Comments on: Best lighting cost comparison: Incandescent, CFL, LED

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:58:06 +0000

That’s not true. I’m perfectly happy with the alternative that my CFLs offer, so I would say they are a more than adequate alternative.

By: James

James — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:32:33 +0000

Why do comparisons of bulbs always negate the fact that CFLs have dire colour reproduction? The phosphors used to turn the florescent light source into something broader band only produce a small number of narrow bands of colour. Because the colour of objects is very narrow band by nature, a room lit by a CFL will look very unnatural – many objects will appear darker, or even appear as a completely different colour than they actually are because they can’t reflect the very specific wavelengths of the CFL. This is completely missed by simple lumens calculations and is precisely the reason why they make rooms look dreadful.

In comparison, an incandescent produces even intensity across the visible spectrum just as sunlight does. I’m all for energy saving but CFLs are not and never will be an adequate alternative.

By: John Swails

John Swails — Mon, 24 May 2010 07:27:57 +0000

We have a small office in the city and the electricity bill is insane. Tell you what, we have tried to turn off the all the electric juice sucking machines, but not really see much of the difference in the bills. But, one day our plaza electrician told me that they are changing all the LED light tubes outside the plaza. Those LED lights look the same as the old light tube but after that we don’t think we see the electrician for months until people complaint about other problems. We tried using the LED light tubes and we are so damn glad we did. We already have the electric bill saving to pay off the LED lights that we got. Awesome product!!!

By: j

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:39:43 +0000

336 lumens LED vs 900 lumens CFL. I doubt the LED would be tolerable in comparison. Especially for reading.

By: Redy Gee

Redy Gee — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:00:42 +0000

We are manufacturer of LED lights in China. Yes, we agree the Reactive Current. A bulb from us marked as 6W, acctually will cost around 9W power. There is a saying of “consume power” & “output power”. Here, 6W is output power while 9W is consume power. This is normal, as all we know that “conservation of energy”. Some current were changed to the heat.

Most time, when some factory want to upgrade its power, then he marks his “consume power” as power. Because there is a wrong acknowlege on the LED market that more power, more light. And with this wrong idea, some consumers will like to buy a more powerful LED light. Actually, it is wrong. For a LED, more Lumen output, more light.

In our factory, we mark the “output power” as power. We think this is what the consumer need to know. But from here, I get to know maybe some one like to know the consumer power for a LED.

So, pls ask your vender is the power marked shows a “consume power” or “output power”. Then you will know the truth before buying.

Last, this is Redy from Eltlite.com

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:46:37 +0000

Thanks for the comment and graph shown on your website. I think LEDs still have a way to go before they become a clear winner over CFLs, but in either case, they are both better than incandescents!

By: Mitra Ardron

Mitra Ardron — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:04:15 +0000

Thanks for the comparisom. The thing missing for me was a break-even comparisom, that showed after what time a CFL or LED is better than Incandescant

I’ve created a new spreadsheet (based on the one above) and its at http://www.mitra.biz/blog/archives/2009/12/cost_comparison.html. Which shows (at 4 hours/day usage) LED’s beat Incandescent after 4 years, but CFL’s are better than all of them from year 1, it takes 30 years for LED’s to beat CFL’s but then need replacing after year 35.

Obviously this depends on assumptions about inflation in electricity prices, so I’ve added a second tab, where I assume electricity inflates at 7% more than general inflation. This isn’t unreasonable, for example NSW in Australia just authorised 60% over next 4 years.

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:55:24 +0000

I have been doing a whole section on CFL lighting, and like most have switched the obvious bulbs in our apartment. But I was having trouble with the A19 and candelabra bulbs, mostly as I could not find the right sizes, and when I could they were at a silly price.

PS – We are required to make good financial decisions, as well as good green decisions – refer Chris’s home page introduction.

All changed when I located a new supplier, ordered and replaced the final 12 offenders in our apartment.

I have written a post at open4energy called Do Compact Fluorescent Bulbs really Save Energy and in it I have included a graph of the energy use across our two bedrooms and the bathroom, with the old bulbs, and then with the new bulbs.

I encourage anyone to visit Wholesale Bulbs when on our page – you will see their adverts – importing directly from China and selling over the web. The latest T2 technology, 25% less mercury, a full range of light temperatures, and an amazing selection of fittings.

By: Matthew Coyle

Matthew Coyle — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:18:10 +0000

I recently visited some LED manufacturers in China and they are deff. advancing the LED technology. I thought the most spectacular application was a 10,000 lumen LED street light which consumed about 8 times less power then the sodium filament. Also very promising are LED floods, spots, tubes and shop lights. Also read the new report out from OSRAM that takes into consideration cradle-to-grave energy use for CFL, Incandescent and LED.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/30/business/energy-environment/30led.html

By: Chris

Chris — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:20:13 +0000

NerdKing, I got that issue of Consumer Reports. It was a good one. They had a whole section on energy conservation and a section on heating your home with wood pellets.