LED Bulbs?
in [Frugal Living]
|
From: BeaForoni on 30 Jan 2007 17:08 I have changed all my light bulbs to flouresent and the savings was considerable, until the utility company raised rates. Now I am starting to see LED bulbs. Seem kind of spendy. Anyone have experience with them?
From: throwitout on 30 Jan 2007 17:31 On Jan 30, 6:08 pm, BeaFor...(a)msn.com wrote: > I have changed all my light bulbs to flouresent and the savings was > considerable, until the utility company raised rates. Now I am > starting > to see LED bulbs. Seem kind of spendy. Anyone have experience with > them? Won't see them replacing your household lights anytime soon. Efficiency is about the same or worse than Florescent. I've yet to see one match the light output of a normal light
From: Don Klipstein on 30 Jan 2007 17:47 In article <1170194924.192588.288550(a)j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>, BeaForoni(a)msn.com wrote: >I have changed all my light bulbs to flouresent and the savings was >considerable, until the utility company raised rates. Now I am >starting to see LED bulbs. Seem kind of spendy. Anyone have experience >with them? I have some and I know quite a bit about LEDs. The latest LEDs coming into production only have about the same efficiency as fluorescents, and they cost a good order of magnitude more per watt in initial cost, and they don't last forever (I mostly hear 50,000 hours and I have heard test results of some lasting less than 10,000 hours). Most white LEDs in products on the shelves now are much less efficient than fluorescents, mostly closer to incandescents than to fluorescents in efficiency. Screw-in LED "bulbs" are in the 1-5 watt range. With efficiency at best the same as fluorescents, don't expect to see much of these exceeding the performance of a 7 watt compact fluorescent or a 30 watt incandescent floodlight or spotlight just yet. My experience so far, although with units a year or two old already, has been comparable to or weaker than a 15 watt incandescent in total light output. Please be aware of hype in LEDs. They are advancing and will see more and more applications as they improve. But keep in mind that some have touted them as more efficienct than fluorescents as far back as the late 1990's! - Don Klipstein (don(a)misty.com)
From: Seerialmom on 30 Jan 2007 18:40 On Jan 30, 2:08 pm, BeaFor...(a)msn.com wrote: > I have changed all my light bulbs to flouresent and the savings was > considerable, until the utility company raised rates. Now I am > starting > to see LED bulbs. Seem kind of spendy. Anyone have experience with > them? The only thing I have LED's in at the moment is my hand-crank flashlights. I believe there were quite a few LED Christmas lights recently; more expensive initially but lower cost to run. Many cities have taken to use the LEDs in traffic lights as well. I don't think you're the first to notice the correlation between "lowering your consumption" and rates being raised. I've jumped through many hoops making my house energy efficient (insulation, dual pane windows, energy star appliances) but never really seeing any dramatic decrease in my bill. If I could get "off the grid" through solar I would (I suppose I could but not sure I want to invest $20,000 to save $120 a month).
From: Don K on 30 Jan 2007 19:07
"Seerialmom" <seerialmom(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1170200408.225596.222060(a)a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > The only thing I have LED's in at the moment is my hand-crank > flashlights. I believe there were quite a few LED Christmas lights > recently; more expensive initially but lower cost to run. Just wait until you get the bill for the carpel tunnel surgery. ;-) > Many cities have taken to use the LEDs in traffic lights as well. That probably has more to do with the high cost and effort to replace a burnt-out bulb than with LED energy efficiency. > I don't think you're the first to notice the correlation between > "lowering your consumption" and rates being raised. I've jumped > through many hoops making my house energy efficient (insulation, dual > pane windows, energy star appliances) but never really seeing any > dramatic decrease in my bill. You've got cause and effect backwards. The increasing rates caused you to lower your consumption. Your lower consumption didn't cause the rates to increase. Don |