Since in a few years incandescent bulbs will become banned, I wonder if anyone will come out with a filament replacement kit for people who want to continue using the old incandescent bulbs? It's just a small piece of tungstun wire, it's just attaching it and removing all the air in the bulb.
The upcoming incandescent ban has a wide range of exemptions. I see little need to repair burnt-out lightbulbs with tungsten wire replacement (which requires lack of oxygen in the bulb).
I mention many exceptions as in I like to think loopholes that the Mississippi River can be rerouted through, in:
It's not a vacuum, I do believe there is an inert gas in the bulb. I suppose a market for a bulb that can be rebuilt may develop. The TV picture tube was an item that was available as a rebuilt replacement for a number of years. I used to change them out all the time back in the last century. 8-)
Why bother considering this when lighting that consumes 75-80% less energy, that lasts longer, is readily avalaible. Incandesants are outdated. I only use them in the frige, oven and a few other locations.
Correct. 11, 100w incandesants are equal to running a 1000 watt electric heater, Incandesants only put out 4-6% of energy consumed as light you can see, the rest is heat. They should be junked for the most part, they have limited use, there are better options for most needs. Now if you have free electric or subsidised cheap electric and need a cheap source of heat, then they make sense.
It takes a long time to reach full brightness, isn't very bright when it does, it casts a sickly glow over things, and you get mercury in your hair if it breaks? ;-)
Some light bulbs do have a vacuum, including most 120V ones 15 watts and less, as well as 120V tubular showcase/refrigerator lamps up to 40 watts, and many others with design current near or under .2 amp.
If the filament is thinner, then the temperature gradient in the gas around the filament is greater, and heat conduction loss by the gas per unit filament area is greater. At some point, it gets better to use a vacuum and run the filament at a lower temperature than it is to use the usual argon-nitrogen mixture. At some further point of decreasing filament diameter, it gets better to use a vacuum than it is to use even premium fill gases such as krypton or xenon.
Incandescents with a vacuum tend to have yellower light and cooler surfaces than gas filled ones of similar wattage.
Yeah, we have the heating on for 7 months of the year here, and half of that is electric baseboard anyway - I don't mind the fact that they're kicking out some heat during those months (although admittedly it's not particularly useful heat up at ceiling height)
I've really gone off CFLs in recent times. It's not just the color temperature or marketing-driven longevity and output claims, but the complexity, amounts of circuitry and plastic used, the lack of servicability (you can't just swap out the part that's actually failed, but have to ditch the whole thing) - none of that seems very 'green'. Not to mention that they're all made in far-flung lands and have to be shipped halfway around the world (but that's probably true of a lot of incandescents, too).
I'm going to hang on to my incandescents for as long as I can, I think - at least until LED technology is a viable option (and it seems to be getting better all the time).
The way I read this is that the filament's heat losses are all radiative in the vacuum case. The reason it runs at a lower temperature is because it is longer, otherwise it should be hotter for the same power out as it's not dissipating heat as fast.
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.