lot of them also give off an unpleasing bluish light. Hopefully that will change with time and the price will come down. LED's are much more durable as the diode is encased in a plastic.. no glass to break, no filament to burn out. As someone who used to spend a lot of time caving, I was thrilled when the LED flashlights came out. After about 12 years of use, one of the LED's in my first LED flashlight finally burned out.


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 10, 2011)

LEDs also require a ballast. When they are used as indicator lights in electronics device, a simple power wasting resistor is used. It's not a big deal, since a simple indicator LED doesn't require much current. LED lamps are another story. I haven't looked into how the manufacturers ballast them, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out it's some sort of active electronic circuit, which raises the possibility of early failure, and yes, harmonics.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 10, 2011)

Well with all the disadvantages I do believe I will put more money toward my insulation and windows. I have been intrigued by the CFLs but the price has been a deterrent. As I said before we saw a difference in the power bill but the out put for the savings was questionable...


----------



## woodgeek (Feb 10, 2011)

maverick06 said:
			
		

> I use the CFL, but i still need to use the regular bulbs for all the outdoor timers (the timers need about 60W to work). So the dumba working in the store can politely inform you of the difference then walk away. He doesnt make the laws in the country... he makes minimum wage.



The in wall digital timers have come a long way recently--there are now versions that do NOT need to have a standby load, so they DO work with CFLs.  They have either a battery (yuk) or a third wire attachment.  Timer+incandescent on 50% of the time with 4x the wattage = 2x the power of leaving a CFL on 24/7!

also, I like the 'warm white' as incandescent replacement, not the 'soft white's that are a little bluer, but not as bad as the 'daylights'.

The best strategy is to buy the bulbs from a decent place that will take them back the next day if you don't like them for any reason.  IOW, trial and error works great, and keeps the brick and mortar places in business.  I have NEVER had a problem returning CFLs that sucked no questions asked.  Why live with a bad bulb for 5000 hours and get a bad attitude about the technology?


----------



## Later (Feb 10, 2011)

WhitePine said:
			
		

> fdegree said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am being serious - aren't all CFLs made in China?


----------



## Later (Feb 11, 2011)

woodgeek said:
			
		

> maverick06 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I use the in-wall battery operated timers from Intermatic and love them. They keep settings after power failures, and the timer "knows" the correct times for dawn and dusk and when to change for DST and standard time based on latitude.

My CFL outdoor flood lights work fine even in 20 below temperatures.


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 11, 2011)

Retired Guy said:
			
		

> I am being serious - aren't all CFLs made in China?



That I don't know. The Chinese are perfectly capable of turning out first rate products. They are also perfectly willing to produce junk at low prices, which is then snapped up by our wonderful retailers' buyers, so that they can unload the stuff on the public at a handsome profit.


----------



## woodsmaster (Feb 11, 2011)

I have a outdoor security light that I put up a few months ago that has a cfl bulb, 64 watt I think. I like it. It cost $29 with the bulb. It was -9 here last night and it worked great. It puts
out way more light than I thought it would.

Our electric co-op had a program where you traded your incondesent bulbs for cfls. I Bought a bunch of incondesents and traded so I'm all stocked up.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 11, 2011)

So I am coming into some knowledge about the CFLs. Just as others have said they are made for certain applications IE: ballast up and ballast down or whatever. This is written on the box in really small print. OH the devil in the details. As soon as I read it on here I checked the box. I also believe the one we had in the table lamp may have screwed up the timer that was installed to give us automatic light at dusk. So where do we go now any ideas?


----------



## semipro (Feb 11, 2011)

We use CFLs extensively have been happy with the light quality of newer models and energy savings in general.  We use CFL spots outside but would not use them in something that needs to come on at full brightness instantly.  The colder it is the longer it takes them to get up to speed. We have seen some early failures but those bulbs are easily exchanged. 

We are trying out LEDs (from Home Depot) in two places (ceiling can and table lamp) and really like them so far.  The light quality is excellent.

I think BeGreen has suggested before, label new bulbs when you install them and this will give you a better idea of how long they are lasting and may allow you to return them under warranty.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 12, 2011)

So any recommendations on the LEDs for the can lights in the living room? We have cans in the kitchen too...


----------



## semipro (Feb 12, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> So any recommendations on the LEDs for the can lights in the living room? We have cans in the kitchen too...



We are using these in a can fixture that lights our stone fireplace.  We've been impressed so far.  One reason we bought LEDs for this location is because we use them a lot and we dim them.  We've not had much luck with dimmable CFLs.  

Model: EcoSmart PAR20 8-Watt (40W) LED Flood Light Bulb


----------



## btuser (Feb 12, 2011)

Home Depot is pushing some LED retros right now for $40 after rebate.  I'd bite for $20 or maybe even $30 but I'm still reeling from the dimmable CFLs I bought a year ago.  Almost 70% failure.

I'm looking at indoor grow setups (for VEGETABLES!) and was interested with claims of some of the LED companies about how most light is wasted on a plant, and the fact that you can fine-tune the wavelength for vegetative growth, thereby grow indoors with 1/4 or less the wattage.  Also, because you have to knock down the voltage they're taylor made for solar setups.  It would be neat to grow green vegetables year round in a Northern climate.


----------



## seige101 (Feb 12, 2011)

btuser said:
			
		

> Home Depot is pushing some LED retros right now for $40 after rebate.  I'd bite for $20 or maybe even $30 but I'm still reeling from the dimmable CFLs I bought a year ago.  Almost 70% failure.



Those retro led kits for cans have been $20 in our local stores for a bit of time now. I replaced all i could in my house with them and i love them.

Check out different stores in the area, pricing can vary on stuff like that.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 12, 2011)

Sure btuser, Vegetables! We believe you.... So to anyone, is there different LED light? Warm, soft, ETC.


----------



## btuser (Feb 13, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> Sure btuser, Vegetables! We believe you.....



Just show me where to pee.  Coincedently, I just took a drug test for a job application.  The woman started to scare me when she asked for the 3rd time whether or not I had a FULL bladder, otherwise I "won't be allowed to leave the building".   I'm thinking to myself:  "How big is this frigging beaker?  I should've bought a Big Gulp!".


----------



## RNLA (Feb 14, 2011)

She must have been related to the guy at the store where I was lookin at CFLs in the opening post of this thread. He seemed to say I was a criminal to the earth if I did not purchase them. Of course my bladder is full want to see... :smirk:


----------



## MishMouse (Feb 17, 2011)

To the OP.
If you want to be left alone by the employees of a hardware store act like you need help.
You do that and they will avoid you like the plague.
Every time I go into a HD/Menards/True Value/Ace etc.. and I need help finding something or I have a question the associates all disappear.  But, when I know what I am looking for and I am in a hurry, they all line up and can not wait to bother me.

What would be a better idea is have each one of the employees wear one of those electric dog collars.
If you do not want help activate a switch and if they get within 10 feet of you then ZAP!.
If you need help you would  have the switch off and they can help you, if you find their help annoying and unhelpful you can flip the switch and ZAP!!.
This will serve 2 purposes, 1 if you do not want help you can keep them away, and 2 if they are idiots they can be ZAPPED!!


----------



## RNLA (Feb 19, 2011)

That is funny. I went to the same store yesterday and the same guy mauled me again. I walked in and the guy saw me, I turned and went down the isle in no particular direction and pretended not to hear him talking to my back, "welcome to ACE what can I help you find?" I turned around and said "nothing, I have it covered." Then the guy gets real quiet and looks offended that he can not help me. I am lead to believe this guy is just not well adjusted to the "customer relations exchange" I do not understand why they don't train these people with something casual like 2-5 minutes of time in the store, then approach the customer and offer "hello I'm Bob do you need help finding anything?" Then take a clue with the answer "No" and offer "If you have any questions I'll be in the store." Then get the heck out of there. The guy and I must have a personality conflict, he might just be awkward and not comfortable with his job.


----------



## begreen (Feb 19, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> Sure btuser, Vegetables! We believe you.... So to anyone, is there different LED light? Warm, soft, ETC.



Yes, there are different color temperature LEDs. The originals cast a high temp, ghastly bluish light. But in the past few years they are making them much warmer, down in the 3000K range. Some use diffusers to soften the light. GE sells soft-white LED bulbs with a conventional translucent glass envelope. They are still very pricey. Feit at $30 is a bit better, but still an awful lot for the energy saved. 

http://www.amazon.com/62180-9-Watt-Soft-White-Light/dp/B004GTN0RQ/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt
http://www.amazon.com/Feit-Electric-A19-LED-Performance/dp/B003YXZIP2/ref=pd_sim_sbs_hi_4


----------



## btuser (Feb 22, 2011)

I was in Lowes yesterday and after the 5th "can I help you?" I started to get a little peeved.  

"Can I help you find something?"

"Yes, I'm looking for 6 mm plastic sheeting.  I need enough to wrap a body.... How tall are you?"


----------



## PapaDave (Feb 22, 2011)

Wow, I thought cfl's were expensive when I first started using them. LED's are crazy. I'm not changing anything until all of the cfl's in here crap out. I've had cfl's in every fixture in the house for over 3 years, and not had a single failure. Color me lucky, I guess. 
What the heck is the payback on led's? 20 years?  :-S 
Power co-op had a deal recently for free cfl's to promote their use. I got 9 for nothing but a minute or two of my time to fill out a form online, and got 'em in the mail a few weeks later.
I think I'll try one in the porch motion sensing fixture just to see what happens, even though that incandescent is fine.


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 23, 2011)

I have a goose neck lamp on a book shelve over my desk. It has a CFL. Sure enough, this morning the sucker died. I confirmed it's the bulb. That expensive CFL had been in there about one year. There is no way I burned enough juice during the past year in that little lamp for the savings to offset the extra cost of the bulb. 

More money lost to another junk CFL from China.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 24, 2011)

So maybe I'll go get a GE soft white LED, I would try one but the light has got to be nice. The CFLs do not generate any heat to speak of neither do the LEDs. Thankfully the garage I am building will be well insulated, the reason I use conventional bulbs now is for the very small amount of heat they put out, it is just enough to keep the contents of the current garage dry. An old friend told me if you can keep the temperature just above the dew point it will keep your stuff dry. I had a tuff time believing that but it does work. All you need is about 2-5 degrees.


----------



## begreen (Feb 24, 2011)

The ambient temp may be above the dew point, but are the tools? When there is a sudden change in weather from cold to warm and humid, cold tools can sweat because they haven't equalized in temperature and the dew point has risen above their temp.


----------



## PapaDave (Feb 24, 2011)

So I put the cfl in the front porch motion sensing fixture yesterday. Once it got dark, I went out there and when the light first kicked on, it was pretty muted. It took maybe 30 seconds or so to get to full brightness, and was nice once there. I'll keep it there until outside temps rise, and see if that makes much difference. 
Hate the idea of switching bulbs in the fall and spring to save a few cents.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 24, 2011)

Hey BG I think the metal stuff still gets a bit moist but the other stuff stays a fair bit drier. For what it is worth this crappy old garage is only temporary, I am glad to have it but it is just about as close to nothing as you can get. I burn two 60-75 watt bulbs 24/7 and it just barely keeps things dry. I am all for more efficient ways of doing things. I am on my way to getting things done but I wish they could do something smart to help us receive new technology like keeping the cost down to near the regular bulbs. I would run the CFLs and or the LEDs in all the sockets if they were inexpensive. My current situation is only an example of why some people use regular bulbs.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Feb 26, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> Hey BG I think the metal stuff still gets a bit moist but the other stuff stays a fair bit drier. For what it is worth this crappy old garage is only temporary, I am glad to have it but it is just about as close to nothing as you can get. I burn two 60-75 watt bulbs 24/7 and it just barely keeps things dry. I am all for more efficient ways of doing things. I am on my way to getting things done but I wish they could do something smart to help us receive new technology like keeping the cost down to near the regular bulbs. I would run the CFLs and or the LEDs in all the sockets if they were inexpensive. My current situation is only an example of why some people use regular bulbs.



Using old-fashioned, resistive light bulbs to heat fully enclosed spaces without windows (garages, storage cabinets, engine compartments, etc) always has made a lot of sense to me. 

First of all, it is hard to buy a cheaper 60-500 W electric heater. 

Secondly, it produces light so you can see what you're doing. 

Thirdly, it can be readily thermostatted, time-switched or dimmed. 

Fourthly, you can easily aim it at some surfaces you would like to keep just a little warmer than the ambient air and, 

finally, it is a highly efficient way of heating (where else is the energy produced going to go??).

If the old bulbs are going to be phased out I plan to pick up a basket full of the larger ones. Presumably, there should be some pretty good deals around by then.

Henk


----------



## Jerry_NJ (Feb 27, 2011)

Interesting, I have been using a lot of CFL for years and have learned that they come in lots of "colors".    For reading and general lighting I like a Kelvin temperature around 3800, sometimes call bright white... daylight is too hot/blue for me at around 6500 degrees Kelvin.  It is sometimes hard to find the temperature on the package.  In any case, don't discount CFLs because you don't like the color.

I use a small wattage reflector bulb on my radial arm saw and sometimes us it to speed up gluing on small parts.  I just bend the flexible mount so the bulb is close to the object.  I think it is a 75 watt bulb, but it really heats small objects.

I don't consider resistive heat a good way to get heat from electricity, but I am spoiled by running a geothermal heat pump.  Still, if I want temperatures over about 100 degrees Fahrenheit a tungsten bulb is a easy way to get it on a focused object.  

I may stockpile a few tungsten bulbs myself, when do they go off the market?


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Feb 27, 2011)

Jerry_NJ said:
			
		

> Interesting, I have been using a lot of CFL for years and have learned that they come in lots of "colors".    For reading and general lighting I like a Kelvin temperature around 3800, sometimes call bright white... daylight is too hot/blue for me at around 6500 degrees Kelvin.  It is sometimes hard to find the temperature on the package.  In any case, don't discount CFLs because you don't like the color.
> 
> I use a small wattage reflector bulb on my radial arm saw and sometimes us it to speed up gluing on small parts.  I just bend the flexible mount so the bulb is close to the object.  I think it is a 75 watt bulb, but it really heats small objects.
> 
> ...




Yeah, I know it is a bit unorthodox. However, for windowless spaces that just need a bit of heating to prevent freezing, etc., it is 100 % effective and provides all the control benefits I mentioned plus providing "free" light.

What is there not to like about it?  Please elaborate.

Henk


----------



## Jerry_NJ (Feb 27, 2011)

Sorry, I didn't mean to oppose the light bulb heater idea.  I have seen over the year in hotels the use of overhead bulbs to provide heat while drying off from a shower/bath.  My comment about efficiency is I am spoiled by a COP of 3-4 for heat pumps.  That 3 to 4 times as much heat as a resistive source.  Of course, one needs the big investment of a heat pump, which I have already made for my house.  We do some "spot" heating with resistive heat in the bathrooms and in a back/side room that tends to run a little cool.  These heaters are more in the 750+ watt.

I think you made a good point on having high wattage bulbs on hand for special needs heating, not specifically for light.


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 27, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> Yeah, I know it is a bit unorthodox. However, for windowless spaces that just need a bit of heating to prevent freezing, etc., it is 100 % effective and provides all the control benefits I mentioned plus providing "free" light.
> 
> What is there not to like about it?  Please elaborate.
> 
> Henk



Too failure prone for freeze prevention in my opinion.  Light bulbs burn out. For critical applications I would use some sort of low wattage commercial heater. 

If it had to be light bulbs, it would be safest to run several lower wattage bulbs in parallel, checking for a burned out bulb every now and then.


----------



## btuser (Feb 27, 2011)

Heat + Light would = co-generation which could work well for some applications, but tough in a seasonal climate.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Feb 28, 2011)

WhitePine said:
			
		

> PyMS said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Running multiple light bulbs in parallel makes a lot of sense, of course.  Chicken farmers incubate thousands of eggs with large arrays of light bulbs in order to provide carefully regulated temperature environments. Although this distributed set-up is probably fairly immune to the occasional loss of a bulb here or there, I also suspect that they may have learned another old trick: namely to operate at slightly lower voltages than those for which the bulbs were designed....

Whereas a typical incandescant light bulb is said to have an average operational lifetime of only 1,000 hours or so, so-called "long-life" bulbs are simply being operated a handful of volts below their design voltage in order to achieve average blifetimes around 10,000 hours. Empirical lamp re-rating rules,   such as specified on Wikipedia for instance, show that incandescant lamp lifetimes increase by as much as 4,000 times by halving nthe operational voltage whereas light output diminishes only by a factor 20.  In fact, there are some famous incandescant light bulbs in the USA that have been burning 24/7 for over 100 years (at suitably reduced voltages and light output levels)!

IMHO, the following practical scenario may have a lot of merit for keeping enclosed, nearly windowless spaces heated at relatively low temperatures:  

Take two 300 W incandescant light bulbs and connect them to 110 V ac IN SERIES. With the total resistance now being doubled the current should be halved (according to Ohm's Law), resulting in only 1/4 total energy output (i.e. 150 W instead of 600 W), and the lamps (at 55 Volt each) producing only 5 % of the original light output (i.e. equivalen to that of a 30W bulb at 110 V), which should just be enough to keep the room, garage or storage cabinet modestly well lighted.   

Although lamp rerating rules now predict a lifetime of hundreds of years, let's just say that they should last a long time (since other construction parameters probably will become limiting factors, instead).

Henk


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 28, 2011)

Why would you run the bulbs in series when a failure of either bulb would kill the string? Even if they are running on greatly reduced individual voltages, a failure can still occur. Today's typical import bulb has a really poor base. A slight bit of vibration, or corrosion, or what have you, and the bulb goes out -- taking its series connected buddy with it.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Feb 28, 2011)

One approach does not rule out the other.

Greatly increasing the lifetime and replacement cost is most important IMHO. Once you have long lifetimes, the need for backups is greatly reduced. Do you have backups for every electric heater?  Yet, these electric heaters ONLY have average lifetimes in the 30,000 - 50,000 hour range....

Instead of providing a fully redundant second set-up, simpler options maybe either to rig a single 150 W bulb with one of those cheap photocell bases (which makes it come on as soon as the light of the primary set-up goes out) and/or to trigger a central alarm.

Henk


----------



## RNLA (Feb 28, 2011)

Thanks for the encouragement, my use of traditional bulbs is temporary at best but it is nice to see that my old buddy was right. I am just using them to take the edge off. We are not talking critical scientific temperature here. The new garage will be fully insulated and well lit. I am pissed that the real light bulbs are going away though. In the same train of thought I am also equally pissed that some guy working at ACE feels the need to maul me when I walk in the door!


----------



## Jerry_NJ (Feb 28, 2011)

The driver of the move to outlaw "traditional" bulbs is the environmental movement extremists.... a.k.a. the Obama administration and its appointed regulators.  If this move had been left to the Congress, e.g., Cap and Trade, we'd not be losing the tungsten filament bulbs.  Still, the true conservatives, such as me, have been using CFL bulbs for years to save $$$ on the electric bill.  I also note most, if not all, of the CFL bulbs create a hazardous material disposal problem which isn't addressed in the outlawing of the traditional bulbs.  Government gone a muck!


----------



## begreen (Feb 28, 2011)

> The driver of the move to outlaw â€œtraditionalâ€ bulbs is the environmental movement extremistsâ€¦. a.k.a. the Obama administration and its appointed regulators.  If this move had been left to the Congress, e.g., Cap and Trade, weâ€™d not be losing the tungsten filament bulbs.  Still, the true conservatives, such as me, have been using CFL bulbs for years to save $$$ on the electric bill.  I also note most, if not all, of the CFL bulbs create a hazardous material disposal problem which isnâ€™t addressed in the outlawing of the traditional bulbs.  Government gone a muck!



WhitePine: Sorry, I inadvertently deleted your post instead of posting a new comment to this thread. This is the deleted post in bold:

*Those environmental extremists were Democratic and Republican members of Congress and that seriously green tree hugger/eco terrorist G.W. Bush. Itâ€™s a law from 2007, not a regulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_out_of_incandescent_light_bulbs *

Let's keep the politics out of this going forward ok?

PS: Recycling centers are being setup for disposing of CFLs. We can do it at our local electric utility office. Also, this change will result in a major reduction of coal burned for power. Coal is a very significant source of mercury vapor in the air we all breathe. I would rather return mercury to the ground than suspend it in the atmosphere, wouldn't you?


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Feb 28, 2011)

Jerry_NJ said:
			
		

> The driver of *the move to outlaw "traditional" bulbs *is the environmental movement extremists.... a.k.a. the Obama administration and its appointed regulators.  If this move had been left to the Congress, e.g., Cap and Trade, we'd not be losing the tungsten filament bulbs.  Still, the true conservatives, such as me, have been using CFL bulbs for years to save $$$ on the electric bill.  I also note most, if not all, of the CFL bulbs create a hazardous material disposal problem which isn't addressed in the outlawing of the traditional bulbs.  Government gone a muck!



Jerry, my understanding is that here in the USA no particular electrical lamp technology is being "outlawed"; all that is happening is that the efficiency standards are being raised.

Current incandescent lamp efficiency is so ridiculously low (only 2.0-2.5 % of the electrical energy used is producing useful light, the rest is heat) that it almost breaks "truth in advertising" laws! What is really being sold here are space heaters that provide a bit of light on the side. 

Especially in hot climates you can pretty much add up the total wattage of the lamps burning in the house and add that to your air conditioning btu requirements (i.e. 3412 btu per kilowatt per hour). In short, you pay twice for that wasted energy!!  In cold climates, of course, incandescent lamps can do what they do best, namely work as space heaters, as discussed earlier in this thread.

So, now it is up to the incandescent lamp industry to improve their product. After all, since Edison discovered 130 years or so ago that carbon filaments made from bamboo (or was it coconut?) fiber lasted 1200 hours, we seemed to have made preciously little progress!  If American ingenuity can come up with a more efficient incandescent lamp, all the world will beat a path to our door again!

Henk


----------



## begreen (Feb 28, 2011)

I am also watching ESL lamps to see how they stack up. They should be showing up some time this year. 

http://www.vu1corporation.com/


----------



## WhitePine (Feb 28, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> Especially in hot climates you can pretty much add up the total wattage of the lamps burning in the house and add that to your air conditioning btu requirements (i.e. 3412 btu per kilowatt per hour). In short, you pay twice for that wasted energy!!



This is an excellent point that even the CFL advocates frequently overlook.


----------



## Jerry_NJ (Feb 28, 2011)

Thanks for the refinement of "our" understanding.  Not sure I "buy" it all, but as everything government, it is too complicate and likely inefficient.

I agree ingenuity and creativity are key to the USA economic growth, but I hold little hope that will produce a more efficiency in a bulb using a hot element to create light.  In fact I hold little hope that is forthcoming anytiime soon.

As for recycling, it is one of the best kept secretes around here, how about where you live.  Have you ever seen a sign at the Home Depot (Walmart....) CFL sales display that even warns you that the bulbs should (let alone must) be handled as hazardous material.  How about a bold print sign waring how to handle a CFL if you happen to accidentally break one.  What percentage of the CFL are disposed of "correctly"?  I'd bet on less than 10%, maybe less than 2%.  

The good news is CLFs last a long time and even though I have been using them widely (with some criticism from my wife, however as I've moved away form the red toward blue temperature the complaints have diminished) I have only a few in my recycle container.  I will, of course, try to take them to a proper recycle center when:  1) I know where that is and 2) I'm going that direction for other purposes to lower my CO2 rom driving one of my 4 cylinder small cars.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Feb 28, 2011)

WhitePine said:
			
		

> PyMS said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for the kind words. However, I think I know why CFLS advocates don't speak much about their advantage here. It's probably a case of "several times nothing is still nothing". In  other words, even though CFL bulbs are 3-5 times more efficient than incandescent bulbs, that only means that 90 % of the energy still ends up as heat......

With the latest LED lamps, the hope is that the nonluminous energy loss can be reduced to about 75% or so, if I deciphered the jumbled industry data correctly.

However, the long-term future of solid state light sources looks pretty bright, I think.  When I started working with gas lasers in the seventies, the world of physics was rocked by the announcement of a new type of solid state (LED-related) laser that produced MORE light energy than the amount of electric energy being used. It did so by effectively COOLING its immediate environment!

Although lasers tend to make very poor sources for general lighting and a zillion other problems need to be resolved as well, it does show that the laws of physics do not forbid in any way the development of electric lamps -- possibly solid state-based -- with very high (super)luminous efficiencies.

Henk

edit: 
Upon rereading this post I realized that my remark about CFLs still wasting 90% of the energy (which I believe to be true) can be misleading in that the 90% loss is now only 9/10 of a 3-5 times lower electric energy flow (for equivalent light output to incandescent bulbs). In other words, the total energy loss is only around 20% or so of the equivalent incandescent bulb energy loss.  HM


----------



## Jerry_NJ (Feb 28, 2011)

I've had poor/unacceptable results from the few LED built to screw into light sockets.  They all failed in only few 10s of hours.  I do see application in upscale automobiles...at least tail lights and parking lights.  We'll see how that works, if anyone reports on it.  I do not have any personal data to go on.  While they were working the light output to my eye (not a scientific measurement) was very poor compared to the claims.


----------



## Czech (Feb 28, 2011)

I used edison socket leds to light my glass block bar, three years plus with no failures, probably 20 or so leds per bulb. I don't recall where I got them, some place I found online, I can look and see if someone is interested. The bar is only lit at night as a night light mostly, I have red white and green that I change up when I feel like it (access is from the basement). I've also learnd to save receipts with the cfl's, most have a guaranty and I've had makers send me replacements no question if the bulbs fail quicker than stated.


----------



## Jerry_NJ (Feb 28, 2011)

I kept receipts on the LED bulbs, they were from Walmart.  That's how I was able to keep my risk down while trying them.  I purchased one and got free replacements.  Best I can recall I may have taken a cash refund when I gave up.  They still sell them, makes me wonder if I had a one-in-a-million failure experience.  The bulbs were made up of many, don't recall, bulbs connected in series, I'm sure, as each bulb can use only about 1 volt.  I have no information on any enclosed electronics to deal with the low voltage and current needs of a LED.  I was disappointed, I was hoping LEDs would give me the equivenent of 6 or better times lighting efficiency over incandescent bulbs.  Later I learned that LEDs don't produce more lumen per watt than do CFL.  The packaging would suggest otherwise.  I don't have the packaging but recall it claimed something like a 40 Watt bulb equivalence at 5 watts consumed.

Hey, I'm sold, give me a bulb that uses no power and lights like a 100 Watt bulb and they'll be used throughout my house.


----------



## RNLA (Feb 28, 2011)

Thanks BeGreen, I was never intending this to be a political thread. I am the OP and I wish to inform all that I am here for the information and experiences of those who use the CFLs and to point a bit of customer relations humor at the goofy guy at ACE hardware.  I realize that politics will rear it's head in the most inconvenient places. But in my little thread? :roll:


----------



## begreen (Mar 1, 2011)

Politics gone. Wish I had this power at some town hall meetings.


----------



## velvetfoot (Mar 1, 2011)

But, you can still heat your home with electrical resistance heat, no?  So, if you had enough light bulbs....

One size doesn't fit all.  I'm sure there are some places around (in Canada?) with low electric prices; not sure why they have to also conform.
Seems to be like the regulations developed for everyone on low water use fixtures, which just seems to me because a bunch of people like to live in arid places.


----------



## SmokeyTheBear (Mar 2, 2011)

We have had pretty good luck with the CFL lights, they have slowly corrected the color rendering issues.  Once they get the freight ape handling situation taken care of  there should be less new bulb mortality.

However I find it absolutely ridiculous removing the old standby lamps from use.

As long as electric heat is being pushed then the house of cards needs its foundation perturbed.


----------



## jebatty (Mar 3, 2011)

I've never been a casino gambler and never one to throw $10 bills out the car window to see how far they fly. Both ventures are about as productive, about the same as burning incandescent bulbs, and make it a $20 spot for summer light if you have a/c - pay more to light your path and pay again to make the journey cool. Always amazes me why anyone wants to throw money away every time a light switch is flipped on for an incandescent bulb - and to throw that money to BIG UTILITY on top of it.

An equally great idea is to invent a gasoline engine for a car that only gets 8 mpg! Wouldn't the demand be great? That's about the same as inventing an incandescent bulb today and expecting anyone to buy them - 1/4 the efficiency of a CFL. 8 mpg vs 32 mpg. It's a no-brainer.


----------



## btuser (Mar 3, 2011)

LED bulbs are poised for another breakthrough.  There is a new technique (accidental) of imposing voids within the Gallium Nitride which helps reduce the fissures caused by the two opposing crystaline lattices of Gallium Nitride and Sapphire.  Its supposed to raise the efficiency/capacity by a factor of 10x.    In 5 years they will be as cheap as CFLs


----------



## mayhem (Mar 3, 2011)

That would be nice.  As of now they've been in the stores alomst a year and a half and they're still $30 per bulb.

Anyone notice a sharp dropoff in the general quality of CFL's in the last couple years?  I put them all over my house when I built it in 2003, some of those are still in daily use and others have failed in the last couple years...now I'm replacing a high percentage of those replacements du to them being either altogether dead, bad ballasts not igniting the tube properly (it glows very dimly) or for significant humming issues.  I had to switch my two living room ceiling fans back to 4 100w incandescent bulbs recently because I could get CFLs that were quiet enough anymore.


----------



## WhitePine (Mar 3, 2011)

mayhem said:
			
		

> That would be nice.  As of now they've been in the stores alomst a year and a half and they're still $30 per bulb.
> 
> Anyone notice a sharp dropoff in the general quality of CFL's in the last couple years?  I put them all over my house when I built it in 2003, some of those are still in daily use and others have failed in the last couple years...now I'm replacing a high percentage of those replacements du to them being either altogether dead, bad ballasts not igniting the tube properly (it glows very dimly) or for significant humming issues.  I had to switch my two living room ceiling fans back to 4 100w incandescent bulbs recently because I could get CFLs that were quiet enough anymore.



Our CFL failure rate exceeds that of incandescents. All have just plain quit. I haven't noticed any dimming or humming.

Our new house has outdoor carriage lamps that came with the new base style CFLs, two of which were bad out of the box. These don't hum or noticeably dim, even when it's cold out. We'll see how they last.


----------



## mayhem (Mar 3, 2011)

Interestingly, my only remaining CFL's from construction are the 4 outdoor carriage lights.  The colder it is outside, the dimmer they are at startup, but they fire reliably even in -20 temps.  Those don't hum.  The newer ones that I had in my living room do hum and when both ceiling fans are lit you can hear them over the tv volume...had to move back to incandescent.

Seems likely to me that its cheap manufacturing...probably junk ballast components.


----------



## jebatty (Mar 3, 2011)

Maybe I'm lucky, failure rate not more than 1 of 20, or 5%.


----------



## WhitePine (Mar 3, 2011)

mayhem said:
			
		

> Interestingly, my only remaining CFL's from construction are the 4 outdoor carriage lights.  The colder it is outside, the dimmer they are at startup, but they fire reliably even in -20 temps.  Those don't hum.  The newer ones that I had in my living room do hum and when both ceiling fans are lit you can hear them over the tv volume...had to move back to incandescent.
> 
> Seems likely to me that its cheap manufacturing...probably junk ballast components.



Bingo!

That and importer/retailer's buyers who care only about the bottom line and not their customers.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 3, 2011)

btuser said:
			
		

> LED bulbs are poised for another breakthrough.  There is a new technique (accidental) of imposing voids within the Gallium Nitride which helps reduce the fissures caused by the two opposing crystaline lattices of Gallium Nitride and Sapphire.  Its supposed to raise the efficiency/capacity by a factor of 10x.    In 5 years they will be as cheap as CFLs



Sounds interesting. Could you provide a reference so I can read up on that?

Since I believe the efficiency of the latest commercially available LED lamps to be around 25%, I don't quite see how efficiency could improve another factor 10, even when allowing for the fact that a special class of solid state light emitting diodes (namely diode lasers) have occasionally been reportred to attain efficiencies > 100 % (by withdrawing heat from the environment). 

Henk


----------



## btuser (Mar 4, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> btuser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here's a link: http://compoundsemiconductor.net/csc/news-details.php?id=19733011
And another basically saying the same thing: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4212526/GaN-process-said-to-reduce-defects-by-1-000X

It states right off the bat that for a given input of power the light output could be raise by a factor of 2. The power factor can also be raised because (forgive me for paraphrasing a subject completly over my head) there's still a lot of heat build up with LEDs, but instead of radiating from the bulb the heat buildup is behind the substrate, and that heat comes from the electrons being pushed around through the GaN and rubbing/hitting all the defects near the layers. By greatly reducing the number of these defects the LEDs can use a high wattage and not burn out. This may not be as efficient, but if I could get a true 40-70 watts from a single bulb, or a 300-1000 watt flood for say a warehouse or streetlamp/parking lot it could radically reduce my replacement costs.

And while we're on the subject of outdoor lighting, LEDs are dimmable so a parking lot or street lamps could be dimmed depending on light requirements instead of the currently on/off ballasts lights we have now. Say maybe 10%? Then, take it even farther with the fact that those same lights can be instantly switched on/off, so you wouldn't have to keep every light on in a parking lot if there wasn't anyone driving in that section. 

This, however may not even be the most exciting application for this: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4212526/GaN-process-said-to-reduce-defects-by-1-000X

Gallium Nitride is predicted to replace Silcone for chip making, and even MOSFETs needed for electric cars becasue they work well at high temperatures.  Laptops that don't need fans, and IT closets that don't overheat July 4th weekend! LEDs' could replace lasers needed for single mode fiber-optics. Gallium Nitride maintains its power density at high frequency, so incredible radar/wireless applications are could become commercially viable with an improved manufacturing process like this. n

Here's an out-dated article that talks about the promise of this material. Interesting to me because it highlights the need for an improved substrate, and what that could do for the big picture: http://www.semiconductor-today.com/features/SemiconductorToday - Powering up GaN MOSFETs.pdf 

The chart about 1/2 way down the page shows what engineers are up against when it comes to picking a surface to grow GaN crystals, and how dang handy it would be to be able to cope with the thermal expansion differences.   Not just LEDs, but mobile devices, cell towers, wireless broadband, military radar, lots of stuff maybe happening because of accidental experiment in a lab not looking for it.  I know it happens every day but still, pretty cool!


----------



## begreen (Mar 4, 2011)

That makes more sense. They are estimating a potential doubling of light output. One thing not discussed is how rare gallium is with an estimated 6 year supply left. Unless we mine all the flat panel tvs in 2017 for rare earth metals, this sounds like a dead end. 

http://www.asimovs.com/_issue_0806/ref.shtml


----------



## btuser (Mar 4, 2011)

A doublling of light output per unit of input, but also the abillity to run at much hotter temperatures so that the sam size bulb could handle a much higher wattage.  Hence the 10x current LEDs.    

It doesn't take much, only one gallium atom is present to every ten thousand or so atoms in the crystal structure. About a gram of gallium to every KG of sapphire/silicone so if the cost were to skyrocket for the raw material it wouln't impact the product cost that much. in the same way nuke power fuel's contribution to the overall cost of the electricity produced is relatively small, so even a large fuel price escalation will have relatively little effect.  There are shuttered mines around the world that will open once the price is right and take back some of the 97% of market share China's "enjoying" right now.   It might be counter productive to dig for it but I don't think the scarcity of the metal will be the limiting factor.

Also, all these rare earth metals are simply left-overs, not the real meat and potatos of mining.  If Gallium was worth more than $7/gram they could find a way of getting more than 10% of the available element when processing.


----------



## RNLA (Mar 4, 2011)

How much tungsten do we have. Why can't we just have an ordinary bulb? Why make this so complicated, why make a change to products that are rare? All in the name of energy savings. If it is not broken why fix it? Just a few questions I have. After all things being considered is the change worth the effort? Where is the break even point in terms of money for research and development, and cost for the consumer? We all know it is already costly to use the CFLs & LEDs....


----------



## btuser (Mar 4, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> How much tungsten do we have. Why can't we just have an ordinary bulb? Why make this so complicated, why make a change to products that are rare? All in the name of energy savings. If it is not broken why fix it? Just a few questions I have. After all things being considered is the change worth the effort? Where is the break even point in terms of money for research and development, and cost for the consumer? We all know it is already costly to use the CFLs & LEDs....



Why not breed a faster horse?  Its complicated, but don't worry.  We're going to have robots to do the hard stuff.


----------



## begreen (Mar 4, 2011)

btuser said:
			
		

> RNLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Breeding?! :gulp:


----------



## RNLA (Mar 7, 2011)

Breeding robots? :bug:


----------



## begreen (Mar 7, 2011)

Exactly! Calling Dr Asimov!


----------



## seige101 (Mar 7, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> How much tungsten do we have. Why can't we just have an ordinary bulb? Why make this so complicated, why make a change to products that are rare? All in the name of energy savings. If it is not broken why fix it? Just a few questions I have. After all things being considered is the change worth the effort? Where is the break even point in terms of money for research and development, and cost for the consumer? We all know it is already costly to use the CFLs & LEDs....



By that logic lets go back to computer systems that were bigger than current houses and the average low end cell phone was many hundreds of times more powerful. Not to mention the energy saving too! Heck lets get rid of cars and go back to horse and buggy! Thought that might be cheaper than the current gas situation, wait you might be on to something here...


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 7, 2011)

btuser said:
			
		

> *Why not breed a faster horse?  Its complicated, but don't worry.  We're going to have robots to do the hard stuff.*




I tried to figure out what you were trying to say here. Is it possible you were just having a Charley Sheen moment, of sorts?  

Henk

PS: thanks for the detailed references earlier on.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 7, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> How much tungsten do we have. *Why can't we just have an ordinary bulb?* Why make this so complicated, why make a change to products that are rare? All in the name of energy savings. If it is not broken why fix it? Just a few questions I have. After all things being considered is the change worth the effort? Where is the break even point in terms of money for research and development, and cost for the consumer? We all know it is already costly to use the CFLs & LEDs....



As mentioned before, the new standards due to be phased-in in 2012 do not explicitly condemn or promote any particular lamp technology, but simply raise the minimum allowable efficiency 30% or so above that of current incandescent lamps. 

Apparently, several light bulb manufacturers have already reported success in developing incandescent light bulbs that meet the new standards.....

Henk


----------



## btuser (Mar 7, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> btuser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Henry Ford was asked if he was ever going to start taking the public's opinion into consideration in designing and painting cars.  He reportedly answered "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses"   There are some great things about horses, but imagine every car and truck on the road having 4 hoofs and dumping all over the place.  Yeah, I'm all set.  

We ourselves really don't have to worry about making the next "faster horses" because there will be no people on the assembly lines of tomorrow.  It will all be robots.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 7, 2011)

btuser said:
			
		

> Henry Ford was asked if he was ever going to start taking the public's opinion into consideration in designing and painting cars.  He reportedly answered "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses"   There are some great things about horses, but imagine every car and truck on the road having 4 hoofs and dumping all over the place.  Yeah, I'm all set.
> 
> We ourselves really don't have to worry about making the next "faster horses" because there will be no people on the assembly lines of tomorrow.  It will all be robots.



That's a neat story; I like it.

With regards to the robots, I am always deeply impressed how far Isaac Asimov was able to look ahead when he started writing his classic robot stories sometime during the fifties. In particular the trilogy "Caves of Steel" and "the Naked Sun" (forgot the 3rd title) in which he predicted the virtual reality environments in which we all gradually appear to have started living. So, yeah, just a few short years from now, carefully programmed robots may well be able to design and build a "faster horse". 

The zillion dollar question, of course, is: can robots eventually learn how to to "think outside the box as well" or will they forever be condemned to keep interpolating and extrapolating using existing human data points? Until then, mankind still needs its Da Vincis, Edisons, Fords, etc. to keep the human race from stalling and/or backsliding.  

Unless, of course, we all decide that the fate of mankind backsliding is preferable over the consequences of abdicating our dominant place in terrestrial evolution to machines with positronic brains (one of a handful of Asimov's predictions that doesn't appear to have become reality yet but may no longer sound totally crazy once we have mastered the realm of quantum computing).  

Henk


----------



## RNLA (Mar 9, 2011)

I don't want to go back to horse-n-buggy. I like the internal combustion engine too much. The sounds that some make are music to my ears. I just wonder what some advances in technology are really worth if they are using materials that are so rare that they make the finished product very expensive for the consumer? Where does one draw the line? If it were easy to see clearly the advantages and cost savings, with no harmful side effects like mercury, then I might be convinced.


----------



## btuser (Mar 9, 2011)

If you plug in your lights, odds are you're using coal for electricity.  A CFL uses 1/4 the electricity at the source.  If we took every spent CFL bulb and ground them up, then launched the dust into the atmosphere to circle the globe we'd still come out way ahead.


----------



## RNLA (Mar 11, 2011)

Actually, in our area we are greatly supplied by hydroelectric or turbines motivated by water. There are even groups doing experiments with tidal current, and wave action motivated turbines. These use an up-n-down motion rather than round-n-round. So I may be one of the few coastal freaks here but that is where our juice comes from...


----------



## btuser (Mar 11, 2011)

That's great to have options.  Our options here in NH are nuclear, Canadian hydro power, and importing fossil fuels.  I'd love to see some viable wind projects but hate to see full trees chipped for electricity when I could burn them in my stove.  Maybe thin-film solar, maybe off-shore tidal, but until there's change in $/KWh we're stuck with coal.  I love my CFL bulbs.  I'm careful with them and mine do go back to recycling but in all honesty they last a long time.


----------



## RNLA (Mar 12, 2011)

Wind is something in our area that is also viable but those are other threads. I do feel like we have lots of options for power here and thank God for the companies that are trying to make things more efficient. As I have said before I am all for having new technology but I am cynical of most things, not like it is a conspiracy, but a healthy disrespect for advertisement hype. I do not appreciate people taking the latest and greatest and saying it is the only way that will be available soon. That is the reason I started this thread. I am normally a very reserved person, quiet to the point when I get worked up, or at least I want to be, so it amazed me to see several pages to this subject. I do appreciate all the responses to my starter post, educated, opinionated, and all the rest.... I still LMAO when I walk into the ACE and see that guy coming my way. I grit my teeth and say " thanks I don't need any help."


----------



## begreen (Mar 12, 2011)

RNLA said:
			
		

> Actually, in our area we are greatly supplied by hydroelectric or turbines motivated by water. There are even groups doing experiments with tidal current, and wave action motivated turbines. These use an up-n-down motion rather than round-n-round. So I may be one of the few coastal freaks here but that is where our juice comes from...



Locally Snohomish Power has taken out permits for tapping tidal power. We have some great locations like at Deception Pass and at the Tacoma Narrows. Just wish they'd hurry up and get it going. We also have some good geothermal sites that need development. Maybe soon, they just passed legislation that will be phasing out the state's biggest coal plant over the next decade.

PS: This is a foolish sailboat owner trying to buck the 6+ knot current at Deception Pass. Most wait for the tide to change.


----------



## RNLA (Mar 14, 2011)

Bring on the alternatives to single source power. The one that I like most is wind, the wind farms look cool. They are proven effective and even on a small scale or single mill they can be good supplements to grid power. This may sound different than my other post on why go for better bulbs but I say we need a double headed solution more source with more efficient use. I guess you can't have one without the other.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 14, 2011)

Totally agree with the wisdom of diversified energy sources.  

In that context, I am wondering if anyone knows of a homeowner who has been able to build/install an old-fashioned waterwheel in a nearby creek in order to produce energy?  

The old waterwheels that one sees in numerous paintings and wallpapers were often darn good looking, I think. Of course, few of us have a substantial creek running over our property. We sure don't. 

However, we are lucky that the nearby dam in the Snake River provides plenty of low-cost hydro-electric energy.

Henk


----------



## btuser (Mar 14, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> Totally agree with the wisdom of diversified energy sources.
> 
> In that context, I am wondering if anyone knows of a homeowner who has been able to build/install an old-fashioned waterwheel in a nearby creek in order to produce energy?
> 
> ...



If you've got flow, its definately doable.  The higher the drop, the smaller the turbine, the greater your power density, and the cheaper in the long run.  I'd love to have one.  There's a 50' dam in back of my house, but I'm sure the local water municipality would frown on me trying to cook up a turbine on my own.


----------



## RNLA (Mar 15, 2011)

Yeah the "officials" here would have anyone by the shorts if they tried to use a local creek or river for turning a turbine. It seems like there would probably be a few "boot leg" operations around here though. We have lots of creeks that run heavy all year.


----------



## MishMouse (Mar 15, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> As mentioned before, the new standards due to be phased-in in 2012 do not explicitly condemn or promote any particular lamp technology, but simply raise the minimum allowable efficiency 30% or so above that of current incandescent lamps.
> 
> Apparently, several light bulb manufacturers have already reported success in developing incandescent light bulbs that meet the new standards.....
> 
> Henk


This is good news, as for my usage the current generation of CFL's do not last nearly as long as the incandescents.
Even the more expensive ones I buy from Menards do not last as long.
Hopefully, they will improve the CFL's also to improve their reliability.
If not I will go with the high efficient incandescents as they would be a better option at least for my usage.

PyMS do you know who is selling these new bulbs?


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 16, 2011)

MishMouse said:
			
		

> PyMS said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just go to the bottom of this web page to find several manufacturers (e.g. GE) and retailers (e.g. Home Depot), who make and sell the mire efficient incandescents.  If I understand well, one new incandescent technology is being sold as "halogens"

Henk


----------



## MishMouse (Mar 16, 2011)

What are HID lights?


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 16, 2011)

I wasn't sure either, so had to look it up.  Apparently they have grouped a motley collection of "high intensity discharge" (HID) lights into this category, including low pressure sodium, mercury and xenon lights.

Because of the big differences in cost, color temperature and environmental contamination risks within this group I would judge them on a case-by-case basis if I were to buy them for home lighting purposes. By and large, this group of lights seems to be predominantly useful for industrial and public area lighting purposes.

Henk


----------



## RNLA (Mar 17, 2011)

HID bulbs in cars are great, homes I do not know? Halogens are energy eaters.


----------



## henkmeuzelaar (Mar 17, 2011)

Sure, halogens are not the most efficient. However, as shown in the HomeDepot comparison chart below, they satisfy the government's demand for a 30% or more increase in efficiency over traditional incandescents.

So, anyone strongly interested in keeping the use of incandescents can just switch to halogen-enhanced incandescents. 

Personally, I will be throwing in my lot with the newer LEDs once the prices get a bit closer to the CFLs.

Henk


----------



## MishMouse (Mar 17, 2011)

I vote LED also, once the price falls.


----------



## semipro (Mar 17, 2011)

Here is a link (and blurb below that) to an article on this issue at EcoHome magazine. 

http://preview.tinyurl.com/48rdh25

The Future of Lighting
As the traditional incandescent bulb fades away, new energy-efficient options are quickly taking overâ€”and may eventually change the way we light our homes.


----------



## begreen (Mar 17, 2011)

PyMS said:
			
		

> Sure, halogens are not the most efficient. However, as shown in the HomeDepot comparison chart below, they satisfy the government's demand for a 30% or more increase in efficiency over traditional incandescents.
> 
> So, anyone strongly interested in keeping the use of incandescents can just switch to halogen-enhanced incandescents.
> 
> ...



When moved into the house there were 100w floods in the many recessed cans that were installed here. (Really dumb idea by artists that wanted to modernize an old farmhouse.) I installed 45w halogen floods in our kitchen's 8 recessed cans before the present CFLs. They last roughly the same length of time (about 2 yrs) and put out a nice light for food. I also have halogen capsula bulbs in our bathroom lights because the sconce glass knocks down too much light. 

My initial tests with replacement CFLs was not good. I put a couple in the dining room and they burned out early. Philips replaced them under warranty a couple times. But the newer generation bulbs have been much better. The 45w halogens in the kitchen were replaced with 13w warm white CFLs (19w over the cutting board area) and they're doing a good job at a nicely reduced consumption of electricity.


----------



## SPhill (Mar 22, 2011)

About 3 years ago, I put CFLs in all of the fixtures that would be on long enough to justify the 5 to 7 minute warm-up time, ie; living room, kitchen and bedrooms. Lights that are turned on for only a few minutes, such as hallways and the laundry room are still incandescent. The warm-up time has been the biggest drawback to CFLs from 3 years ago, but my bulbs (all from Walmart) are all still functioning fine. My electric bill is lower by maybe $20. 

Also, I replaced the outdoor floods with CFLs and have had no problem with temps as low as single digits -- the Walmart CFLs have served for 3 winters with no failures. By comparison, the incandescent outdoor floods would often fail after one winter.

The biggest annoyance is definitely the warm-up time and the higher energy draw during warm-up. The most annoying is going to the kitchen for just a moment. I wish I had a single incandescent fixture I could flip on for just long enough to grab something and go. I recently got one one quick-start CFL, but it still takes up to 90 seconds to reach full power. The second annoyance is CFLs cannot be used with dimmers. I use dimmers in the great room and over the hearth, to accent the fire.

So I'll put up with these ancient CFLs until newer tech comes along. I am not impressed with the insane prices of LEDs and am hoping for advanced incandescents.

ps, just about every box store has a CFL recycling bin.


----------



## Jimbob (Mar 22, 2011)

Some more info on CFL's here:
http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/l...wpg_cw_bulbs_110321/20110321/?hub=WinnipegBin


----------

