Discussion in 'Life After Brown' started by Hoaxster, Jun 25, 2012.
OK - Which do you think is better - Incandescent, CFLs or LEDs
It's not the same thing----CFL's are much more energy efficient and lasts much longer than their incandescent counterparts.
If you drop one and it breaks......you have to call a haz. mat. team.
The cartoon however is about an imaginary light bulb denoting an idea. Can you say "imaginary" ?
The piggy tail spots will dim down a room that was brighter with reg. spots in the canned lighting. True....tested here.
You're not buying the right wattage or color temperature. If you break one, just treat as hazardous, don't touch, leave the area, and notify a supervisor. Just kidding, open a window and sweep it up 10 minutes later.
CFL's were a decent transition technology, but LED's are almost cheap enough for mainstream use. A while back I started replacing my CFL's with LED's as they died. The price is dropping pretty fast on LED light bulbs, it's only a matter of time.
I replaced all of my incandescents with CFL's a few years ago. LED's are still too pricey but are becoming more reasonable and I will replace my CFL's when they burn out.
My dislike of piggy tails has nothing to do with cost......incadescent is what I want ...period, the end!!
Not in my experience. Seems to last about the same for me. Waiting for the LEDs to before affordable.
On a side note, funny how after people here changed to more energy efficient appliances, and bulbs, that the electric company had to raise their rates, because they weren't making enough money. So we end up paying the same or more anyways.
It just goes to show ya, it's always something........thanks Gilda!
Probably varies on the quality of the bulb, which is also true of incandescents. I use to change my outdoor lighting (which always stay on) 4-6 times per year, but since I switched to CFL I've had some last as many as two years and others as few as six months.
Last year I completed transitioning my house to an energy-efficient one. My motivation was purely cost, not environmental, and changes were gradually made when justified. For example, I found a great deal on three LCD HD TVs (two small and one large), which replaced three older tube styles I had inherited - two of which dated back to the 1980s. Not only did I want HD, but I wanted to replace my cable with a HTPC (home theater PC) system. I found a great deal on a HTPC that streams across my network, and within months it made for itself -it'll pay for the LCD HD TVs as well shortly.
Compared to since I began my "efficiency" project, my energy bills have dropped by about $40-60 per month, so I have to disagree with you. (Again, my motivation was $$$, not environmental.) Much of my savings has come from new appliances, which was planned for several years. My washer & dryer were a Montgomery Wards set from the late 1970s and total energy hogs.
I've been in this house since 2003 and haven't changed bulbs on my living room lamps yet......good old 60 watt incadescents !!!
Off-topic but yeah, they seem to have similar advertised life frequency. The most important thing (to my knowledge) is determining the frequency of usage on the bulb -or how many times it's flipped on/off, not necessarily how many hours "on".
I have several incandescent light-bulbs from the 80's that work just fine.
Frequency, weather, etc. are all speculated to be factors determining the lifespan of a CFL bulb, whereas incandescents are based on hours on. I strongly disagree as I have a few bulbs on my property that stay on 24/7 for security reasons, and some CFL - from the same package - have lasted much longer than others. Really, I think it's just the quality of the bulb. In any event, all of them have outlasted the incandescents I use to use.
My (great) aunt lives in a home built post-WWII, and her bulbs in the garage, attic and along the exterior of the house are incandescents from an era when the power company supplied them at no charge (so 80-years-old?) - and yes, she uses these lights fairly frequently. I guess they don't make them like they use to -- might as well shorten the lifespan, and collect people's $$$.
CFLs work great as long as you turn them on and leave them on for hours at a time. They do not like being frequently on and off and will fail quickly. If they are to be on for short periods LEDs are the way to go. I have a CFL in my living room that runs from dusk until I get home that has been going strong for probably 4 years or more
LED's are the way to go less wattage consumed,more controllable from a dimming stand point ( high and low trim) ,longer life 50 to 100 thousand hours and can match incandescent 2700 K color temperature to cast a warmer color.
Also LED RGB color changing sources are becoming more affordable Soon everyone will be able to change you lighting color by a simple controller at an affordable price. Maybe you feel blue today.
Check out all the freezers @ Target food stores is all led on a motion sensors that turn the light on as you approach or open the doors.)One thing to remember LED's love cold but they are sensative to heat and need heat sink in all their envelopes or inclosures.
LED's are the future but the price still needs to drop more before they are really competitive.
LED - most expensive
LCD - expensive
Incandescent - fairly inexpensive
From what I have read, GE was the biggest "pusher" of LCDs since this would decrease their competitors and increase their margin.
Have not heard of any lobbyists pushing LEDs yet.
So you're just stubborn.
I call BS or u never use your living lights. One or the other.
If broken, pick up and throw in the trash.....my kind of clean-up.
CFL cleanup according to the EPA
Separate names with a comma.