Bulbs first, flatscreens second, vacuum cleaners next?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by photon

Exactly, families with kids need more light as there's usually people in more rooms. Winter is long and light's needed after 5pm to do almost anything, some bulbs in my house get used probably only a few hours per year, while others get used half the day almost every day.

Definitely different lifestyles will produce different usage patterns. My house (semi-large suburban 2 storey) has two adults with full time jobs living there. If it had 2 adults, one home all day, a bunch of kids and grandma, it'd be a different story for light usage, and hence CFLs.

So far the gov't hasn't tried to legislate me into living in the smalles (==most environmentally friendly) size residence that would fit my family. Hopefully that continues, because I really like my suburban neighbourhood and house.

I'd be interested to hear where people think the line is on acceptable regulation? The government is making me buy more efficient lightbulbs, any reason they couldn't make me live in a more efficient sized house?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

It should be said that both your "Watt = Joule per second", and my "Watt = Volts times amps" are correct.

Yep. Which is probably why people find this stuff confusing.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by photon

The bulb that won the first L Prize doesn't have any issue with on-time or view angle (part of the requirements of the L Prize). And any issue with capacitors drying would be from quality control or poor caps or poor design, not with the fact that it's LED. ETA: You already mention that above I see.

I think it is more than 'poor design' The fact is, that cap is heavily taxed.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Definitely different lifestyles will produce different usage patterns. My house (semi-large suburban 2 storey) has two adults with full time jobs living there. If it had 2 adults, one home all day, a bunch of kids and grandma, it'd be a different story for light usage, and hence CFLs.

So far the gov't hasn't tried to legislate me into living in the smalles (==most environmentally friendly) size residence that would fit my family. Hopefully that continues, because I really like my suburban neighbourhood and house.

I'd be interested to hear where people think the line is on acceptable regulation? The government is making me buy more efficient lightbulbs, any reason they couldn't make me live in a more efficient sized house?

That is exactly the point of FoL. If saving energy is good and the 'right' thing to do, and further if the govt. is outlawing certain high energy devices, it is not an absurd stretch to see that type of control going further and further.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

That is interesting, thanks, didn't know that.

Does the power meter we get billed on measure real power or apparent power?

That is a subject of great debate, the power company until recently had no way to measure phase angle of individual houses and had to make estimates based on the pole transformers. Smart meters make this more plausible. Phase correction can also be introduced which again has a whole new set of arguemenets about whether that is in fact a help or not.

[photon]

Originally Posted by jonesy

I think it is more than 'poor design' The fact is, that cap is heavily taxed.

Still, 25,000 hours is nothing to sneeze at, and I'd be willing to be someone will start a LED refurb company that will buy old ones and replace the cap and get them back into use.

I've come > < this close to putting LEDs in my home office a few times (because changing them is a PITA with the arrangement) and have been sitting in the dark for months trying to decide if I want to wait for this new Phillips one in 2012.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by photon

Still, 25,000 hours is nothing to sneeze at, and I'd be willing to be someone will start a LED refurb company that will buy old ones and replace the cap and get them back into use.

I've come > < this close to putting LEDs in my home office a few times (because changing them is a PITA with the arrangement) and have been sitting in the dark for months trying to decide if I want to wait for this new Phillips one in 2012.

I'll make it easy, I have a bunch from my factory in China. You want one?

[photon]

Do I want a factory in China?

For teh good caps I go to Japan! (That's how my motherboard was marketed to me anyway).

[photon]

Or do you mean do I want an LED bulb? Sure, what are they rated at in lumens?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by jonesy

That is exactly the point of FoL. If saving energy is good and the 'right' thing to do, and further if the govt. is outlawing certain high energy devices, it is not an absurd stretch to see that type of control going further and further.

The government isn't outlawing high energy devices for the sake of it. It's outlawing high energy devices that provide the same levels of service as devices that have lower power consumption. And really regulations never lead, they always follow market trends anyways. Further, regulations can be implemented in many different ways such as performance standards that don't discriminate against any one device.

But ultimately yes we're here because we realized that we need to reign in our energy system. In case you haven't heard there's huge environmental impacts from that system.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by jonesy

That is a subject of great debate, the power company until recently had no way to measure phase angle of individual houses and had to make estimates based on the pole transformers. Smart meters make this more plausible. Phase correction can also be introduced which again has a whole new set of arguemenets about whether that is in fact a help or not.

My understanding (and I admit I'm starting to tread to the edge of it) is that lower power factors do have real costs. Higher apparent power means a higher line loss in transmission, and the increased current would require larger items of all sizes in the grid, right? So if someone's power draw has a non-negligible phase angle (like say, from CFLs) and that causes a real cost to the grid operators, isn't it reasonable that they pay for that? It seems like that would be a better way of capturing the true costs of energy use.

(It would be too bad if someone's eco-friendly bulbs were causing a negative externality that the rest of us had to subsidize... )

[sclitheroe]

Most big name CFL manufacturers have 2-3 year warranties on their bulbs..has anyone actually kept a receipt, the box flap, and the bulb, and tried to claim on these?

I'm contemplating doing it with the next bulb I purchase and replace - since we know CFL's don't last as long as rated (like everything else in the world, I suppose), I'm thinking it must be possible to essentially buy a bulb and get replacements at least once for each one purchased.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by jonesy

That is exactly the point of FoL. If saving energy is good and the 'right' thing to do, and further if the govt. is outlawing certain high energy devices, it is not an absurd stretch to see that type of control going further and further.

I know, I agree with his position, if not with the rhetorical devices used to advance it.

I happen to think I should be able to use any kind of light bulb I want in the comfort and privacy of my own home. Like Trudeau said, keep the gov't out of the nation's bedrooms!

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

Most big name CFL manufacturers have 2-3 year warranties on their bulbs..has anyone actually kept a receipt, the box flap, and the bulb, and tried to claim on these?

I'm contemplating doing it with the next bulb I purchase and replace - since we know CFL's don't last as long as rated (like everything else in the world, I suppose), I'm thinking it must be possible to essentially buy a bulb and get replacements at least once for each one purchased.

The beautiful thing about providing a warranty for a product that sells for <$5 is that it's never worth the time to put in a claim.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

The government isn't outlawing high energy devices for the sake of it. It's outlawing high energy devices that provide the same levels of service as devices that have lower power consumption. And really regulations never lead, they always follow market trends anyways. Further, regulations can be implemented in many different ways such as performance standards that don't discriminate against any one device.

But ultimately yes we're here because we realized that we need to reign in our energy system. In case you haven't heard there's huge environmental impacts from that system.

I'm on the fore front of 'reigning in our energy system' as you say. (its the usage not the system that needs reigning in) That aside, you missed the point. A typical family could live in a European size house with a European sized car which would provide the same levels of service, so it sounds like you would be ok with the govt madating such a thing to help the reign in process.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

My understanding (and I admit I'm starting to tread to the edge of it) is that lower power factors do have real costs. Higher apparent power means a higher line loss in transmission, and the increased current would require larger items of all sizes in the grid, right? So if someone's power draw has a non-negligible phase angle (like say, from CFLs) and that causes a real cost to the grid operators, isn't it reasonable that they pay for that? It seems like that would be a better way of capturing the true costs of energy use.

(It would be too bad if someone's eco-friendly bulbs were causing a negative externality that the rest of us had to subsidize... )

Those are the exact questions being debated while people work on the 'smart grid' Sometimes a initially good sounding idea just doesn't hold water.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by photon

Or do you mean do I want an LED bulb? Sure, what are they rated at in lumens?

5 billion!

.
.
.
.
i'll check I have 5W and 7W ones

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by jonesy

Those are the exact questions being debated while people work on the 'smart grid' Sometimes a initially good sounding idea just doesn't hold water.

Interesting. The part of me that took an economics class once thinks the smart grid is a good idea. (Those who use power at peak times or otherwise are more expensive to service can pay more.)

The part of me that took an electrical engineering class once never really thought about all the potential problems. Maybe the cost of implementing such a smart grid wouldn't be worth the incentive based benefits it would provide.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I know, I agree with his position, if not with the rhetorical devices used to advance it.

I happen to think I should be able to use any kind of light bulb I want in the comfort and privacy of my own home. Like Trudeau said, keep the gov't out of the nation's bedrooms!

In some cases, such as this light bulb one, legislation drives manufacturer innovation. All to often, manufacturers just provide the same old product without innovating.

Do you think that cars would be as efficient as they are today without the government legislating more efficiency. Likewise, (and this is my opinion) car efficiency would be a lot higher yet had the government told car manufacturers that it must be so.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Interesting. The part of me that took an economics class once thinks the smart grid is a good idea. (Those who use power at peak times or otherwise are more expensive to service can pay more.)

The part of me that took an electrical engineering class once never really thought about all the potential problems. Maybe the cost of implementing such a smart grid wouldn't be worth the incentive based benefits it would provide.

Who is making the grid? The guys selling you electrons. Do they really reallly want to spend a lot to make a system where you use less of their product? Plus there is the whole nightmare of regulated vs. unregulated parts of power generation/delivery/sale. 3 different groups, some regulated, some not. Techincal problems are there for sure, but the $$ are being fought over now and that is the real power struggle (<---heh)