Low energy light bulbs - comparison

Like most people, I guess,I'm working on changing as many of my lamps to low energy. The great deep-thinking ones are thinking of banning the sale of filament lamps anyway. I made a spreadsheet that showed I was using about £250 a year on lights (big house). This should come down to about £80 with LE, after allowing for not being able to dim them.

Problem is I need to change several light fittings and buy new free-standing ones for reading etc. I don't want to do this until I know more about the the sizes, output and light colour of the bulbs. I've looked at various suppliers sites thrown up by Google, and the suppliers I use for electrical bits, but the data is very limited. Short of buying one of each lamp and testing them myself I'm not sure how to proceed. Its not like a thermostat or a piece of pipe. Lighting is an important part of the design of a room, so I want to get it right.

Has this topic been discussed on this ng lately? I've not browsed it for a while. The uk.d-i-y faq has no information like this. Does anyone know of another faq or info site?

If not would people be willing to share their findings? I would be happy to put together a spreadsheet and recordset of the findings if they appeared to be consistent and useful (maybe I'll regret saying that!). I could put this on my website with a link on the faq or it might go on the faq itself.

What do people think?

Peter Scott

Reply to
Peter Scott
Loading thread data ...

I'm sort of answering my own question. I have found three sites that have more detailed information on them including colour temperature and physical size:

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link

Der...

That'll teach me to check *again* on Google before I post! Anyway, I hope someone might find the addresses useful. I guess a faq is not needed?

Reply to
Peter Scott

I think the biggest problem will be the rather subjective comments people make. Some just don't like 'em, others are quite happy. What would be useful is something that tabulates the make/model, rated power & lumens output for each lamp and (in an ideal world) the real lumen ouput at switch on from cold, at 1, 2, 5 and 10 mins, the colour temperature once warm and if they start with or without a flicker. The latter half would require an awful lot of effort though and decent measuring kit.

The first bit could be done by looking at the packaging as most, if not all, lamps now have that info on them. There are a lot of lamps out there but if a few people spent just 5 or 10 mins in the supermarket/DIY Shed WHY making a note of the rating of all the lamps then sent that information to a central point for collation it wouldn't be to much for any single person to do, apart from collator! Mind you it wouldn't be that hard to have a web interface to allow people to input their findings.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

I think a faq is needed, this is a common question. IME there are good, so-so and oh-no.

I've had good experiences with Osram, the toolstation ones were all so so but not the best light quality, Philips I've not been tempted to buy any more, and the one poundland one I bought out of curiosity was dire.

If you write something, here's a good place for it:

formatting link

Reply to
meow2222

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 09:02:41 +0000 someone who may be Peter Scott wrote this:-

The sizes are stated in various places. They range from lamps no larger than GLS lamps to ones considerably larger. Some are also considerably heavier, which may be of concern in some fittings.

Output and light colour is to some extent a matter of personal prejudice. Some will swear blind that such lamps are dim, take too long to warm up, are no good for almost anything and the available figures on output and colour are all wrong. On the other hand some have been using such lamps since the 1980s, have now got them almost everywhere and don't see why some make a fuss about them.

There are search engines to answer that question.

Reply to
David Hansen

Peter Scott formulated on Thursday :

You should only consider using the low energy lamps where the light is turned on and left on for a sensible period of time - for all other uses ordinary filament lamps are best for both electrical economy and lamp replacement economy, initial cost and you get 100% light output as soon as switched on.

The low energy lamps just don't survive very long if frequently switched, filament lamps are much better for this type of use.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield

In message , Peter Scott writes

You have solved my problem at least:-)

Compact gs23 9 watt fluorescents are only available in warm white from my local outlets. We have a low ceiling in our kitchen and use recessed twin lamps. Even with 5 units SWMBO is not happy. I tried changing the opaque cover but she wasn't happy with that either. Cool white from the above should do it.

regards

Reply to
Tim Lamb

Really? Not based on shelf space devoted to them in most stores.

I think you mean small minded people who like to interfere in the freedom of choice of others.

I find that surprising. I also have a considerable number of lamps - almost all tungsten of one technology or another and don't get to anything like this figure.

I think that the exercise is pointless. I haven't yet found any low energy lamps that I would entertain having in the house. I find the light quality poor and colour rendition obtained distinctly artificial looking and strange to the point of having a bilious effect.

The amount of energy saved I don't think is worth the effort just in the context of lamp use, especially when mechanics and light suitability are also taken into account, and in comparison with other energy saving measures, it's really not worth bothering.

Reply to
Andy Hall

I am one such person. Unless lights are to be switched on for hours at a time (such as my outside driveway lights) I think these energy saving light bulbs are a waste of time and money when used inside the home.

They're horrible things and do not give the same light as a normal bulb, despite what all the so called experts (aka marketing people) say.

If the light is only on for a an hour or so, (and often three minutes when you use the bog) the energy saving is minuscule - 40w or something? All the savings you'd get over a year or so are the equivalent of not having one or two baths. A paltry amount. Cut the central heating down a degree, stop using hairdryers so much etc, I am all for that. For a tiny few watts here and there for light bulbs? Waste of time.

My 2c, not to offend anyone elses opinions of course.

Reply to
Kaiser Sose

You're assuming that manufacturers don't speak with forked tongues. In my experience, rated equivalence doesn't begin to come near that of a conventional incandescent bulb.

Sure, if you're prepared to dig though the small print you sometimes find weasel words mentioning that they're actually equivalent to "soft tone" bulbs but who the heck buys them?

Having said all that I was tempted by an offer in Tesco the other day (11W GE bulbs for 19p each). I then spent the next couple of hours converting a pendant in the hall to taking two of these bulbs. The output is almost acceptable now.

Tim

Reply to
Tim Downie

We have a wiki for this sort of thing...

Owain

Reply to
Owain

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:04:03 GMT someone who may be Harry Bloomfield wrote this:-

That was the advice when such lamps came out, but things have moved on since then.

Ditto. I have had a low energy bulb in a toilet for I suppose getting on for a decade now. It is often just switched on for a few minutes. It was still working fine this morning.

Some designs of low energy bulb are better than others in this duty cycle, just like some designs of GLS bulb are.

Reply to
David Hansen

So the advantage of putting a relatively expensive low energy lamp in such a location would be what exactly? You do not save much if any energy if it is only turned on for a couple of minutes and the manufacturing process is not very green when compared to an ordinary cheap filament lamp.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield

formatting link
?title=CFL_LampsNT

Reply to
meow2222

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 13:06:36 GMT someone who may be Harry Bloomfield wrote this:-

Not having to replace the bulb so often. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

One will indeed only save a little energy over the space of a few minutes. However, little things add up over the years.

That would be a factor, if both types of bulb lasted for the same time and used the same energy.

Reply to
David Hansen

pompous lot of old bollocks.

Wiki woo to one and all.

Des Kay xx

Reply to
Anita Palley

You dont even know what it means, yet you know its pompous and bollocks. You must be a youngun to think that makes sense.

NT

Reply to
meow2222

David Hansen explained :

On/off type of use is a killer for discharge type lights and they do not achieve the full light output until a time after you would normally be turning it off again.

True, but you need to do the sums for what would be saved over the years v the extra cost of the lamps and their reduced life from the frequent switching.

Discharge lamps only achieve economy once they have been turned on for a while. I once saw the calculations for the short period use of a fluorescent light versus an equivalent output filament lamp - taking in all of the factors such as wear and tear, consumption, cost of labour replacing etc.. The filament lamp proved to be more economic upto 1 hours use.

Before installing these types of energy saving lamps and flourescents, I make a decision as to whether the extra expense is worth while for the type of use the room receives. Economy is not always factored in, because sometimes fluorescent provides a more suitable light to a filament light. I have around 70' of fluorescent lighting in my garage, this despite a small proportion being frequently switched, because this type of lighting is more suitable for this type of use.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield

How long ago were you looking at these calculations? CFLs are now really very cheap, and I suspect rather more reliable than several years ago.

cheers, clive

Reply to
Clive George

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:35:20 GMT someone who may be Harry Bloomfield wrote this:-

That was the case. However, things have moved on and it is not as great a factor as it once was.

Ditto.

Presumably you are talking about linear tubes, rather then compact fluorescents. What sort of control gear?. I have seen such calculations too, but such calculations in 1966 would be different to those in 2006.

For the sake of argument I won't challenge your "extra expense" assertion here. Do you think you are the only person who makes such decisions? Do you think that others might reach different decisions, or are your decisions the only ones that can be made?

Reply to
David Hansen

HomeOwnersHub website 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.