8 ms·
> Plus, they’ll more than pay for themselves in electricity savings compared to the old, inefficient LED bulbs they replaced. Sure, eventually, but without fur
by vanderZwan 8y ago
> Plus, they’ll more than pay for themselves in electricity savings compared to the old, inefficient LED bulbs they replaced.
Sure, eventually, but without further context this obsession with light bulbs always sounds a little bit penny wise and pound foolish to me.
The relative cost of lighting on the monthly electricity bill is tiny so those savings are pretty small. Getting a more efficient fridge, washing machine, TV or (in our profession) computer typically has a much bigger effect on electricity expenses. And that is assuming your heating and cooking is done with gas.
- coldacid 8y agoGiven the starting "plus" of that sentence, it's obvious that the author's concern isn't so much the energy savings of the newer bulbs over the older ones, but the improved quality of light over the now aged bulbs. With that much yellowing on the older bulbs and a per-bulb price only 1/9th of what it used to be, I'd replace them too without a damn about the electricity savings -- that they would lead to any savings at all would be a bonus.
- BurningFrog 8y agoI think people are always overly focused on things they personally touch and see. Thus environmental policy centers on shopping bags, straws, and light bulbs, rather than things that objectively have real environmental impact.
- azinman2 8y agoI don’t think anyone making such policies thinks that those things alone will save the planet. It’s about a mentality into the daily choices we make that makes the difference. That said, leds that are 13-15 watts instead of 60 watts does make a big dent into saving electricity at the country scale.
- lupire 8y agoThey don't make much of a difference. Like recycling, it's a way to feel like making a difference with Puritan work ethic, without regard for results.
- masklinn 8y agoI mean, without any numbers it's difficult to know what your understanding of "much of a difference" is, but replacing 60W incandescents with 10W LEDs can save MWh/year for a single property. A single bulb used 5h/day[0] on average means 90kWh/year. Aside from lowering the load somewhat, depending on the electricity prices the LED bulb might pay for itself in a year. [0] which is not really difficult, 6 to 7 in the morning and 18 to 22 in the evening and you're there.
- i000 8y agoThis is precisely Bill Gates attitude, he called it "cute" https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2011/05/05/bill-gates-wind-and-solar-are-cute https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2011/05/05/bill...
- moosey 8y agoLike eating beef. Quit eating beef, people. If we're going to fight climate change we're all going to be forced to give up most meat anyhow, so might as well start.
- mattnewton 8y agoThese wins are all relatively easier than weening the country off massive cattle farms, personal gasoline cars and jet fuel vacations, and they can still be environmental wins. I think the energy they take from larger problems is immaterial and so there isn’t any harm done.
- jak92 8y agoIf you live in a warm climate, the heat that light bulbs put out can be significant. Your AC needs to then remove that heat.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y agoThere's a simple joy in trading out some dying halogen bulbs for so much brighter LED bulbs which use the same power. It's absolutely optimizing in the wrong place, but it's super satisfying.
- lupire 8y agoWhy is it wrong? Halogens are a fire hazard and a heat nuisance.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y agoFrom an energy expenditure angle it's wrong when you could focus on upgrading washer/dryer/fridge, that sort of thing. But those are good points.
- jandrese 8y agoIn an energy savings per dollar spent sense that halogen replacement might be the best option.
- CharlesColeman 8y ago> The relative cost of lighting on the monthly electricity bill is tiny so those savings are pretty small. Getting a more efficient fridge, washing machine, TV or (in our profession) computer typically has a much bigger effect on electricity expenses. And that is assuming your heating and cooking is done with gas. The switch from using tiny space heaters for light to using LEDs that consume a tenth of the power was a huge savings. It only takes a few 100w bulbs to equal or exceed the energy consumption of a modest desktop computer.
- nine_k 8y agoThis is correct. I just thought that "everybody" has switched to CFLs 10 years ago, when they became decent.
- ip26 8y agoCFLs are everywhere, but came with a lot of downsides. My personal observation was that they were never more than 50% of the bulbs in a house (that I ever saw).
- lupire 8y agoThey never became decent. They were always loaded with toxic mercury that became a hazard if the glass broke, and they had short life and though some good one existed, the market was overrun with bulbs with long warm up times, bad color, and buzzing.
- ConceptJunkie 8y agoThey were decent 20 years ago. In my experience, the quality dropped sharply around 10 years ago or so. I've seen at least one CFL fail within a few weeks of buying it. LPT: Don't buy the globe ones that go over your bathroom mirror. They are practically pre-burned-out for your convenience.
- dwighttk 8y agoYeah, I switched a few bulbs to CFLs 10 years ago when they "became decent", and then switched them out every 6 months (i.e. when they burned out) until LEDs "became decent"... Haven't had as much trouble with LEDs as CFLs, but I'm definitely not paying $10+/bulb like I did with CFLs.
- Brakenshire 8y ago> The relative cost of lighting on the monthly electricity bill is tiny so those savings are pretty small. Only because of the successes up to this point. Marginal gains in LED efficiency aren't going to do much, but the shift from incandescent to LED has had a big impact.
- ars 8y agoAnd why is he comparing to Incandescent anyway? He should be comparing to CFL, and against CFL LED bulbs are rather poor - more expensive, same energy efficiency, same life. Why do it? I have LEDs in my house, but only because my local utility pays for most of them. If not for that I'd use only CFL's - they are cheaper, and just as good.
- coldacid 8y agoRead again. He's comparing newer LED bulbs to the older, yellowed ones he was already using.
- tialaramex 8y agoAll my LED lighting had better efficiency numbers than CFLs. There's not the same saving as going from incandescent because obviously you can only make that saving once. But they're definitely better. LEDs also don't care about cycles. A CFL doesn't like being cycled on and off very much. So that leaves a temptation to say well, I'll be back in here again in a minute and leave it switched on. No temptation to do that with LED.
- masklinn 8y ago> Sure, eventually, but without further context this obsession with light bulbs always sounds a little bit penny wise and pound foolish to me. Might be, might not be, it all depends on the usage of the various items e.g. let's say I've a 100W incandescent kitchen bulb, it's lit 5h/day on average, an equivalent LED would be 12~15W for ~$5 and will save ~3000Wh per week. Going from a Class A to an A+++ washing machine would save ~500Wh/cycle. And I can buy 50~100 bulbs for the price of the washing machine, so that'd be both penny foolish and pound foolish. Maybe "without further context" you should avoid hard and fast assertions, should run the numbers and should help people try and profile their energy usage instead of putting down their efforts?
- droithomme 8y ago> Going from a Class A to an A+++ washing machine would save ~500Wh/cycle. The major energy cost for clothes washing is heating the water. A rooftop solar water heater dramatically reduces energy use, often more than one would get from using the same space to install solar panels. A front loading washing machine uses less water than a top loading one and will also use less energy for water heating.
- masklinn 8y ago> The major energy cost for clothes washing is heating the water. A rooftop solar water heater dramatically reduces energy use, often more than one would get from using the same space to install solar panels. Most modern washing machine are cold-water only, washing machines with a hot water inlet tend to be prosumer. Same with dishwashers.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- droithomme 8y agoOK, that's very interesting. It's not true in the US, never seen a cold only machine. Wait, are you talking about the machines that have an electric heating element inside the washer? And you can still wash warm and hot cycle, but they don't require a connection to the hot water heater? Or are you talking about machines (which I've never seen but am willing to accept exist in other countries) that actually only offer cold cycle as a washing option? If we're talking about ones with an internal heating element, those generally use about twice as much energy to operate than ones that rely on a hot water intake. But with the two input machines one has to figure out the energy to heat the water as a separate cost, which is what I was mentioning. Gas heated hot water heater will be more efficient than electric heated, and solar heated will be most efficient of all.
- mikestew 8y agoGetting a more efficient fridge, washing machine, TV And after I've done all of that? Or maybe I'm looking for easier, less expensive wins than dropping $700 on a fridge? Let's not poo-poo the choice of replacing inefficient, CO2-producing tech by being quick with the "yeah, but...".