One of the big misconceptions of cost savings charts on manufactured goods is when somebody accidentally goes opps, and it's now broken. Kind of like spilling those $9 beers at baseball games, they taste great until the guy behind you goes 'opps', and it spills all over.
Drop one of those fancy bulbs getting out of your truck. Or the chair your standing on slips while you're installing it. Opps. Back in line for another over priced commodity.
What's next, riders on your homeowner insurance to cover light bulb life expectancy.
I like the 90 watt idea, but does True Value sell them. I don't do Walmart.
I don't think CFLs and LEDs are a "failed idea", Mark ... I see them all over the place, used by everyone I know ... I'm hardly in the minory here ... I have broken a couple and didn't have to go to the hospital ... just swept it up.
Also, it's "you're".
First of all I was referring to the LED's not CFL's. Second, I probably only use about 10 hours of lighting a day, math following:
10 hours X 100 watts/1000 X .09 cents/kw X 365 = $32.85/year. Therefore 250.00/32.85 = 7 years, no thank you. Granted this doesn't fully illustrate the costs of CFL's versus incandescents and ignores the other problems with them but it's a great place for someone like you to get to do some real world thinking about it rather than just listening to the hype.
I'm keeping my incandescents! (actually we do have a couple of CFL's in lamps but don't like them)
The legislation to ban incandescent light bulbs failled to pass and was overturned.
I Have Replaced 4 CFLs In My Kitchen In 4 Years
The kitchen light gets used the most, so I thought I would start out my cost savings there. The first was replaced due to a smash up. 2 adults 2 hours for cleanup wiped out any future savings. 3 have since burnt out, 2 are awaiting a safe disposal place. Municipalities were supposed to facilitate recyscling, what a joke there. Currently the kitchen fixture has an incandescent bulb. I throw the switch it comes on full brightness. There are places in any house where if a bulb does not do taht it is hazardous, stairs come to mind. In other places like closets it is just a waste. By the time the bulb reaches anything near full brightness you have selected a garment and turned it off.
I beleive I have more LEDs in use than CFLs. My office is incandescent free. I have a 3.5 watt (60 LED) light in my office in an ancient gooseneck desk fixture. It is high on a bookshelf in the corner. It provides sufficient light to permit safe movement in the room, while computer working, board surfing or streaming post TV. It comes on when the computer power switch is thrown and will stay on all night when charging instrument batteries. The overhead ceiling fan fixture has a 100 watt CFL equivalent for reading and workin on other than the computer at night. During the day I raise the shade, open the curtain and let the sun shine in, NW exposure. In the bedroom is a double bulb ceiling fixture, 1 incandescent 1 CFL. In the bathroom morror fixture are alternating incandescent CFLs. In the living room are some multi light lamps, LEDs at the mood level and CFL for general lighting. I was gung ho a few years ago, did not get impressed with performance and will wait for something better.
I find that LEDs may give an equivalent value of lighting but in a limited direction. I have yet to see a suitable 360° LED bulb.
Paul in PA
Ahhhh.. easy fix here, you don't buy GE bulbs. Sylvania makes bulbs made right here in the U.S. you do have to read the label though. Some Sylvania bulbs are made outside the U.S.
> Also, it's "you're".
lol!
More Mercury is spewed into the air by ...
More Mercury is spewed directly into the air by extra electricity consumed by an incandescent bulb (because of coal-burning electric plants) than is used to manufacture a Compact Fluorescent bulb.
I pay $1 per bulb for the CF's on sale. Even if it takes two 60 watt CF's to replace a 100 watt incandescent, you still win.
It's a no-brainer.
> First of all I was referring to the LED's not CFL's. Second, I probably only use about 10 hours of lighting a day, math following:
>
> 10 hours X 100 watts/1000 X .09 cents/kw X 365 = $32.85/year. Therefore 250.00/32.85 = 7 years, no thank you. Granted this doesn't fully illustrate the costs of CFL's versus incandescents and ignores the other problems with them but it's a great place for someone like you to get to do some real world thinking about it rather than just listening to the hype.
>
> I'm keeping my incandescents! (actually we do have a couple of CFL's in lamps but don't like them)
Ben, according to this government document (released in 2001, under the Bush Admin, so you know it's correct), page 14, the average residence has 45 lights, which run an average of 2 hours each per day, for a total of 90 hours.
Using your math, and your 9 cent/kwh charge ...
90 X 100 / 1000 * .09 X 365 = $295.65
Therefore 250/295.65 = 0.84 years is the payoff for the average residence. BOOM.
"I bet most people would recoup that $3.75 in less than a year, especially when using 100w bulbs." - proven correct!
Yeah, that's pretty bad.
That's sort of true. Incandescent lights technically were not banned. What passed was legislation that sets performance and energy use standards for lighting, that get phased in over time. 100w bulbs can not meet the 1st tier standard and are effectively banned in October 2012, unless a company can figure out a way to reduce their energy use. 40w bulbs will be banned by 2020.
This law dates back to 2007, BTW, for those of you that like to point fingers in the wrong direction.
Except they are unlikely to last 6 months, so your math fails. So add in buying them at least twice a year.
More Mercury is spewed into the air by ...
> More Mercury is spewed directly into the air by extra electricity consumed by an incandescent bulb (because of coal-burning electric plants) than is used to manufacture a Compact Fluorescent bulb.
>
> I pay $1 per bulb for the CF's on sale. Even if it takes two 60 watt CF's to replace a 100 watt incandescent, you still win.
>
> It's a no-brainer.
I understand that coal mining, just by itself, can be somewhat hazardous; maybe even more hazardous than all those people losing all those feet when a CF bulb breaks on the floor.;-)
According to Duke energy ... 6000 to 12000 hours.
http://www.duke-energy.com/whycfls/whycfl-FAQs.asp
"CFLs last between 6,000 and 12,000 hours, or about 10 times longer than a typical incandescent bulb. For this reason, they are perfect choices for hard-to-reach and long-burning locations."
Are there some duds, sure. I hardly ever replace a bulb, though. I'm not sure about CFLs, but the LEDs are guaranteed for 5 years, so no, I don't need to factor in the cost of replacing anything in 6 months.
According to those that bought them they last 6 months. I'm not surprised you take the salesman's opinion.
I've bought plenty, going back to when they first came affordable about 10 years ago ... They last as advertised ... I've had nothing but CLFs or LEDS for the past 5 or 6 years, and maybe replace 1 or 2 bulbs a year due to them burning out.
> That's sort of true. Incandescent lights technically were not banned. What passed was legislation that sets performance and energy use standards for lighting, that get phased in over time. 100w bulbs can not meet the 1st tier standard and are effectively banned in October 2012, unless a company can figure out a way to reduce their energy use. 40w bulbs will be banned by 2020.
>
> This law dates back to 2007, BTW, for those of you that like to point fingers in the wrong direction.
I used to use fluorescent lights but since they don't last as advertised and they are made in China I went back to Incandescent bulbs and I'm happy I did. I live in the upper Mid west and they are hot and help out heating the room in addition to supplying lighting. Since I own a business and my clients don't live in China, but they do live in the USOFA. Incandescent bulbs are made in the US and If my clients are not working I'm not working. So right now I am on a buy American kick.
Actually, if you will go back a couple of months or so, you will see that entire project was killed. It's gone the way of the changing everything over to metric legislation.
CPT, I found that a couple of months ago the legislation that was set to kick in at the beginning of 2012 was pushed back to Oct 2012, but I don't see where it was killed. Do you have link to that?
>On Friday, the House voted to delay enforcement of the new standards until at least Oct. 1, with the Senate expected to agree, as part of a last-minute budget deal to keep the government operating through the rest of the fiscal year. Republicans have vowed to press for a full repeal of the new rules.
>Yet in some ways, despite all the heated rhetoric and political brinksmanship, the delay hardly matters. The looming possibility of the new standards, signed into law by President Bush in 2007 — and the fact that places like Europe, Australia, Brazil and China have already put similar measures in place or intend to do so — has transformed the industry. A host of more efficient products already line store shelves and poke out of light sockets.
I like CFL, but haven't seen the LED's that cheap. We just moved out of a house into another one we owned, and we took all the CFL's with us, and for $20, replaced all the other bulbs with incandescents. I'm a big believer in those bulbs. We have had some for what seems like 5 years now.
