Anyone moved to LED Lighting?

Page 9 of 16  

Here's a chart (with pictures, yet) showing some actual measurements of various types of lighting.
http://www.mge.com/home/appliances/lighting/comparison.htm

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@whocares.com (Dave Houston) writes:

Interesting point on the graph is how much better linear fluorescent can be than CF... also that metal halide basically starts where LED leaves off.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Osram, who makes incandescents, CFLs and LEDs, did a study indicating very well that only a very small percentage (about 2%) of energy used by all 3 of these throughout their life cycles, including manufacturing and transportation, is in everything other than the electricity consumed by them over their lifetimes.
http://www.ledsmagazine.com/news/6/8/4
http://www.osram-os.com/osram_os/EN/About_Us / We_shape_the_future_of_light/Our_obligation/ LED_life-cycle_assessment/More_Information/index.html
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

I will post the info I have on the harm that UV does to folks that have Lupus and fibromyalgia. Probably tomorrow.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:

If you're trying for energy savings, you're going the wrong way as LEDs produce lower lumens per Watt than CFLs currently. The only way you get energy savings with LEDs over CFLs currently is if you do exclusively task lighting where the directionality of LEDs can let you use a lower Wattage LED lamp than CFL. LEDs are certainly improving over time so eventually they may pass CFLs for efficiency, but they don't currently. The current LED lamps also suffer from color temperature inconsistencies which are problematic if you have more than one LED lamp in a room.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And you would benefit from less foul language.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
He made his point quite well though.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I can't remember what he tried to say. Don't bother requoting it, either.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chuck wrote:

Does your wife have some form of Cutaneous porphyria?
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Daring Dufas wrote:

The reference I have found relates to Lupus. I was somewhat incorrect saying it also affected RA and Fibro. Her Dr. had said that folks with auto immune problems should avoid UV. Since she has Lupus and Fibro, (auto-immune diseases) I assumed it caused problems for both. Since RA is also an auto-immune disease, I again assumed that uv might be a problem. The Dr. was addressing just the Lupus. Here is the reference I found for Lupus: www.itzarion.com/lupus-uv.html
She can only be in Walmart or HD for a few minutes. Then she has a very bad reaction. Any time outside she must be wearing a sun hat (blocks UV's). Sorry if I rattled anybodies cage. Chuck
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chuck wrote:

One of my roommates has a form of Porphyria and instead of a tan he gets lesions on his exposed skin and it makes him very sick.
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
pointed out, it's very hard to accurately assess the benefit of CFLs because of the complexity of the issue. Few models seem to include the fact that in the winter, incandescent bulbs actually help heat the home. The true cost/benefits of CFLs over tungsten bulbs are incredibly complex and that allows either side of the argument to spout nearly any numbers they feel like. All they need do is adjust the underlying parameters or ignore facts like the future cost of removing mercury from the enviroment the same way we're now removing asbestos.
We've stockpiled a fair number of incandescent bulbs at my house, because like you, I believe that I shouldn't be forced to use a technology that makes someone in my family sick. In a free country I should have the right to spend money on what I choose to, not what the government mandates.
If Americans truly want to save energy, how about dimming Las Vegas, which is reported to consume 5 gigawatts a day to keep all those lights running? I wonder how many tons of carbon are consumed by the thousands of people who fly in every day to gamble away their children's college fund? (-:
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Something many may not have have thought of is that box we stare at for hours every night with the LCD sets and the lighting technology behind them. This could be a huge factor in our lighting input for the day.
You may be interested in this (spurred by your supplied links elsewhere) LEDs may be just as bad as CFLs for health damage due to spectral content.
http://www.international-light-association.eu/PDF/Artificial%20Light%20and%20Health%20PLDC07.pdf
pointed out, it's very hard to accurately assess the benefit of CFLs because of the complexity of the issue. Few models seem to include the fact that in the winter, incandescent bulbs actually help heat the home. The true cost/benefits of CFLs over tungsten bulbs are incredibly complex and that allows either side of the argument to spout nearly any numbers they feel like. All they need do is adjust the underlying parameters or ignore facts like the future cost of removing mercury from the enviroment the same way we're now removing asbestos.
We've stockpiled a fair number of incandescent bulbs at my house, because like you, I believe that I shouldn't be forced to use a technology that makes someone in my family sick. In a free country I should have the right to spend money on what I choose to, not what the government mandates.
If Americans truly want to save energy, how about dimming Las Vegas, which is reported to consume 5 gigawatts a day to keep all those lights running? I wonder how many tons of carbon are consumed by the thousands of people who fly in every day to gamble away their children's college fund? (-:
--

"Chuck" < snipped-for-privacy@attt.net> wrote in message
news:he643p$h5d$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Except this stuff on blaming health problems by melanopsin peaking at 460 nm being stimulated by CFL's blue peak (436 nm) is BS. An equivalent amount of daylight has more stimulation of the blue color sensors in the eye (peaking at 445 nm), as indicated by daylight appearing more blue. An equivalent amount of daylight stimulates scotopic receptors (peaking at 508 nm) much more than CFL does, as indicated by higher s/p ratio. Daylight's spectrum is pretty smooth and high throughout the violet to blue-green range, and favors a photomechanism peaking at 460 nm (whereCFL spectrum is lacking) even less than is favors sensing a bluish color.
The whole document appears to me to be a fluorescent-bashing BS set of half-truths.
In fact, most health claims related to 460 nm from advocates of full-spectrum lamps are that non-full-spectrum fluorescents do not produce enough in the 460 nm area (which most white LEDs do produce a lot of).
<snip to here>

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It does become hard to differentiate sales promotion at the cost of other product bashing from honest testing and reporting, whatever that is...LOL
I believe it was that same report that brought in LED lighting as a similiar problem as fluorescent spectrums. I wouldn't have believed that lighting spectrum balance was so important but as I age I find myself very affected by lighting, particularly SADS type responses due to lack of sunlight.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The BS one snipped out here by any chance?

Phototherapy for SADS tends to consist of:
1. Quantity first and foremost - this needs a lot of light.
2. Secondarily, many sources indicate favorability of 460 nm area blue spectral content - which most white LEDs have a lot of and where most fluorescents run on the low side.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The symbol you are refering to is probably a right caret. Your browser has added them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I was referring to the "greater than" symbol.
I use a newsreader for Usenet. Mine adds a greater than symbol to lines being quoted, even if they already have greater than symbols due to being previously quoted. Newsreaders do this because Usenet culture expects them to. Your software apparently not intended to be a newsreader apparently refuses to add one to a line already having these, even if you are adding a level of quotation. Missing greater than symbols can confuse readers as to who wrote what.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"greater than" is only a usage in mathematically expressions for a ">" symbol. There are many proper names for the symbol but the mathematical usage or meaning does not apply here.
Some Usenet browsers have evolved to more advanced levels and support the style, quite well. Your style is only one of the many used on Usenet and other forums.
My Usenet browser can read and write posts on Usenet. Are you using a separate newswriter to post?
I see no confusion. All text is with the respective headers containing the reference, who posted it and sometimes the time and other details, depending on the browser used.
Josepi wrote: The symbol you are refering to is probably a right caret. Your browser has added them
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then why does HTML call them that?

I read and post with the same software.

The few times I used a browser software package to post, it added those symbols at the beginning of every quoted line, same as software intended for Usenet use. It certainly does that when I reply to e-mails. That was the composer automatically invoked by the mail/news software included into Netscape 4.7.
However, I have done at least 99.9% of my postings with tin or slrn running on a Unix shell account. My guess is that they invoke Pine or something similar for composing.
Now I notice that whatever you are using is not adding them at all. That can make things confusing when people used to this Usenet convention of using these (or occaisionally alternatives such as colons) snip out signatures and stuff from signature files to edit for space.
Meanwhile, references are all in a single line that is one of the headers of an entire article.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.