PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Timetable set to phase out high-energy light bulbs
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Electrical, Theory and Practice
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cubes



Joined: 10 Jun 2008
Posts: 619
Location: Norfolk

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

adam2 wrote:
If they are true incandescent bulbs, with an old style "squirrel cage" filament, then I agree entirely. Such lamps have an appalling efficiency, even worse than modern incandescent lamps. Vendors of such lamps often call them "carbon filament" which is untrue. They do not even look like carbon filament lamps, they use a tungsten filament and somewhat resemble the very early tungsten lamps.
It is however possible, IMHO, that some of the lamps that you have observed are in fact LED "filament" bulbs, these have a good efficiency and may be used freely if they produce the desired effect.


I don't know the correct term but I believe those are the ones.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6818
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The EU have announced draft proposals to ban the manufacture or import of tungsten halogen lamps used for theatre lighting and related purposes.

There would be no restriction on the sale or use of existing stocks, but manufacture within the EU, or import into the EU after 2020 would be prohibited.

Whilst it would seem that the UK will not be affected by this proposal since we should have left the EU by then, I suspect that manufacture may cease for want of demand.
Even before this was announced, Phillips Lighting announced that production of many theatre lamps would soon cease.

There have of course been howls of protest from parts of the theatre industry, all very over done IMHO. There is a good range of LED theatre lighting equipment available, and it will no doubt continue to get cheaper and better over the next few years.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4858
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would think the theater companies being the one paying the bills both for the lights and the electricity should be able to determine if a light that makes an actress look ten years younger compared to an alternative is worth the money? When the LED lights do indeed put on a better show they will be put in service at once, no government regulation required.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6818
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not convinced that most theatres and similar entertainment venues have got a clue about energy consumption and the costs thereof.

This is true of small and medium size businesses in general. For at least 25 years it has a paying proposition to replace incandescent lamps with CFLs or more recently LED lamps.
Yet the great majority of pubs, cafes and restaurants continued to use energy wasting incandescent lamps. A lot still do.

An awful lot of people are simply unable to grasp the figures.
Many such places claim that they cant afford energy saving lamps, but presumably have no trouble paying for the electricity wasted by incandescents.

Try asking the average non technical person the following "what is the approximate cost of the energy used by a 60 watt bulb over its life"
Answers are usually "less than a pound" or "a few pence"

The actual cost is about £10. Yet many small businesses "cant afford" a low energy lamp that costs £3 and should outlast numerous old type lamps.

In the case of theatre lighting , the average hours of use are probably much less than for general lighting in say a restaurant, but on the other hand lamp wattages are very much greater. Often in the 500 watt to 1000 watt range, more in a large theatre.
Much use is made of coloured lighting on the stage, and here the power saving is astounding when deep colours are required.
For white light, a 200 watt LED theatre lantern will replace about 1,000 watts of halogen. If a deep blue is wanted, then 200 watts of blue LED can replace 20,000 watts of halogen.

In a new or refurbished theatre, the capital cost LED stage lighting is effectively zero. The higher cost of the LED equipment is more than offset by the capital NOT spent on electric cables, dimmers, and switchgear.
A large west end theatre can have a stage lighting demand of over 1MW and normally requires a dedicated substation which costs money and takes up very valuable space.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4858
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

adam2 wrote:
I am not convinced that most theatres and similar entertainment venues have got a clue about energy consumption and the costs thereof.

This is true of small and medium size businesses in general. For at least 25 years it has a paying proposition to replace incandescent lamps with CFLs or more recently LED lamps.
Yet the great majority of pubs, cafes and restaurants continued to use energy wasting incandescent lamps. A lot still do.

An awful lot of people are simply unable to grasp the figures.
Many such places claim that they cant afford energy saving lamps, but presumably have no trouble paying for the electricity wasted by incandescents.

Try asking the average non technical person the following "what is the approximate cost of the energy used by a 60 watt bulb over its life"
Answers are usually "less than a pound" or "a few pence"

The actual cost is about £10. Yet many small businesses "cant afford" a low energy lamp that costs £3 and should outlast numerous old type lamps.

In the case of theatre lighting , the average hours of use are probably much less than for general lighting in say a restaurant, but on the other hand lamp wattages are very much greater. Often in the 500 watt to 1000 watt range, more in a large theatre.
Much use is made of coloured lighting on the stage, and here the power saving is astounding when deep colours are required.
For white light, a 200 watt LED theatre lantern will replace about 1,000 watts of halogen. If a deep blue is wanted, then 200 watts of blue LED can replace 20,000 watts of halogen.

In a new or refurbished theatre, the capital cost LED stage lighting is effectively zero. The higher cost of the LED equipment is more than offset by the capital NOT spent on electric cables, dimmers, and switchgear.
A large west end theatre can have a stage lighting demand of over 1MW and normally requires a dedicated substation which costs money and takes up very valuable space.

Then you would think the power company and the LED light salesman would get together and educate the management of the theater. A government mandate just arouses suspicions of cronyism and corruption.
I must say that my first experiences with CFLs were that they were way over priced and did not even a quarter as long as promised so did not in fact save even a penny. Cost savings promised and cost savings actually delivered can be two very different things.
I recently purchased a 40 inch LED TV to replace our old one that died. The energy use label on it says it uses $7.00 per year based on 5 hours a day and 12 cents a KWH I'm probably closer to 9 hours a day and 23 cents per KWH. So $24.00/year but that doesn't count the DVR box between it and the dish which (I'm told) uses 50 watts constantly working or idle and this Dell computer with wifi 110 +1.2 watts average 240 watts max on the computer so between those three things they amount to 39% of my 11KWHs per day.
Power just came back on here, wind knocked a line down this AM and I've been running on the backup generator.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6222
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

adam2 wrote:
I am not convinced that most theatres and similar entertainment venues have got a clue about energy consumption and the costs thereof.

This is true of small and medium size businesses in general. For at least 25 years it has a paying proposition to replace incandescent lamps with CFLs or more recently LED lamps.
Yet the great majority of pubs, cafes and restaurants continued to use energy wasting incandescent lamps. A lot still do.

An awful lot of people are simply unable to grasp the figures.
Many such places claim that they cant afford energy saving lamps, but presumably have no trouble paying for the electricity wasted by incandescents.

Try asking the average non technical person the following "what is the approximate cost of the energy used by a 60 watt bulb over its life"
Answers are usually "less than a pound" or "a few pence"

The actual cost is about £10. Yet many small businesses "cant afford" a low energy lamp that costs £3 and should outlast numerous old type lamps.

In the case of theatre lighting , the average hours of use are probably much less than for general lighting in say a restaurant, but on the other hand lamp wattages are very much greater. Often in the 500 watt to 1000 watt range, more in a large theatre.
Much use is made of coloured lighting on the stage, and here the power saving is astounding when deep colours are required.
For white light, a 200 watt LED theatre lantern will replace about 1,000 watts of halogen. If a deep blue is wanted, then 200 watts of blue LED can replace 20,000 watts of halogen.

In a new or refurbished theatre, the capital cost LED stage lighting is effectively zero. The higher cost of the LED equipment is more than offset by the capital NOT spent on electric cables, dimmers, and switchgear.
A large west end theatre can have a stage lighting demand of over 1MW and normally requires a dedicated substation which costs money and takes up very valuable space.
What is the cost of a 60 watt equivalent LED or CFL light over its lifespan as compared to a 60 watt incandescent?

I am talking here about a full comparison. That is to say, purchase cost+ running cost. I'll be happy to find they are cheaper, by the way. It's not a rhetorical question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6818
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Costs vary a lot so no great accuracy can be claimed, but here are some approximations of costs for a total of 10,000 hours use.

60 watt incandescent lamp.
10 replacement lamps at 50 pence each-------------£5
600KWH of electricity at 15 pence a unit------------£90
Total cost per 10,000 hours--------------------------£95

15 watt CFL.
One replacement lamp-------------------------------£5
150KWH of electricity at 15 pence a unit-----------£22-50
Total cost per 10,000 hours--------------------------£27-50
(note that I have assumed a 15 watt CFL, this will give slightly MORE light than a 60 watt incandescent, a greater saving would result from use of an 11 watt CFL, but that will be a bit dimmer. I have also assumed a purchase cost of £5 for a reputable branded lamp such as Phillips or Osram. Cheaper alternatives exist but may not last as long)

10 watt LED.
One replacement lamp at--------------------------- £6
100KWH of electricity at 15 pence a unit-----------£15
Total cost per 10,000 hours-------------------------£21.
(note that I have assumed a purchase price of £6, for a good quality lamp from a reputable maker, much cheaper alternatives exist but may have a shorter life or lower light output than claimed)

Both CFL and LED lamps from premium manufacturers should last longer than 10,000 hours, giving even greater savings.
Electricity prices vary a bit.

General features of incandescent lamps
Very cheap, so the best option if theft or accidental breakage is likely.
Are inherently suitable for DC supplies, or for AC of any frequency.
Suitable for high temperatures.
Will light, very dimly, on a much reduced voltage.
Drawbacks, energy waste, short life.
Also VERY sensitive to supply voltage variations, at 220 volts will be significantly dimmer, at 250 volts life will be significantly reduced. Both voltages are well within the permitted range in the UK.

General features of CFLs
Reduced running cost
Long life
Higher initial cost of lamp.
Don't tolerate extreme temperatures.
Some types are AC only, those that accept DC may need a higher voltage.
Most types go out at a much reduced voltage.

General features of LEDs
Lowest running cost
Extreme long life, if of good quality.
Higher initial cost.
Don't tolerate heat, but are fine in cold.
Some types are multi voltage.
Many are suitable for DC supplies.
Highly efficient coloured lamps are available.
Constant light on varying supply voltage, within reason.
Some types are dimmable.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"


Last edited by adam2 on Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:31 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6222
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for that information Adam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7864

PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good info Adam. I made a similar point in back in ...2005!

http://chrisvernon.co.uk/2005/10/lights-out-for-incandescents/

Quote:
At a personal level each 100W bulb used for an average of four hours a day will use 146kWh a year, costing £10.22 (at a typical 7 pence per kWh). Compare this to the 20W equivalent compact florescent which only uses 29.2kWh costing just £2.04 over the year, a saving of £8.18 per bulb. Say the average household has five bulbs with that kind of duty cycle and we’re looking at an annual saving of £40.88 on the electricity bill.

...

At the national level, each of the 22 million homes saving 585kWh a year would save 12.9 Terawatt hours. For reference, a large nuclear power station generates approximately 8.8 Terawatt hours a year. So just the single, simple, modest action of replacing the incandescent light bulbs in domestic homes (which could be phased in over several years as incandescent bulbs need to be replaced) would reduce our electricity demand by one and a half nuclear power stations worth.

If government were to ban incandescents in a similar way as lead pipes and asbestos are already banned, then the average household would save around £40 a year and the nation would save the construction, operation and decommission of one and a half nuclear power stations (or equivalent gas/coal imports). Other benefits might include reduced number of household fires started by hot lamps or faulty wiring (less current being drawn through the lighting circuit), fewer people falling off chairs or electrocuting themselves changing bulbs (since the number of changes would be reduced by 80-90%), and less raw materials and landfill needed for construction and disposal of incandescents.

Any absolute ban like this would also remove incandescents from business and industry providing further energy and financial saving on top of those discussed for domestic users.


Interestingly, incandescents were subsequently banned, and UK electricity demand has fallen, a lot, by more than a new nuclear powerstation's worth over the last decade (despite increased population).

LEDs are today the no-brainer that CFL were a decade ago.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
cubes



Joined: 10 Jun 2008
Posts: 619
Location: Norfolk

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

All we need to do now is get rid of those pointless decorative incandescent bulbs!

Also, don't CFL bulbs have significantly reduced light output by the end of their lives? Something LED and incandescent don't suffer from.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6818
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The light output of an incandescent lamp does reduce as it ages, though not by that much.
CFLs reduce in output significantly and should be replaced when the light is no longer adequate, reputable brands should give a good light for over 10,000 hours.
LEDs tend to reduce in output as they age, but for good ones the effect is small.

Age related variations in output are usually much less than variations caused by mains voltage variations in the case of filament lamps, or variations due to temperature changes with CFLs.

The human eye is not that sensitive to variations in light intensity, unless two lamps are compared side by side.
The old British Standard wattages for general purpose lamps were selected such that each wattage was about one and a half times the previous one.
15, 25, 40, 60, 100 and 150 watts, these being about the smallest differences that are noticeable.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4858
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If I wished to quibble about it I'd argue that incandescents last a lot longer then 1000 hours of use and CFLs don't last as long as stated above with many not outlasting the incandescent that they replaced. I have also seen a lot of LED traffic lights that were supposed to last 50,000 hours that have already lost whole strips of lights and need replacing because you can't replace anything other then the whole fixture, not just the lights that are out. But the reduction in power usage trumps all other arguments and that is where we are going to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6222
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally, I can't stand CFL's and never could. The light off them is horrible and the so-called "equivalent" wattages in terms of lumens for CFL's in comparison to incandescents are laughable in my experience.

LED's, however, I can live with. They have an issue with light spread. But, this can be adequately addressed with light diffusing surrounds on the LED's.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6818
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Standard incandescent lamps in the UK are designed to last for 1000 hours if run at exactly the design voltage. 5% high will halve that life, and 5% low will double it.
The position is made more complex by doubt as to what the design voltage actually is ? 230 volts or 240 volts ?

In the USA, 100 watt lamps have a design life of 750 hours, 60 watt lamps are 1000 hours and 40 watt lamps are 1,500 hours.

In both countries longer lasting lamps are available, but cant be recommended for general use since they are even less efficient than standard life lamps.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4858
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 2:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One thing you can't do with a LED is get any useful heat out of it. Things like a poultry brooder used to work fine with 100 watt bulb in them. The other day I needed to warm up the fuel filter on my tractor (-20F) and my work light that used to work on such tasks was useless as it now has a LED 10 watt in it. I employed one of the girls hair blow dryers to get the job done. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Electrical, Theory and Practice All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 9 of 12

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group