Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- From: John O'Flaherty <quiasmox@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:03:41 -0500
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 08:33:28 -0700 (PDT), z <gzuckier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Oct 6, 2:42 pm, John O'Flaherty <quias...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 10:38:14 -0700 (PDT), z <gzuck...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
{snipped}
Although I myself have converted most of my bulbs to fluorescents,
there are definitely places where I prefer incandescents; and I'm
still wondering how much money I'm going to save on bulbs which
produce less heat, when I spend 3/4 of the year trying to heat my
house, and the cost per BTU of oil is pretty close to that of
electricity these days.
Right. In heating season, there's no gain from using CFLs (or any
other indoor energy conservation) if you have electric heat, and very
little otherwise. That would apply to fully-heated spaces, where any
heat from appliances would just displace heat from the furnace. In
basements or other unheated places conservation is still worthwhile.
--
John
but there isn't that much lightbulb use in unheated basements, etc.;
and in human homes, during air conditioning season when bulb heat is a
problem, it doesn't make a difference when the bulbs are off because
of daylight, which is long in the summer; when the bulbs are off
because people are asleep which is the major part of the dark hours in
the summer; and when the AC is off because the sun is down and it's
cooling off, which is relevant for some parts of the country.
basically, the big advantage of fluorescents is in big buildings where
the temp is completely air conditioned because there isn't any natural
ventilation, and the light is all from bulbs because there isn't any
sunlight except around the windows, and people are inside them during
daylight hours. and of course, they've been fluorescent for years.
It's not a question of whether bulb heat is a comfort problem but
that it's expensive, which it is whether or not air conditioning is in
use.
I do think CFLs are worthwhile, because there's plenty of electric
light used during times when a furnace isn't expected to run. Only
specifically during heating season when heat is being used is there no
energy-saving advantage, and even then there still may be an
advantage, in bulb life and trouble saved replacing them. The only
place I don't use CFLs is where I want immediate full light in a space
where I only stay a short time.
On another point, on channel 4 in St. Louis last night, they had a
news feature where they got all exercised about the mercury in CFLs
and the danger of breaking them. There's mercury in flourescent tubes
too, and they've been around a long time. I think it's worth being
careful of them too.
--
John
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- From: Robert Blass
- Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- From: z
- Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- From: John O'Flaherty
- Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- From: z
- 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- Prev by Date: Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- Next by Date: Re: convert 12V down to 9V DC
- Previous by thread: Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- Next by thread: Re: 22-watt compact florescent bulbs VS 100 watt incandescent bulbs?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
