Long Live the Incandescent!

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Today's NYT has an article on incandescent bulbs that meet the energy
efficiency mandates that were expected to make them obsolete.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/business/energy-environment/06bulbs.html?hp

And last week, when announcing tougher energy efficiency mandates for
straight tube fluorescents and reflector bulbs, Obama said that 7% of US
energy use goes for lighting. That's about the same percent that I had come
up with using DOE statistics and a far cry from the bogus 20-25% figure used
by the eco-terrorists and other Wallmart shills.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/business/energy-environment/30light.html

And here's another interesting read on CFLs.

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/incandescent.htm

Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
On Jul 6, 6:33=A0am, nob...@whocares.com (Dave Houston) wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Looks good, I especially like the low parts count to make them.  I
hope someone combines the reflective coating technique with the laser-
etched filament technique to possibly obtain even greater
efficiencies.  I never liked throwing out a ballast and all those
other parts with a CFL.  I still contend that the supply chain needed
to make a CFL (resistors, transistors, capacitors, coils, mercury,
phosphor, gas handling, etc) outweigh a simple bulb with only 5 low-
tech parts. If you add up the total cost of manufacturing and mining
and delivering the resources for all those individual parts then dump
them all into landfills, I think the "true cost" of CFL goes way up.
But the lobbyists conveniently leave out the cost of logistics and
deep supplier costs associated with all the parts needed to make a
CFL.


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not being a physicist, I don't know whether the combination is possible. I
does seem an obvious way to further improve it. The laser etched filament
seems similar to the "tungsten lattice" developed at Sandia Labs.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/676767/posts

There's also this...

http://spie.org/x26015.xml?ArticleID=x26015

Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
This looks like some interesting stuff Dave.  In particular the 39
page article will be on my nightstand to read in bed tonight.  I
woould have bet that LEDs are the wave of the future.  In fact I have
4 lamps in my bathroom fixture.  They product intensely white light.
Unfortunately the light goes straight down with very little spill to
the sides.  I've become accustomed to it, and lean a little further
forward when I'm shaving ;-)  These were reasonably priced at Sam's
Club for something like $7.00 each.  IIRC they use around 4 watts
each.  For 16 watts they product a LOT of light.  At the same time
I've been using CFLs for perhaps 14 or so years now and have been very
happy with them other than much shorter life than advertised.

Cheers,

John, SW Missouri


On Jul 6, 6:33=A0am, nob...@whocares.com (Dave Houston) wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
John,

I also thought LEDs might be the winner but costs need to come down a lot
more plus they need to improve dispersion.

I've never denied that CFLs save money - I've only objected to the
propaganda that grossly over promised that they would save enough energy to
"save the world". If the 7% figure is accurate it means residential lighting
uses less than 3% of total US energy. (Interestingly, a study done in
Cambridge in the UK came up with the same figure.) Saving even half of that
3% isn't very significant, especially when most of the CFLs have low power
factors so the actual savings on the generation side ends up at much less
than 1%. As only about half of our electricity comes from coal-fired plants,
the reduction in C0 is near zero. Meanwhile, the rising sea levels and
disappearing arctic ice would indicate that we have already passed the point
of no return and that much more drastic measures are needed.

The obvious advantage of these new incandescents is that they can be built
on the same production lines used for the old style incandescents so
production costs should be lower.

BTW, the "tungsten lattice" project at Sandia and the silver band-pass
filter project at Rensselaer involved the same individual, Shawn-Yu Lin.


Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
There hasn't been that many new products in the LED home lighting
products that I encounter here in the sticks, but I'm also a
flashlight fanatic - and there has been some really impressive
products introduced over the past couple years.  My latest flashlight
is an Olight M30, 700 lumen blaster!  This flashlight "feels" like it
puts out as much light as the 1,000,000 CP lights from the sporting
goods stores.  It seems like ever other month they double the last
record for output.  I'm still of the opinion that LED will be the
light of choice in the future for many applications in our homes and
automobiles.  While I'm not happy about the narrow beam of the LED
lamps in my bath, I recognize that had I known about these lamps I
could have planned the lighting to work around the lamps
shortcomings.  A couple extra recessed housings with LED lamps would
give me the lighting I want and the wattage is so low a few extra
lamps is nothing.

http://gizmodo.com/210326/first-led-headlights-appear-unleash-astonishing-styling-possibilities

http://www.light-reviews.com/olight_m30 /

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=231491




Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:04:48 GMT, nobody@whocares.com (Dave Houston) wrote in

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes you have.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No. You said that they were " a bad idea"

The assertion that others have claimed that CFLs would literally "save the
world" is a false straw man you created to distract from your intemperate and
disproved assertions and poor predictions.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

There are at least four major energy sectors, residential being  the second
smallest.  There will need to be reductions in each.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Using Dave's broken logic, there is nothing worth doing because any given use
which in turn is only a fraction of the total usage within any of four major
energy sectors. There are very roughly 16 use-sector subdivisions so  each
accounting for ~~6%  -- EACH ONE OF WHICH  needs to be reduced for global
efforts to be successful.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Dave Keeps repeating this despite the fact that he now knows that current
CFLs (at least those in my house) have power factors > 0.93 measured (with a
Kill-a-watt).

[rest deleted]   And like that. We've been through all this before.

... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org

Re: Long Live the Incandescent!

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Thank you Marc for making that point.  It's not a matter of which ONE is the
solution.   Every little bit counts.  There is the matter of 'total'
consumption cost.  But I'm pained to read the endless rants from idiots
decrying ANY new movement because they've managed to brew up some numbers
that make it look bad.  The status quo is obviously not working so some
movement is going to be necessary.  I accept that this will take multiple
efforts on many different fronts.  Thankfully there are more choices,
naysayers be damned.



Re: Long Live the Incandescent!


discussion : psadnb2KkKxf68HXnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

One sector that is not being looked at enough is the Fridge and freezer's
that people have at home...

One of the worst energy dinosaurs fridge that most American have is the old
20+ years fridge that keep our beer cold in the garage..

I've replaced my 7 years old fridge in the kitchen by an energy star one and
took the old one to the garage, and I dropped the very old one to be
recycled properly.

This was 4 month ago, I already see a difference in my electrical
consummation just by that move. (And the beers are still cold ;-))
 


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
According to the Department of Energy, only 9% of residential electricity
use is for lighting so it should be obvious to even the simple minded
enviro-nuts (except those who fabricate their own statistics) that there are
bigger targets. Single malt, straight, without ice is another way to save
(electricity, that is). ;)

BTW, have you replaced the new fridge's light with a CFL?


Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
"Dave Houston" wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The obvious thing is that we need to address energy consumption on all
fronts -- not just a few "big targets."  By dragging feet on everything but
the most difficult areas to improve, we further delay doing anything at all --  
while things continue to get worse.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

==============================>
Bass Home Electronics
DIY Alarm and Home Automation Store
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
Sales & Service 941-870-2310
Fax 941-870-3252
==============================>


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!


"Robert L Bass"  wrote :
Quoted text here. Click to load it

However, the bulk of the effort (and cost) should be to those things that
give more reward and are feasible.

Another way of saying it is EFFECT / COST -> PRIORITY

--
Bill Fuhrmann



Re: Long Live the Incandescent!


"B Fuhrmann" wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I do what is feasible for me.  I can't directly control what government
agencies and power companies do.  However, I can affect what happens in my
house.  I can afford the extra cost of CFLs over incandescent bulbs so I use
them.  I like to keep the temperature in the house about 72F during the summer
but that consumes lots of power so I leave it at 78F.  Heating isn't much of
an issue for me since the temperature rarely gets cold enough to bother me,
even during Florida's frigid winter nights.  I use solar energy to heat the
pool and the Jacuzzi.  Weather permitting, I usually ride my bike rather than
drive the car.  I used to ride a bicycle a lot but health issues make that no
longer an option.

These are all small things but if more people do them and lots of other small
things there can be a significant benefit.  I agree that it's important to
work on the big polluters and energy consumers, but IMO that doesn't relieve
us all of the obligation to reduce our individual footprints.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

==============================>
Bass Home Electronics
DIY Alarm and Home Automation Store
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
Sales & Service 941-870-2310
Fax 941-870-3252
==============================>


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
Dave Houston wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Now that's what I call "savings"....  :-)

Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
I've done about all I can down here.  I have a 3 month old Trane VS
two stage heat pump (SEER 19) coupled with a VS 3-stage propane
furnace (95%).

I have many CFL's in/outside the house, plus LED lamps in a couple
locations.  ALL my appliances are energy star (thanks to the tornado 3
years back).  I'm seriously considering a new VW Jetta TDI diesel -
just waiting for Obama to get the cash for clunkers rebate program in
full swing.

I have a 2 year old Plasma TV, but I sure would like one of the new
energy efficient LED TVs ;-)



Re: Long Live the Incandescent!


: 29ca9e2f-e40f-4d5a-acce-fb3b0b414dd0@g31g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Now! Thats the spirit!

Still you got an old fridge for the beer??   ;-)

 


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!


discussion : 4a5da4e7.22601968@nntp.fuse.net...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope!  they dim on and off as we open the doors, so cfl would not work, but
i have a feeling that the are leds.. way too white for me..

 


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:43:17 GMT, nobody@whocares.com (Dave Houston) wrote in

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Here Dave succinctly repeats his own logical fallacies.

There may indeed be "bigger targets". But even a 100% reduction total
(elimination) of any one or two or five of the "bigger targets" will not
achieve the total energy and CO2 reduction needed. The solution will lie in
making reductions wherever and whenever possible.

Sober business owners and leaders, scientists, politicians, administrators,
journalists, and others that Dave maligns with regularity recognize that
there is often no single, simple fix to complex problems whether they be in
business, science, law or other human endeavors.

Dave Houston also demonstrates once again that his approach to a serious
problem is to create straw men with which to mount an self-serving, illogical
and specious attack on those who actually understand the issues and are
trying to implement actual solutions.

... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org

Re: Long Live the Incandescent!

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Back on Sun, 18 Feb 2007 16:44:26 -0500 in message
Marc_F_Hult  wrote (in part):

    " The study I cited http://www.kouba-cavallo.com/art/eval2001.pdf
    that Dave was apparently using to disparage folks that actually
     measure things and understand what they measure ("bureaucrats
    and ivory tower academics")  was a study of actual measurements
    of actual older refrigerators in actual use in the service area
    of the metro Cincinnati utility that provided electricity for
    the fridge in Dave's house."


See http://www.kouba-cavallo.com/art/eval2001.pdf "Low-Income Refrigerator
Replacement -- Selecting the Worst of the Worst" . )


HTH ... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org



 


Re: Long Live the Incandescent!

Quoted text here. Click to load it
This is so much poodle gas it is hysterical.


Site Timeline