# LED home lighting



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Anyone had any experience with LED home lighting. Our halogen fixtures are biting the dust and I'm considering replacing them with LEDs.

Thoughts??

http://www.superbrightleds.com/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?product=MR16










We have a few still working fixtures where I will be putting in LED based bulbs for the 12 volt systems


----------



## iBrodie (Sep 11, 2004)

*Go for it!*

LED seems to be what they use alot over here in the UK and I must say it looks great its nice and bright and it seems the light bulbs don't burn out as much as other types, So I would say go for it!!


----------



## Jason H (Feb 1, 2004)

Sounds like a good idea, make sure they are made by a reputable company. Lots of these lights look generic, and that might mean non UL certified parts and fake CSA approvals.


----------



## mr.steevo (Jul 22, 2005)

Hi,

I find that LED's hurt my eyes. The christmas lights that are out now are difficult to look at. Granted, you shouldn't be looking into the bulbs you are considering, but it would be best to buy just one and see if it's light quality is different.

s.


----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

I've used the LED Christmas lights outside my house, and I've had no problem with them. I think the suggestion to try one or two first to make sure it is the type of light and has the qualities you are looking for is wise.

For all my room lights, I have replaced the standard incandescent bulbs with compact flourescents With a couple of minor exceptions, they have performed very well and give off a good light when it is filtred through a lampshade or opaque glass. I suspect that for your halogen fixtures, the LED will become the replacement light technology of choice, as time goes on.

Best of luck!


----------



## Fink-Nottle (Feb 25, 2001)

I've been trying to do this in my house with limited success. Last year I spent a large amount of money and replaced all of our kitchen potlights with LED bulbs. Unfortunately I found out that they would not work with a dimmer... they were either off or on. So my wife, who apparently likes mood lighting in the kitchen, made us go back to the regular bulbs.

In my basement I have small halogen potlights... I'd love to replace them with LED bulbs as the ceiling is low and you can feel the heat on your forehead from these things. However, I haven't found an LED equivalent.

If anyone knows of a good source for LED bulbs... either in Toronto or by mail, please post it here.

Thanks!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Obviously this is in emerging stage. The way dimming works on LEDs is to turn off part of the cluster.
They are also working on light temperature so the you can order the lights now in two differing degrees if you want warmer like incandescents or bluer/hotter like haolgens.

Here's you solution FN



> Ducat Recessed LED Fixture
> November 2005
> GVA lighting is proud to announce the introduction of our new recessed LED lighting fixture. The Ducat is available in seven standard finishes; including four duo-tone metallic finishes. The Ducat can be supplied with 3 x 1W LED in any of 9 colors, including Warm White. *Fully adjustable, this LED lighting fixture is available with a variety of optics and dimming options.*












http://www.gvalighting.com/

Looks like you were about a year ahead of the curve.

••••

I'm also interested in a good source and will be a guinea pig - no wife to satisfy 

•••

I'm going to look at these which are halogen racks with standard bulbs with the idea of subbing in the LEDs like these










http://members.shaw.ca/sagelighting/led_spotlights_and_bulbs_specifi.htm

Here is a link listing LED suppliers in Canada

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/byC/Canada/byP/light/LEDLighting/LEDLighting.shtml


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Anyone had any experience with LED home lighting. Our halogen fixtures are biting the dust and I'm considering replacing them with LEDs.


Seems to me they're nowhere near bright enough for anything but mood lighting.
50 watt halogens provide about 800 lumens

http://www.superbrightleds.com/MR16_specs.htm


----------



## Digital_Gary (Sep 18, 2003)

krs said:


> Seems to me they're nowhere near bright enough for anything but mood lighting. 50 watt halogens provide about 800 lumens



We replaced some of the pot lights at DPI and that is what we found too. 

Macdoc, talk to Brian. I think he may have brought some home. He might have some feedback for you.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

You're right  more research to come.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

We have switched most of our home lighting to fluorescent bulbs. 13 Watt replace 60 and 100 watt and power bills have dropped by about $20 a month. Be aware there are some limitations due to size of glass coverings, but we simply left them off.

We even use them outdoors where they are protected from direct weather by a glass casing quite successfully. I have yet to replace any of the four outside bulbs in just over two years of use. I used to have to replace incandescent bulbs two or three times a year.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Yeah, we have also switched to flourescents. Sinc, there are new, smaller ones available, and they solved the size issue for us. We had some fixtures that the flourescent bulbs wouldn't go into at all, due to the width of the base, but that is solved by the new smaller ones, too. They do, however, share the same problem of being undimmable.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC, don't you find that the quality of fluorescent bulbs diminishes too quickly? By quality I mean amount of light given and brightness? With these Canadian winters, we need all the light we can get. 

How is the quality of LED lights? I always though they were more "accent" lights...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

AS, I agree they are not as bright, but we have adjusted nicely to them as being normal and the power savings are indeed worth that small annoyance.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I switched to FL for some utility areas and overheads for cleaning staff areas but can't stand them for most home lighting.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> They do, however, share the same problem of being undimmable.


You can buy dimmable flourescents, but they cost more.


----------



## Melonie (Feb 10, 2005)

the light from most flourescent product is too harsh and unforgiving.

We use OTT lights, in various incarnations, around the house, in "critical" areas like living room, dining room, bedroom, home offices, sewing room.

Expensive but worth the $$$.

See:
http://www.ottlite.com/productsview...product_phosphor=truecolor&category=truecolor


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> I switched to FL for some utility areas and overheads for cleaning staff areas but can't stand them for most home lighting.


Why can't you stand them? The colour of the light? 
You can get them in all sorts of different "whites" just like the flourescent tubes.


----------



## ErnstNL (Apr 12, 2003)

I switched a few incandescent lamps to fluorescent substitutes and found it strange at first but suitable after getting used to the color changes. (a bit of a red shift?)
In the basement it works really well. It takes a few minutes for them to warm up to full intensity, otherwise they are fine.
The fluorescent bulb are available in tri-light too!

I HATE halogen, they actually hurt my eyes and give me a headache.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Melonie said:


> the light from most flourescent product is too harsh and unforgiving.
> 
> We use OTT lights, in various incarnations, around the house, in "critical" areas like living room, dining room, bedroom, home offices, sewing room.


Thanks for the head-ups - will look into some of them.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Melonie said:


> the light from most flourescent product is too harsh and unforgiving.
> 
> We use OTT lights, in various incarnations, around the house, in "critical" areas like living room, dining room, bedroom, home offices, sewing room.
> 
> Expensive but worth the $$$.


Melonie - You lost me. These OTT lights are flourescent too - just a different colour spectrum.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

We use OTT lights on the work benches as they are tolerable and the light is always below eyelevel but without dimming and spot control I find FL in general intolerable.

You want to see why - point a halogen at a fish tank then a FL - 
Human eyes are geared to point source.
Only indirect FL ( as Frank Lloyd Wright discovered as well ) is useful for other than utility purposes as far as I'm concerned.

I think LED will give the point control of halogens with better than FL efficiency but it's not prime time yet - might get a couple of the bright bulbs to experiment with.

Do we have a GTA source yet??


----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

I have found if the flourescent lights are under a lampshade or behind an opaque glass covering, the effect is indistinguishable from incandescent. I agree with you MacDoc, that, unshielded, they are murder on the eyes.

I imagine that as the technology develops, LED will become more and more the standard form of illumination; the energy savings are just too good to ignore.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> We use OTT lights on the work benches as they are tolerable and the light is always below eyelevel but without dimming and spot control I find FL in general intolerable.


I'm not an FL salesman...but you can get flourescents that are dimmable and they also make flourescent spotlights.
Most people have a problem with the different whites - trying to figure out which one is the most suitable.
Too many choices - you don't get that with incadescents.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Chris said:


> I imagine that as the technology develops, LED will become more and more the standard form of illumination; the energy savings are just too good to ignore.


Doesn't look as if these LED lights are any more efficient than flourescents.
From the webpage that macdoc originally posted:


> Model E27-W24 Narrow Angle
> 24-LED Medium Base Spot Light, 15 Degree Beam Angle - 120VAC
> 
> light output comparable to 15~20 watt incandescent
> Consumes just 3 Watts of power


A flourescent comparable to a 100 watt incadescent uses about 13 Watts.


----------



## Guest (Dec 20, 2005)

from digg.com today, not sure if it's been posted in this thread or not yet:

http://patmullins.com/ledlightmyths.html


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

They don't make FL point source and there in lies the problem.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Thought I would update.....

These are just terrific - we use them all over the place p erfect for desks and aquariums and at 4 watts we leave them on - nice ambience and they are VERY powerful.

Ikea LED task lamps are only 4 watts and cast amazing light. We light the aquarium and our work areas with them.











> Key features
> Includes light diode; has 50 times longer life than an incandescent bulb, consumes less energy and never has to be replaced.
> Gives directional light; good focus light.
> Adjustable arm for easy directing of light.
> ...


Our overhead LEDs are still a work in progress. We mix them with halogens.
Still waiting for the 300 lumens +in the 20 watt halogen form factor.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

My condo is all LEDs except the stove and microwave and I noticed about a 15% drop in my electrical bill. I would go for it.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

ALL LEDs !!!??? - details?? - you sure???...


----------



## mr.steevo (Jul 22, 2005)

Hi,

I'm considering LED's for my next home. These look interesting and are closer to a light bulb in appearance.

6-Inch LED Downlight Module, LED Recessed Downlight, LED Can Light

Too bad about the $99US per bulb cost.

s.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

IF you can afford to wait a year I'd do so.
It's pretty close to a break out in price/performance.
LED breakthrough may revolutionize lighting

They should really be in the same price range as Halogens.

Ours run 16 hours a day so it's worth the money tho we only paid about $40 average for a 20 w halogen equivalent ( 160 lumens or so ).

There is a big wave coming from majors

Future bright for LED lights in homes : Business : DAILY YOMIURI ONLINE (The Daily Yomiuri)

For task lights tho - the IKEA goose neck are rock solid and very useful even for accent lighting.


----------



## spiffychristian (Mar 17, 2008)

.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Maybe you should try a different manufacturer of the lights.

I have these 50 watt halogens in the kitchen as well and they last a long time - at least a year, probably longer, I don't really keep a track.
The other thing you might want to check is your line voltage, maybe that's high which would cause the lights to burn out faster.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I think you have a fixture problem.

Are they 12 volt??

We burnout maybe one light a year of a string of a dozen.

This string has been in place for maybe 6-7 years over two houses. They 20 watt 12 volt halogens originally with now a few LEDs mixed in.










We switched to partial LED 18 months ago ( you can see the difference - no back scatter on the lights on the other side and they are cool to the touch )










The high voltage bayonet - yes they burnout too often and as they do I pop in LEDs but the LEDs are not yet powerful enough for the kitchen.

That' my big beef is power for areas that need a lot of light.

I can't redesign a rental so that local task lights can work tho under cabinet LEDs are popular now and work really well.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

LEDs are close but there's still time to improve. They are getting brighter each year for the same power input. They do have advantages over Compact FL ... they don't catastrophically light on fire or explode, they are not toxic mercury laden environmental nightmares to dispose of, you can use them in enclosed fixtures (DON'T do that with CFL unless your fire insurance is paid up, and you are hankerin' to collect) and they are instant on at 100% illumination.

Larger CFLs are OK (the 17 watt - 60~100 watt incandescent replacements).

I find the smaller CFL bulbs (eg vanity lighting in the bathroom) to be the worst of the bunch. They take 2-3 minutes to come up to brightness and the failure rate is terrible; we've replaced 6 lamps for 5 sockets in the last year. When I go to Home Depot to get a new bulb, they have this huge bin of opened CFLs packages from which they just pull replacements from. They tell me CFLs are easily the most defective product they deal with, bar none.

You have to wonder about buying a ballast that cost $1 to make, when ballasts are the number one cause of FL lamp fires (and that includes the traditional long tubes with the $80 external ballasts).

Anyway, the vanity lighting is exactly the kind of spot where halogen/incandescent or LED lamps would be better choices. I would be inclined to keep an eye on, but probably pass on larger LEDs just right now. In a year that could be different. It's only a matter of time, as it's really the better, greener solution of all the options.

By the way, did anyone pick up on the press release from BC Hydro where they mentioned heating needs have gone up since CFLs have replaced incandescents? They say it's another 25,000 tonnes of Carbon they kind of forgot to account for initially when recommending the switch (BC leads North America with CFL adoption) and by 2017 it will result in adding 45,000 tonnes. They do say there is a net saving, but not as much as previously thought.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

gordguide said:


> LEDs are close but there's still time to improve. They are getting brighter each year for the same power input. They do have advantages over Compact FL ... they don't catastrophically light on fire or explode, they are not toxic mercury laden environmental nightmares to dispose of, you can use them in enclosed fixtures (DON'T do that with CFL unless your fire insurance is paid up, and you are hankerin' to collect) and they are instant on at 100% illumination.
> 
> Larger CFLs are OK (the 17 watt - 60~100 watt incandescent replacements).
> 
> I find the smaller CFL bulbs (eg vanity lighting in the bathroom) to be the worst of the bunch. They take 2-3 minutes to come up to brightness and the failure rate is terrible; we've replaced 6 lamps for 5 sockets in the last year.


Could you be a bit more specific which type of CFL bulbs you're talking about?

I use a lot of these that are the size of a regular lightbulb or slighly smaller - never had one explode or catch on fire, the ones I get also turn on instantly (I didn't think they sell the others any more) and I certainly have a number in enclosed fixtures - the CFLs run much cooler than the old incandescents so I don't understand your comment about fire hazard.
Oh, and failure rate.........much better than the incandescents they replace.

The only downside is the colour of the light if you're not careful to pick the right bulb and that tiny bit of mercury.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I've pretty much bailed on CFs as well for similar reasons tho we will run out the ones we have.
I mix up CFs and incandescents - there is a heating issue for Canada and other colder climates tho our computer load offsets that.

Both CFs and LEDs need cooling at the socket which tends to lead to early burnout.

As GG mentioned - hanging on a for a year is smart - lots coming.

Any task lights tho.....lose the halogens for LED.

I don't like CL as they are not point source - LED provide low heat, long life and point source.
They just need to get brighter.

I also really like the lack of scatter on LED so you have to be careful in evaluating output.

Our LEDs did not seem to light the room as well but when you examine the work area the light level was just as high if not higher as it was all focused and after all it's useable light that counts.

It's kind of add - you walk up to the work bench and the area looks dim but the stuff on the work bench is brighlty lit.
ONE 3 watt LED task light can light our entire 90 gal fish tank very nicely.

This unit has incredible lighting power yet only 12 watts - replacing a 100 watt halogen.....










400 lumens bright white 

Brightest LED Replacement Bulbs

But go slow.....I'm an early adopter and I HAD to get the heat load down in the main office area to keep the house HVAC system functioning properly.
So LEDs were a natural ( had to toss a bunch  ) and I had clients in the business so access to some of the tech for less.

But I tell you - being able to reach up and handle a halogen replacement putting out 160 lumens of focused white light .....and it's cool to the touch.......very very neat....and in the same string as the halogens and with a 10+ year life span expected.
That's tech I can live with.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

I've had a good experience with GU-10 replacement bulbs, from Lumia Bulbs, a company in Ottawa.

I'm using these, in replacement of 20W halogen bulbs.
High power LED Spot & Flood lights


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

This thread is useless without specific name brands and retail sources.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Then why bother to make a meaningless comment?

If you want info ask - the thread is a couple years old

*Dec 18th, 2005, 03:51 PM *

and the market is changing all the time. There's lots of info on the web and this is a discussion about where it's at by some who are doing it now and have spent money. It's not for your shopping convenience.

Have you read the entire thread???

There are links and some are old.....caveat emptor.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... Could you be a bit more specific which type of CFL bulbs you are talking about" ..."

Absolutely. This exact bulb; the link goes to Amazon so read it now; might change. The comments are spot on, in my opinion. Avoid.

" ... never had one explode or catch on fire, the ones I get also turn on instantly (I didn't think they sell the others any more) and I certainly have a number in enclosed fixtures - the CFLs run much cooler than the old incandescents so I don't understand your comment about fire hazard. ..."

Well, since you haven't had one exhibit a normal failure, you probably don't know about the normal failure behaviour. Note that were not talking defective bulbs, which may just stop working; this is what a perfectly good bulb will do when it dies it's perfectly normal death in so-many-thousand hours from now.

Melting plastic and smoke along with the smell of burned electronic components is the normal end-of-life failure mode. We are told that a normal end-of-life failure should not include fire, and indeed, the plastic used in these bulbs should be practically swimming in fire suppressants.

The problem being, that fire suppressants only work when the source of flame is extinguished ... it should simply stop burning then. But not before.

Secondly, these chemicals are all in the process of being banned (one group last week [March 2009] here in Canada) and once again, this is offshore manufacturing of a complex part sold at the lowest possible consumer-level price. Chemical quality cannot always be guaranteed, and some Chinese manufacturers have been known to omit pesky chemicals that cost all this money to buy and that won't be apparent to the end user.

We are told that this is not cause for alarm and is to be expected, but we're only told this when we ask, usually after a panic because smoke is a normal component of these end-of-life failures as well. I really don't have much use for the half-truth, so it annoys me that the agenda requires this info is kept from the public, to insure adoption. We're not children. Don't treat us that way.

For me, having some background in electronics and consumer electronics sales and marketing, I am alarmed at the low priced versions of CFLs I see for sale and the issues that can arise from counterfeit components, for example, with China manufacturing. Do not be tempted to buy the cheapest bulbs, in other words. Stick with reputable brands you feel you can trust. My experience with the Philips Vanity lights is not encouraging, to be honest.

Enclosed fixtures are a major no-no, and it should say so in the instructions included with every bulb.

The lamps themselves do not generate heat; they run cool. The ballasts, on the other hand, need free air circulation or you are risking a fire. If used outdoors, seemingly contradictory instructions insist they must be fully enclosed; what needs to be said is the outdoor use enclosed fixture must be rated to accept a CFL bulb to avoid the ballast overheating issue.

At a minimum, enclosed fixtures with insufficient free air circulation will severely reduce the life of the bulb.

See this older CBC story regarding a release by Ontario Hydro, and warnings from fire marshals regarding the proper use and installation of the bulbs.

Unfortunately, with Carbon Reduction and Green now carrying the aura of a religious experience, you need to carefully sift through the current literature and try to get to the bottom of issues these days. It is rarely all good or all bad and no change, including changes for the better, come without consequences and caveats. Keep an open mind, is all.

The short answer is they are recommended to replace incandescent bulbs but are not suitable for every incandescent fixture or location. Read the instructions carefully.

Users of WiFi might find a nugget of information in those instructions as well. I won't mention what it is, since of course everyone who uses CFLs has read them and they already know what I'm referring to.

As for ballasts catching fire, I had the experience many years ago of getting a phone call from the neighbours (basement suite in the same house) telling me the fire department had been called and that the entire home was filled with smoke. I had made it home (in about 5 minutes, by bicycle) before the FD arrived and was there when they entered the home. ** "Got any fluorescent fixtures?" were the first words out of his mouth when he smelled the smoke. Of course, we had just installed 8 double-tube fixtures in the basement a few weeks before.

Damage was minimal but you don't normally forget these things.

** I can still see the look on his face, fire axe in hand and preparing to swing at my front door, when I told him the door was open. He looked at me like I was the school-yard bully who just stole his toy. He reluctantly opened the door without destroying it, but you could tell that I had just ruined his day.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

gg -

Thanks for the Amazon link.

I had looked at buying some of these CFLs with the mini socket, but in all my fixtures that use them - not many - one can see the lightbulb and these CFLs don't look very attractive, so I passed.
Just as well it turns out although the implication of the review comments is that the GE version of this buld is fine - it's the Philips version that has a problem.

As to the normal failure of a CFL bulb - I don't think I posted that I have never had one fail (can't look at the previous page to see exactly what I posted) - I have had CFL bulbs fail but they didn't fail in the mode described in the CBC article. They just didn't turn on any more - that's all. Nothing dramatic in my case.

And as to the last link - the person whose house burned down.
Well, apparently he used a CFL with a dimmer - it's pretty obvious one is not supposed to do that and it states that right on the package before you even buy the bulb.
There are also CFL bulbs made specifically for use with dimmers.
The owner of the house that burned down made some comment that he is not the type of person to sue - well, the way I read the article, he misused the product, he doesn't have any basis for a lawsuit.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Okay, so, this isn't exactly *home* LED lighting, but may be of interest:

Roadways will light up with LED - Nova Scotia News - TheChronicleHerald.ca


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

New York is going LED as is Fairbanks.....in the North with the long night it makes a ton of sense.

A huge advantage is that LEDs are directable so the light goes where you want it - not to light pollution.

That something people need to bear in mind when thinking about home lighting - whatmight not seem like enough light miget be lots - on the flip side - trying to light a whole room with indirect bounce - you would have a hard time but then that's an issue with small halogens as well.

There are no torchiere LED AFAIK yet.


----------



## chimo (Jun 9, 2008)

If you really want to dig into LEDs and lighting in general, you can find lots of information at www.candlepowerforums.com.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

we have 2 sets of bulbs (in ceiling bulbs) for the basement in a 40/60 configuration. Because the LEDs light up too white, it is not the ideal lighting. Nowdays, with the small incandescent light bulbs, some colour temperature are slow to light up (in our case right now)

So, we have our basement setup with 10 bulbs (i think more actually, i have not counted them haha) Most of them use incandescent bulbs and the other part is lighted with LEDs. They are setup in such a way that either set of lights are one, they light up perfectly the basement living room.

So, we have the LEDs for going in and out (on, grab something and off to go out right away). The other set of lights are for when we stay in the room for a while.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... Well, apparently he used a CFL with a dimmer - it's pretty obvious one is not supposed to do that and it states that right on the package before you even buy the bulb. ..."

Absolutely, it does. However, when you are selling a product as a universal replacement for an item that everyone in the country uses, you need to be sure that information gets out. I don't feel that information, and a great deal of information about CFLs, is being properly disseminated to the general public.

Believe it or not, I know people who can't read, and SaskPower was handing out free CFLs; either going door-to-door last fall in cities and towns, or mailing them to rural residents, to every address in Saskatchewan.

I know others who never read anything, including packaging. Like the guy whose house burned down.

" ... New York is going LED as is Fairbanks.....in the North with the long night it makes a ton of sense. ..."

Actually, it's exactly the opposite with the north. At North 60 latitude, night from 4 pm to 9 am in December means artificial lighting with incandescents offers supplemental heating when it's needed most, preventing the burning of fossil fuels (almost entirely propane or wood) to compensate. The poor efficiency of incandescents is based entirely on viewing them as a lighting-only product; view them as a heating + lighting product and they are 100% efficient, with zero wasted energy.

In the summer, when supplemental heat is not needed (as much) it's bright enough not to need artificial light except for a 3~4 hour window (roughly midnight to 4 am), so there is nearly 100% energy saving, a level even LEDs could not boast at 45 north latitude.

For about 3 weeks around the solstice at N 58 (where I hang out in June) you do not need artificial light anywhere outdoors at any time during the night, and it's legal VFR flight rules 24 hours a day (sun goes down, but not to the 6 degrees below the horizon necessary to move to instrument flight rules). You get a bright sunset that moves north-northwest to north-northeast, then the sun comes up.

In the winter, at that same altitude, you have 7 hours daylight, and the sun begins to go down at 3:30 in the afternoon. From 3:30 to 4:00 you can actually feel the heat going away if you're outdoors; it's that fast and that much colder at night.

In New York, it makes tremendous sense, of course. At the equator, even more ... the amount of daylight is always the same with the seasons, and so is the need for supplemental lighting that does not add heat, which in that case is unwanted heat and wasted.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> ... New York is going LED as is Fairbanks.....in the North with the long night it makes a ton of sense. ..."


Gord...that's STREET lighting...


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I bought some stock in a Canadian company, Carmanah, that produces solar powered LED lightings for use in various places.

Carmanah Technologies Corporation > Home


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

Very good company, Dr G. I keep an eye on them myself, although I haven't bought stock at this time. Very well respected supplier to the US military, and some "other" agencies, by the way. Recession proof business.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

gg, my average cost is about 77 cents, so it is down for me. Still, I have this as part of my long term holdings from the profits I made in Pengrowth. Used them to buy Carmanah, ZENN and Western Wind Energy Company.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

This is not a residential LED issue, but it is an interesting twist on the movement toward LEDs...

LED traffic lights don't melt snow Boing Boing


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> This is not a residential LED issue, but it is an interesting twist on the movement toward LEDs...
> 
> LED traffic lights don't melt snow Boing Boing


It does pose an quandary. Perhaps the next generation of lights will have electric heating elements that can be activated remotely, when snow is present.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*GE sheds light on 40W replacement LED bulb*





> With many countries planning or having already implemented the phase out of incandescent bulbs, lighting company GE has unveiled a 40W equivalent Energy Smart LED bulb that consumes 9W, hence providing a 77 percent energy saving over its old-fashioned technological incandescent cousin. GE says the Energy Smart LED will produce nearly the same light output as a 40W bulb but will last 25 times longer. It is expected to be available to consumers later this year or early 2011.
> 
> While 40W doesn’t sound like a very bright light, the new LEDs have been designed by GE scientists and engineers to better direct light downward, and not just for use in lampshades and other low-light devices. The company hinted that many consumers are unimpressed with current LED bulbs that produce around 350 lumens. These LEDs will deliver 450 lumens, the equivalent of a 40W globe, which is the threshold to achieve the Energy Star rating the company has applied for.
> 
> “This is a bulb that can virtually light your kid's bedroom desk lamp from birth through high school graduation,” says John Strainic, global product general manager, GE Lighting.


(GizMag)


----------



## Jason H (Feb 1, 2004)

John Clay said:


> It does pose an quandary. Perhaps the next generation of lights will have electric heating elements that can be activated remotely, when snow is present.


Or just design lights without the top hats on the LEDs... or just cut off the bottom half of the top hat so the snow falls out. I've seen a few states that have that design and they dont have any problems with snow 

Oh wouldnt the heater negate the energy savings of the LEDs?


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Hopefully enough of you are interested in the topic to forgive the resurrection of a year-old thread...* 

*World’s first 100 watt equivalent LED replacement bulb*












> Currently the brightest options for those looking to ditch their incandescent light bulbs in favor of the longer life and more energy efficient LED variety are those equivalent to 60 watt incandescent bulbs, such as the GeoBulb II. Things got a little brighter last month when California-based Switch Lighting announced its 75 watt-equivalent LED bulb and now the company has gone one better with the announcement of the world's first 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb.


(GizMag)


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

This looks to me to be the first energy efficient bulb that will actually fit in the globe covered ceiling fixtures we have in the bedrooms and hallways of our home. Fluorescents were never an option due to their length. About time, but how soon they become available in Canada is quite another issue.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

I may make a plunge and try out some LED home lighting products. Costs are not so prohibitive anymore although they are still early adopter prices, and mercury containing CFLs should not be the future of lighting. I'm just waiting until Sept 26 to see what lighting rebates BC Hydro will provide.

I do have a few other reasons to try LEDs...

1. Light fixtures on dimmer switches, I will probably start with the dining room which is most used to test this out and keep my sons' room on incandescent for the time being, unless BC Hydro offers enough of an incentive...








Philips | 12W LED "A" Dimmable Soft White | Home Depot Canada

2. The need for instant on. I can deal with warmup times elsewhere but the kitchen is not one of them. 








PHILIPS | 7W PAR20 Dimmable Soft White (50W) - LED Bulb | Home Depot Canada

I am not disposing of any CFLs in the process, just the kitchen and dining room currently uses halogen and incandescent bulbs respectively. It wouldn't make environmental sense to replace any CFLs until they're EOL.

My electricity bill is $80 a month right now in my townhouse and I've been looking for ways to cut that. I'm expecting to save about $20/year so that's a payback period of about 7 years. lol. Maybe less depending on rebates. I also tried reducing the hot water tank by 10F which will reduce standby losses by $1 a month. I will also be insulating piping, none of the pipes are insulated from what I can tell. I won't do too much as I'm just renting but just whatever is exposed aka above the hot water tank.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The problem with globe lighting is it's very wasteful in terms of scatter.
That's why a 3 watt LED focused task light is lots bright even if it would be lost trying to light a room.

We use a 3 watt task light left on all the time for the upper hallway.....it lights a picture very well and provides just enough light for navigating around the stairs.










I find focused lighting ( we have one over the kitchen table that is brighter, much preferable to backscatter lighting.

Our LEDs over the work areas run way cooler than the halogens, consume way less power and provide close to the say lumens on the actually work surface which after all is the point.

Ideal lighting you only see the lit surface, not the light itself. Far easier on your eyes.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> *Hopefully enough of you are interested in the topic to forgive the resurrection of a year-old thread...*
> 
> *World’s first 100 watt equivalent LED replacement bulb*
> 
> ...


Love the 1 year payback bit. At 10¢/KWH that would mean the bulb would have to be going 7 hours/day 365 days a year to achieve that payback.

The; "Turn it off if it's not needed" solution makes much better sense economically.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> The problem with globe lighting is it's very wasteful in terms of scatter.
> That's why a 3 watt LED focused task light is lots bright even if it would be lost trying to light a room..


Definitely for areas where track lighting would be suitable then yes a focused LED is great. My dining room light fixture is a diffuser and I would think that bedroom lighting should be diffused as well, although a focused beam would make a great study/reading light.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

*Mild rant*

{Was intending to post this on my CFB rant thread but was unable to find it.}

One of my big complaints about LED Christmas lights is that the bulbs are not replaceable. One bulb goes and if the shunt goes as well, it's time for a new string. Hardly what I would call environmentally responsible. 

Reply has always been that the bulbs do not burn out. Not true. Dropped in at a local restaurant. One string has four burnt out bulbs, fortunately the shunts all still work or the entire string would be dead. The owner says he bought them 4 years ago. He runs them for one month a year and has never used them outdoors.

Also does not address the teenage thugs that come along and break a bulb for the sheer joy of watching the entire string die.

The bulbs seem to be removable and the smaller lights even appear to use the same base style as good old mini lights. Time to make those puppies replaceable. 

Electrically they consume less than 5% of a similar mini-light display but it seemingly takes about three times as many to bulbs to make an equally effective display. With that in mind a significant price reduction might help persuade some of us holdouts to make the switch.


----------



## jayman (Jan 4, 2008)

eMacMan said:


> {Was intending to post this on my CFB rant thread but was unable to find it.}
> 
> One of my big complaints about LED Christmas lights is that the bulbs are not replaceable. One bulb goes and if the shunt goes as well, it's time for a new string. Hardly what I would call environmentally responsible.
> 
> ...


Maybe the first/second generation, or the 'El Cheapo LED christmas lights do not have the option for replacement bulbs, But the LED lights we have do indeed have the option for replaceable bulbs. I just did this to one of our strands yesterday. The kit actually came with 2 replacement bulbs and a spare fuse.

The only reason we changed to LED was because of a promotion at our local building supply store, we received 30% off each new LED strand up to 5 new strands in return for "recycling" one old strand of lights, more old lights recycled = more coupons for 30% off... and because they now have "soft glow" or a more traditional look to them, not the bluish/white colour that LED lights are more commonly known for.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Good to know the bulbs are now indeed replaceable. Would of course be nice if replacement bulbs were actually for sale. In the meantime as some failures are obviously inevitable it is still a case of buying four strings in order to keep three strings fully operational.

What I found interesting is that all of the failed bulbs on that multi-colour string were the blue variety. Half of the blue bulbs had failed. Either a design flaw or a bad batch for that colour/brand.

I have seen one tiny display of white LEDs that had a reasonably warm appearance. The end of those cold whites cannot come fast enough for me.

BTW Am I the only one who cannot see the dark blue LEDs in sharp focus?


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*GE turns out the lights on CFLs*








Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) that could fit into standard light sockets only hit the market in the 1980s, but the signs are their days may be numbered. GE has announced it will cease production of CFLs this year and instead switch its focus to producing LEDs.

GE says that although CFLs managed to reach a high sales mark of around 30 percent of the US light bulb market, thanks in large part to an endorsement from Oprah in 2007, they fell to around 15 percent of sales in 2015.

While they're much more energy efficient than the incandescent globes they were ushered in to replace, many consumers didn't take to the quality of light they produce. CFLs also don't work with dimmers, take time to warm up to full brightness, and contain toxic mercury.​
(GizMag)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> *GE turns out the lights on CFLs*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And they did not even mention the RF interference. 

Besides in this part of Canada the heat they generate is never wasted. By some strange coincidence the three months of the year which do not need the additional heat, are the same three months which do not require the lights!

FWIW I bet if you look in your own home about 90% of your light bulbs are on at most 10 minutes a day. Some such as attic bulbs as little as ten minutes a year. Incandescent is by far the best choice for low-use bulbs since they are cheaper and use far fewer toxins.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Still buying incandescents for my house. Much cheaper by miles.



CubaMark said:


> *GE turns out the lights on CFLs*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Macfury said:


> Still buying incandescents for my house. Much cheaper by miles.


Really?

With all the on-going promotions and coupons in Ontario and Quebec, the most I ever paid for a brand-name A19 LED bul was $1.97.
Most of them came in at less than a dollar.
And they last at least 20 times longer than incandescent and use roughly one-tenth the power.
I don't see how they could be any cheaper than incandescents even in the short term.

The only incandescents I still buy are specialty bulbs where there either are no LED equivalents or the LED ones are positively ugly.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

this chart which compares all 3 should help you decide. 
Compare: LED Lights vs CFL vs Incandescent Lighting Chart


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Home Depot is selling 60W equivalent A19s for between $10 and $12 per bulb.

I can buy incandescents for $1.00 to $2.00 per bulb--and that's only because of government regulations that destroyed the economy of scale on their production. Power consumption is irrelevant to me since I use these lights most often in winter, where additional heat is welcome.

I don't like the cold quality of LED light either, so I will stick with incandescents.




krs said:


> Really?
> 
> With all the on-going promotions and coupons in Ontario and Quebec, the most I ever paid for a brand-name A19 LED bul was $1.97.
> Most of them came in at less than a dollar.
> ...


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

Macfury said:


> Home Depot is selling 60W equivalent A19s for between $10 and $12 per bulb.
> 
> I can buy incandescents for $1.00 to $2.00 per bulb--and that's only because of government regulations that destroyed the economy of scale on their production. Power consumption is irrelevant to me since I use these lights most often in winter, where additional heat is welcome.
> 
> I don't like the cold quality of LED light either, so I will stick with incandescents.


I see your point, most of the time I have the lights off since the cost of electricity is excruciatingly expensive, so at that point, it won't matter which bulb is on.

so justifying a cost of which type to use : cfl, led or incandescent makes no difference. 
I buy most of my bulbs at ikea which has LED on sale, otherwise i go to homedepot as my builder has installed some specific interface i have to purchase.

To be honest i do not see cfl or leds lasting longer than incandescent bulbs they are junk made in china, lucky to get a year out of anything.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

That 20x figure on CFLs is pretty much BS. If they are left on 24/7 they will out last incandescent about 10x. If they are turned on and off with any frequency then maybe 3 to 5 times longer. Not worth the ugly color, the on off 60 times a second....


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

eMacMan said:


> That 20x figure on CFLs is pretty much BS. If they are left on 24/7 they will out last incandescent about 10x. If they are turned on and off with any frequency then maybe 3 to 5 times longer. Not worth the ugly color, the on off 60 times a second....


I have been replacing brand new cfls that are less than 3 years of age - barely used at all.. 
I think that the quality of cfls are worse than incandescent ..


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Macfury said:


> Home Depot is selling 60W equivalent A19s for between $10 and $12 per bulb.


I wouldn't pay that much for an LED bulb either.
The last ones I bought at HD were Cree bulbs they were getting rid of - $1.97 each.
That's pretty much my $$$ limit on LED bulbs.

[QUOTE}I don't like the cold quality of LED light either, so I will stick with incandescents.[/QUOTE]

I'm getting the 2700K LEDs, they pretty much look identical to incandescent except that they are a bit brighter for the 60 Watt equivalents than a 60 watt incandescent.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

macintosh doctor said:


> I have been replacing brand new cfls that are less than 3 years of age - barely used at all..
> I think that the quality of cfls are worse than incandescent ..


Yeah, I find cfls terrible as well.
I'm surprised anyone still manufactures those


----------



## polywog (Aug 9, 2007)

All of our overhead lighting is halogen, and they are all on dimmers and usually on at only 25% if that.

For everything else we invested in Philips Hue. Sure it was expensive, but there is definitely a fun factor to it, and the colours are amazing.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

polywog said:


> All of our overhead lighting is halogen, and they are all on dimmers and usually on at only 25% if that.
> 
> For everything else we invested in Philips Hue. Sure it was expensive, but there is definitely a fun factor to it, and the colours are amazing.


I was talking to a contractor who specializes in halogen lighting and he said that if you place halogens on a dimmer, that only a little bit of energy is saved--most of the electricity is dissipated inside the dimmer switch as heat.


----------



## polywog (Aug 9, 2007)

Macfury said:


> I was talking to a contractor who specializes in halogen lighting and he said that if you place halogens on a dimmer, that only a little bit of energy is saved--most of the electricity is dissipated inside the dimmer switch as heat.


That was the case with very old mechanical dimmers Macfury. But modern electronic dimmers are extremely efficient (99%) and even magnetic dimmers are around 80%. With the electronic dimmer, only 1% of the load is lost as heat. So you do save a considerable amount.

The only downside is that you shorten the bulb life (with halogen) unless you run them at full power from time to time.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

I'm slowly replacing all my CFL with LEDs as they stop working.

All my GU10's are LED.

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

polywog said:


> That was the case with very old mechanical dimmers Macfury. But modern electronic dimmers are extremely efficient (99%) and even magnetic dimmers are around 80%. With the electronic dimmer, only 1% of the load is lost as heat. So you do save a considerable amount.
> 
> The only downside is that you shorten the bulb life (with halogen) unless you run them at full power from time to time.


Interesting, thanks.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

IllusionX said:


> I'm slowly replacing all my CFL with LEDs as they stop working.
> 
> All my GU10's are LED.
> 
> Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


The CFLs in my home are strange they a MR16 base with a GU10 adaptor which a 
GU10 CFL mini light fits in. They are burning out fast. The builder put them in. 
So as they go I replace them with MR16 LED lights by Phillips 6 watts but 50 watt bright. Amazing bulbs 2 years and counting. 
Instant on. Vs the CFL which takes 5 mins to warm up- which makes my wife swear
Each time.
https://www.homedepot.ca/en/home/p....--bright-white-3000k---2-pack.1000658588.html


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

macintosh doctor said:


> The CFLs in my home are strange they a MR16 base with a GU10 adaptor which a
> GU10 CFL mini light fits in. They are burning out fast. The builder put them in.
> So as they go I replace them with MR16 LED lights by Phillips 6 watts but 50 watt bright. Amazing bulbs 2 years and counting.
> Instant on. Vs the CFL which takes 5 mins to warm up- which makes my wife swear
> ...


We had those CFL back at the old house. My sister still lives there, but the basement where those are installed is not used anymore. Hehe
Not sure about them burning fast, but we had the for a pretty long time. They didn't get turned on/off daily though.

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Hate CFL's and not a big fan of LED's either. For one, the price to "upgrade" is prohibitive, and if you're going from a shorter-lasting pleasant light to a longer-lasting unpleasant one, where is the advantage? Incandescent lights tend to have a yellowish hue, much like the sun does, which makes them seem quite natural. I find both CFL's and LED's to be quite harsh by comparison. The mandate to eliminate 60 and 100 w incandescent bulbs from production seems more based on industry favouritism than customer demand. If incandescents give off heat, so what? That's less gas that you'll need to heat your home.

If they would make, say 65w and 105w incandescent bulbs we'd be home free; the only thing the law pronounced was that the two most popular SIZES would be eliminated. There's nothing to stop people from selling or using oddball sizes instead. I get a strobe effect whenever I look at an LED and shake my head a little from side to side. That includes LED lights pin cars, which seems to turn off and off more rapidly than they should IMO. They seem artificial. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

IllusionX said:


> We had those CFL back at the old house. My sister still lives there, but the basement where those are installed is not used anymore. Hehe
> Not sure about them burning fast, but we had the for a pretty long time. They didn't get turned on/off daily though.
> 
> Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


problem is with builders today they use the crappiest items they can buy in bulk from the cheapest supplier.. kinda like NASA and sell it as a premium product..

the contraption combo which is MR 16 base and GU 10 adaptor with a crappy cfl light on top was made by a company called premier which I can not find them any where ..
so I had to replace them with Philips LED lights which are by far a superior product.

besides when you attempt to change the builder supplied contraption - it falls apart in your hands - exposing live wiring.. which sadly is backed by a stupid Tarion excuse that that is normal. lol


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

This may be the single, most informative & inoffensive post I have ever seen you make on these boards.

Simple facts, no agenda, not trying to sell a bill of goods, no screeching. Thank you.

Carry on...



fjnmusic said:


> Hate CFL's and not a big fan of LED's either. For one, the price to "upgrade" is prohibitive, and if you're going from a shorter-lasting pleasant light to a longer-lasting unpleasant one, where is the advantage? Incandescent lights tend to have a yellowish hue, much like the sun does, which makes them seem quite natural. I find both CFL's and LED's to be quite harsh by comparison. The mandate to eliminate 60 and 100 w incandescent bulbs from production seems more based on industry favouritism than customer demand. If incandescents give off heat, so what? That's less gas that you'll need to heat your home.
> 
> If they would make, say 65w and 105w incandescent bulbs we'd be home free; the only thing the law pronounced was that the two most popular SIZES would be eliminated. There's nothing to stop people from selling or using oddball sizes instead. I get a strobe effect whenever I look at an LED and shake my head a little from side to side. That includes LED lights pin cars, which seems to turn off and off more rapidly than they should IMO. They seem artificial.
> 
> ...


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

FeXL said:


> This may be the single, most informative & inoffensive post I have ever seen you make on these boards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's because it has nothing to do with religion or politics. By the way, CFL's catch fire, and are not supposed to be disposed of in the same manner as regular incandescent bulbs because they contain mercury. I discovered this one time when I accidentally on purpose smashed one of them on the ground. The certainly shatter well. 

LED lighting we use for our Christmas tree, and I certainly see the strobe effect if I move my head while looking at them. We also use them for stage lighting. They're great there! Expensive though, and I wouldn't want to live under that kind of lighting. 

Somebody cut a deal to take over from the incandescent manufacturers, and they certainly didn't think things through. Proper lighting is crucial, especially on these northern climates when the hours of daylight in winter are so short. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> That's because it has nothing to do with religion or politics. By the way, CFL's catch fire, and are not supposed to be disposed of in the same manner as regular incandescent bulbs because they contain mercury. I discovered this one time when I accidentally on purpose smashed one of them on the ground. The certainly shatter well.
> 
> LED lighting we use for our Christmas tree, and I certainly see the strobe effect if I move my head while looking at them. We also use them for stage lighting. They're great there! Expensive though, and I wouldn't want to live under that kind of lighting.
> 
> ...


Not gonna name names, but the initials GE may figure prominently in the back room dealings.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

The lighting companies were complicit in pushing for the elimination of incandescents because the new bulbs were orders of magnitude more expensive. In the same way, Dow Chemical funded the push for legislation eliminating CFCs because they already had a replacement refrigerant ready and could get a jump on competitors.

I wasn't aware that the elimination of incandescents referred only to specific watt ratings. That's interesting. I take advantage of the loophole on "rough service bulbs" which allows for incandescents.

I agree with the comparison of incandescents to the sun. In the same way, I prefer street lamps that look like the moon. Pink and yellow-tinged street lamps look sickly.





fjnmusic said:


> Hate CFL's and not a big fan of LED's either. For one, the price to "upgrade" is prohibitive, and if you're going from a shorter-lasting pleasant light to a longer-lasting unpleasant one, where is the advantage? Incandescent lights tend to have a yellowish hue, much like the sun does, which makes them seem quite natural. I find both CFL's and LED's to be quite harsh by comparison. The mandate to eliminate 60 and 100 w incandescent bulbs from production seems more based on industry favouritism than customer demand. If incandescents give off heat, so what? That's less gas that you'll need to heat your home.
> 
> If they would make, say 65w and 105w incandescent bulbs we'd be home free; the only thing the law pronounced was that the two most popular SIZES would be eliminated. There's nothing to stop people from selling or using oddball sizes instead. I get a strobe effect whenever I look at an LED and shake my head a little from side to side. That includes LED lights pin cars, which seems to turn off and off more rapidly than they should IMO. They seem artificial.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Macfury said:


> The lighting companies were complicit in pushing for the elimination of incandescents because the new bulbs were orders of magnitude more expensive. In the same way, Dow Chemical funded the push for legislation eliminating CFCs because they already had a replacement refrigerant ready and could get a jump on competitors.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And it's official! Mark the calendar—we agree on something again. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## polywog (Aug 9, 2007)

Might be of interest to the incandescent fans

MIT: New Incandescent Light Bulbs Are More Efficient Than LEDs


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

fjnmusic said:


> Hate CFL's and not a big fan of LED's either. For one, the price to "upgrade" is prohibitive, and if you're going from a shorter-lasting pleasant light to a longer-lasting unpleasant one, where is the advantage? Incandescent lights tend to have a yellowish hue, much like the sun does, which makes them seem quite natural. I find both CFL's and LED's to be quite harsh by comparison. The mandate to eliminate 60 and 100 w incandescent bulbs from production seems more based on industry favouritism than customer demand. If incandescents give off heat, so what? That's less gas that you'll need to heat your home.
> 
> If they would make, say 65w and 105w incandescent bulbs we'd be home free; the only thing the law pronounced was that the two most popular SIZES would be eliminated. There's nothing to stop people from selling or using oddball sizes instead. I get a strobe effect whenever I look at an LED and shake my head a little from side to side. That includes LED lights pin cars, which seems to turn off and off more rapidly than they should IMO. They seem artificial.
> 
> ...


Rather than upgrading. I replace when they go out, so you don't have to throw out any perfect bulbs. 

I highly doubt the heat generated with incandescent bulbs is an issue. And is highly inefficient heating living space, depending where you install your lighting. Most of that heat go into the attic or subfloor which is totally useless.

But I have to say a 150w halogen desk lamp does heat you up pretty well working under it. 

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Hmmm, mot incandescent bulbs in our home are in table lamps and all heat is released into the room. The only place in our home where bulbs are mounted in the roof are hallways which are rarely ever turned on.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

SINC said:


> Hmmm, mot incandescent bulbs in our home are in table lamps and all heat is released into the room. The only place in our home where bulbs are mounted in the roof are hallways which are rarely ever turned on.


dining room chandelier as wife hates the bulky nasty NASA looking LED bulbs in a fancy light fixture, that's the only place in our house we use incandescent - family dinners the room gets nice and toasty. [40watts by 10 lights]


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

IllusionX said:


> Rather than upgrading. I replace when they go out, so you don't have to throw out any perfect bulbs.
> 
> I highly doubt the heat generated with incandescent bulbs is an issue. And is highly inefficient heating living space, depending where you install your lighting. Most of that heat go into the attic or subfloor which is totally useless.
> ....
> ...


Hardly an issue. If the house is so well insulated that the furnace seldom fires off and the air wants to stratify, then you should be using a heat exchange system to keep air circulating and bring fresh air into the home. 

Also as Sinc says ceiling lighting has largely gone out of style partly because it makes it harder to do a proper vapor seal of the attic insulation.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

eMacMan said:


> Hardly an issue. If the house is so well insulated that the furnace seldom fires off and the air wants to stratify, then you should be using a heat exchange system to keep air circulating and bring fresh air into the home.
> 
> Also as Sinc says ceiling lighting has largely gone out of style partly because it makes it harder to do a proper vapor seal of the attic insulation.


today's modern homes have sealed attics and properly seal recessed lighting
also our home does have a HRV, but I only use it, if we are baking or during dinner parties to assist with the circulation of hot air because of heat.

Our furnace fan is set to circulate air every hour for 10 mins regardless.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

SINC said:


> Hmmm, mot incandescent bulbs in our home are in table lamps and all heat is released into the room. The only place in our home where bulbs are mounted in the roof are hallways which are rarely ever turned on.


With kids, we hardly have any desk lamp. So ceiling fixtures and recessed LED lights are all we use.

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Wife picked up some soft white LED bulbs yesterday, 60w. This colour I can live with and it's hard to tell from the 60w incandescents. However, the price is ridiculous: one set were two for $10, the other was $10 each. Good god! That's as compared to less than $1 a bulb. This is not being done because it's better for the environment (they're supposed to last longer) but for the profit. And we really have no choice. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

I don't really understand all these arguments against LED lights.
Some of those may have been valid years ago but not ith today's products.

I like the colour of the incandescent bulbs, so I buy 2700K LED lights rather than the whiter (higher Kelvin temperature) LED lights so they look the same as incandescents
As to cost, for at least the last two years there have been constant promotions by both retailers and the various power companies in Ontario and Quebec - for both the 40 watt and 60 watt (equivalent) LED lights, I never paid more than $1.97. Still more than incandescent but easily recouped in energy savings.

For the dining room chandelier I found LED filament bulbs - not quite as nice as the incandescents which I still use - but getting there.










The biggest issue I have with LED lights is that there are so many things to watch out for when buying a bulb.
For incandescent it's basically wattage, getting the right type/socket and clear or frosted.
For LED types it's all that plus colour temperature, radiation pattern (which is usually not specified on the package), colour quality, dimmable or not etc.
Makes picking the right one a bit more tedious.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Three big issues for me as to LED lighting. 

Strobe effect. A killer with CFLs and still an issue with most LEDs. Curable with LEDs but very few manufacturers are gonna put a high quality power supply in a light bulb.

Spectrum. Despite attempts to mimic the colour of incandescent bulbs, there are still major gaps in the visible spectrum.

Cost. Take the 60 watt bulb that stays on 8 hours a day. At 10¢/KWH that's less than half a kilowatt-hour per day, roughly a nickle a day or about $1.50/month. It would take about a year to pay for a good quality LED bulb and I know the LED would not be comfortable reading light.


----------



## Kami (Jul 29, 2002)

eMacMan said:


> Strobe effect. A killer with CFLs and still an issue with most LEDs. Curable with LEDs but very few manufacturers are gonna put a high quality power supply in a light bulb.


Flicker bothers me too. However, the latest generation of Cree and Philips bulbs don't bother me at all. Have you looked at the LED light bulb displays in Home Depot to see if you notice the flicker?

Out here, LED bulbs go on clearance as the new models/designs arrive. Like krs, I've been able to get bulbs for less than full retail - I'm happy with $3.97 for a 800 lumen Cree bulb. They are much more stable when we have dips and surges in power during our annual winter wind storms. Incandescents can blow more easily than the LEDs


For those who are interested in learning more about strobe flicker

Proper driver design eliminates LED light strobe flicker (MAGAZINE) - LEDs


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

eMacMan said:


> Three big issues for me as to LED lighting.
> 
> Strobe effect. A killer with CFLs and still an issue with most LEDs. Curable with LEDs but very few manufacturers are gonna put a high quality power supply in a light bulb.
> 
> ...


Seems you have made up your mind that LED bulbs are not for you regardless of the facts.

The "strobe" issue was an issue a few years back with very cheaply manufactured LED bulbs.
Here is an article from almost two years ago that gets into details and solutions.
Proper driver design eliminates LED light strobe flicker (MAGAZINE) - LEDs
Nobody in my family has noticed any flicker effect with the Cree bulbs I bought about a year ago. If you still notice flicker in LED bulbs today, take them back and switch to a different manufacturer.

Colour Spectrum - probably the most valid one of your three points.
I assume you are referring to the CRI, not the colour temperature. Unfortunately, so far I have never seen the CRI value listed on the packaging of a consumer LED light bulb.
The CRI of typical LED bulbs is still poorer than that of incandescents so some colours may render a bit differently.
Article on CRI:
Shining a light on high-CRI LEDs - CNET

Costs - well, as I mentioned before, for at least two years one could buy good quality LED bulbs for less than $2.00 each. That was the time to stock up.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

My complaint with the issue of lighting no matter the kind or the colour is the price alone. I submit the whole intent was to open up a new market so manufacturers could overcharge consumers compared to incandescent which was no threat to global warming nor society.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

SINC said:


> My complaint with the issue of lighting no matter the kind or the colour is the price alone. I submit the whole intent was to open up a new market so manufacturers could overcharge consumers compared to incandescent which was no threat to global warming nor society.



Agreed. Also, it's one thing if you have money to start with and can afford to "upgrade" your home, but if you're poor or living paycheque to paycheque, the price of light bulbs can make a huge dent in your basic food/shelter/clothing costs, let alone your disposable income. I also see this as a cash grab, and the light bulb makers are complicit in this conspiracy. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

fjnmusic said:


> Agreed. Also, it's one thing if you have money to start with and can afford to "upgrade" your home, but if you're poor or living paycheque to paycheque, the price of light bulbs can make a huge dent in your basic food/shelter/clothing costs, let alone your disposable income. I also see this as a cash grab, and the light bulb makers are complicit in this conspiracy.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not saying one should upgrade, but it could be a upgrade as the bulb burns so you don't need to toss out any perfectly good bulbs. 

That's what I've been doing as bulb burns at work. Buy a few when they are on sale, and replace the halogen GU10 as they burn out with LED, and then never have to do it again.

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

IllusionX said:


> I'm not saying one should upgrade, but it could be a upgrade as the bulb burns so you don't need to toss out any perfectly good bulbs.
> 
> That's what I've been doing as bulb burns at work. Buy a few when they are on sale, and replace the halogen GU10 as they burn out with LED, and then never have to do it again.
> 
> Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk



Famous last words. I wonder how many people are holding on to and sorting their receipts by date for when one of those new bulbs burns out after three years instead of ten. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> Famous last words. I wonder how many people are holding on to and sorting their receipts by date for when one of those new bulbs burns out after three years instead of ten.


How do you prove the bulb matches the receipt? How do you prove how many hours the bulb was on? Whether it was properly used? I agree--it's unlikely that you will collect a refund on a burned out bulb purchased three years ago. 

It would also be a manufacturer's guarantee at that point. The store won't take back a product that old. "Please send bulb to Cincinnati, Ohio at your expense and we will refund purchase price at our discretion."


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I once bought a two year battery guarantee from The Source for a set of C2016 coin type batteries for $6 extra and saved the receipt. When they died in one year in my car starter fob, I took them back to the store. They refused the warranty claiming I had no proof they were in fact the very batteries purchased with that receipt. Consumer rip off anyone?


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

SINC said:


> I once bought a two year battery guarantee from The Source for a set of C2016 coin type batteries for $6 extra and saved the receipt. When they died in one year in my car starter fob, I took them back to the store. They refused the warranty claiming I had no proof they were in fact the very batteries purchased with that receipt. Consumer rip off anyone?


about 7 years ago i bought a bunch of CFLs - through rona, they died quickly, i gathered all the dead bulbs because of principal and returned them for new lights. they did say - this is a one time experience, I replied yup, "not going to buy your junk again" - sticking to home depot, no receipt needed - they just scan your credit card and your history shows up even after a few years - they are happy to exchange items.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

macintosh doctor said:


> about 7 years ago i bought a bunch of CFLs - through rona, they died quickly, i gathered all the dead bulbs because of principal and returned them for new lights. they did say - this is a one time experience, I replied yup, "not going to buy your junk again" - sticking to home depot, no receipt needed - they just scan your credit card and your history shows up even after a few years - they are happy to exchange items.


Home Depot? I used a respirator that fell off my face several times as I was removing asbestos tile glue because the strap kept breaking. I returned it the next day and they tried to deny a refund "because this product is in no condition to be put back on the shelf." I asked them why they would even WANT to put a broken respirator back on the shelf. 

Had to call in a manager who reluctantly offered the refund, but they were still lecturing me that they don't normally provide refunds for products that other customers have no problem with.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

fjnmusic said:


> Famous last words. I wonder how many people are holding on to and sorting their receipts by date for when one of those new bulbs burns out after three years instead of ten.


I only hold onto receipts for warranty purposes for something somewhat expensive - a lightbulb at $2.- or $5.- or even $10.- does not qualify.

In any case - if one wants to keep the receipts I would suggest to scan them; a lot of receipts I get lately fade and become unreadable after only 6 months
Or take the option to have the receipt emailed if that is available.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

krs said:


> I only hold onto receipts for warranty purposes for something somewhat expensive - a lightbulb at $2.- or $5.- or even $10.- does not qualify.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A good suggestion, but you're still going to run into the same roadblock others have cited: they will question how you can prove this is the same light bulb as the one on the receipt. If a bulb is worth 79 cents, I'm not going to worry about it. But at $10 or even $5 a bulb, times the number of light bulbs in the house, that's going to work out to a between $500 and $1000 investment right there, ballpark. I wouldn't call that minor anymore. It's a cash grab by the light bulb makers. 

By the way, you can make an incandescent bulb last twice as long with a dimmer at 90% on it. At 50% it lasts about twenty times as long. For those truly concerned about power consumption and saving money. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

fjnmusic said:


> A good suggestion, but you're still going to run into the same roadblock others have cited: they will question how you can prove this is the same light bulb as the one on the receipt.


That is a red herring.
Unless the item has a serial number you can never prove (and don't have to) that the defective items is the same one as on the receipt.
There are lots of items where one buys more than one - I never had an issue of getting any defective one replaced.

The bigger issue for the lightbulb would be the postage.
Cree expects one to send the defective bulb back to Mississauga - that would still cost more than what I paid for the bulb unless I end up with a whole bunch of them.

This whole discussion really revilves around how much one paid for the bulbs and how carefully one chose the LED bulb in the first place.
For me the whole thing made a lot of sense when I could buy the bulbs for less than $2.00 each.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

fjnmusic said:


> A good suggestion, but you're still going to run into the same roadblock others have cited: they will question how you can prove this is the same light bulb as the one on the receipt. If a bulb is worth 79 cents, I'm not going to worry about it. But at $10 or even $5 a bulb, times the number of light bulbs in the house, that's going to work out to a between $500 and $1000 investment right there, ballpark. I wouldn't call that minor anymore. It's a cash grab by the light bulb makers.
> 
> By the way, you can make an incandescent bulb last twice as long with a dimmer at 90% on it. At 50% it lasts about twenty times as long. For those truly concerned about power consumption and saving money.
> 
> ...


You must have a really big house to even have 100+ bulbs. Who's living under avg income and pay cheque to pay cheque again?

I barely have 30 bulbs in the house. Bump that to 40ish when I finish the basement with recessed spotlights.

Over the course of 5 years, I've only replaced half of these bulbs to LED, 8 of which were newly installed recessed lights. 

It's gonna take as long to wait for the other CFL to burn, and get LED replacements. 

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

As I lay here in the master bedroom, I count 3 in the ceiling fan, two in the closet, two in the bedside lamps, five over the vanity, 2 more on the ceiling in the bathroom. That's 14 and this room doesn't even have recessed ceiling lights. I think 100 (including 8 in the garage) is a realistic round estimate. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> As I lay here in the master bedroom, I count 3 in the ceiling fan, two in the closet, two in the bedside lamps, five over the vanity, 2 more on the ceiling in the bathroom. That's 14 and this room doesn't even have recessed ceiling lights. I think 100 (including 8 in the garage) is a realistic round estimate.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Of which about 80 are probably used for less than 15 minutes a day making energy savings completely meaningless. If these are 60 watters, it would take at least 5 years for a $2 replacement bulb to pay for itself in energy savings. 

I am guessing that more than 20 are used for less than 60 minutes a year. Let's see, if those are 100 watters and you are paying 10¢/KWH, it would take at least 200 years to pay for a $2 LED with the energy saved.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

Here, I have about 15 bulbs that gets daily usage. (3-5hours a day) which are 6 ceiling lights in the loving room, 3 in the kitchen, 2 outside, 1 dining table, 2 bathroom and one bulb in each bedroom.

These are all LED. The rest are CFL, like lobby area, den area, guest room, and office. Places that require fast light up, such as half bath gets to keep incandescent bulbs. 

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

2012, 13 and 14 I spent quite a bit of time traveling and more than a few nights in motels. CFBs were unavoidable and I can say with absolute certainty that in the bath area, lights other than incandescent either make me look like a corpse or a heart attack waiting to happen. Full visible spectrum is a big deal!


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

eMacMan said:


> 2012, 13 and 14 I spent quite a bit of time traveling and more than a few nights in motels. CFBs were unavoidable and I can say with absolute certainty that in the bath area, lights other than incandescent either make me look like a corpse or a heart attack waiting to happen. Full visible spectrum is a big deal!


You are absolutely right, I don't think anyone will argue that point.
Compact flourescents are terrible in that respect - their CRI value is between 50 and maybe 80 for the very good ones.
But LED bulbs are much better with a CRI typically over 90 which brings the CRI close to those of incandescents.
With the LED bulbs I have, mostly CREE, it's hard to tell the difference between incandescenst and LED bulbs. LED bulbs are often perceived to be brighter than the 'equivalent' incandescent - probably because the incandescents are older and have decreased in brightness from their original new value.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

The $2 price tag for LED standard replacement bulbs seemed a bit suspect to me. Was in Walmart yesterday and priced them out.

LED 60W equivalent: Cost $11, consumes 10W, rated at 25,000 hours.

Halogen 60W equivalent: Cost $2.10, Consumes 43 Watts, rated at 6000 hours.

Here's the math based on half an hour per day and 10¢/KWH. It will take 15 years to pay for the price difference in the bulbs. I would consider the lifespan rating to be the maximum not the expected but even so neither bulb should require replacement.

The halogen of course has pretty much an ideal color spectrum where as the LED by definition must have gaps.

Both bulbs would require DC conversion and voltage reduction built into the device, so I wonder if this could pose a slightly increased fire risk as opposed to incandescent bulbs?

*Note to those not logged in: I notice that ehMac has inserted an adlink to Walmart into my post. This is click bait and not a link to Walmarts price on LED bulbs.*


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> The $2 price tag for LED standard replacement bulbs seemed a bit suspect to me. Was in Walmart yesterday and priced them out.
> 
> LED 60W equivalent: Cost $11, consumes 10W, rated at 25,000 hours.
> 
> ...


'Twould appear so at least for LEDs. Article is short on details despite being a bit verbose.
Lighting Science issues recall of 554,000 LED bulbs because of fire hazard | News | Geek.com


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

eMacMan said:


> The $2 price tag for LED standard replacement bulbs seemed a bit suspect to me. Was in Walmart yesterday and priced them out.
> 
> LED 60W equivalent: Cost $11, consumes 10W, rated at 25,000 hours.
> 
> ...


Couple of comments:

The $2.00,price tag I was referring to, and I thought I made that clear, was with a $5.00 per bulb instant rebate that was offered throughout by Ontario Hydro and Hydro Quebec.
Stores typically reduced their regular price to about $7.00 and then one could apply the $5.00 coupon.
I saw oeple walking out with a full shopping cart of LED bulbs using the coupon.
$2.00 wasn't even the best price, occasionally one could get them for 97 cnts, ie $5.97 on sale less the $5.00 coupon.
The cheapest regular LED 60 Watt equivalent now without a coupon seems to be around $7.00
https://www.homedepot.ca/en/home/p....19-slimstyle-soft-white-2700k.1000747940.html

LED bulbs require conversion to DC but Halogen bulbs don't.
Halogen bulbs are still incandescent bulbs that are filled with a bit of halogen gas. That provides a number of benefits.
For LED bulbs, the high AC voltage to low DC voltage conversion requires quite a bit of circuitry in the base of the bulb - that's why those bulbs will never come down in manufacturing cost to that of incandescents.
It also makes the base pretty hot - easy to burn your fingers when touching the base, the LED portion itself does not get very hot.

Not sure where you got the idea that an LED "by definition" must have gaps in the colour spectrum or what you even mean by "ideal colour spectrum"


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

eMacMan said:


> 'Twould appear so at least for LEDs. Article is short on details despite being a bit verbose.
> Lighting Science issues recall of 554,000 LED bulbs because of fire hazard | News | Geek.com


Not sure what the purpose of the link is - that recal was almost 3 years ago, LED bulbs have come a long way since.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

This basic grade school experiment should explain what I mean by full spectrum lighting.

The Creative Science Centre - by Dr Jonathan P. Hare

Just repeat with one of your LEDs. If the full rainbow is projected, you have full visible spectrum lighting. If there are gaps or visibly weak portions, then you do not.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

Don't forget that many many builders use MR16 bulbs!! These are 12v bulbs that require a power supply to work. 

But I guess all of ehmac uses E27 base incandescent bulbs that can be had for a dollar for 4.

/no offence.

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kami (Jul 29, 2002)

eMacMan said:


> This basic grade school experiment should explain what I mean by full spectrum lighting.
> 
> The Creative Science Centre - by Dr Jonathan P. Hare
> 
> Just repeat with one of your LEDs. If the full rainbow is projected, you have full visible spectrum lighting. If there are gaps or visibly weak portions, then you do not.


Did you read the article that you posted? Here is what the light source was in the experiment

_"I used a powerful (2W) white LED in the light box. This is not a truly multicoloured white light source like the rays from the Sun for example. As a result the spectrum is not quite so perfect as you would see produced by small rain drops in the wonderful display of a rainbow."

_The photo on the web page is showing pretty much the full spectrum of light_ - _there are no visible gaps


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Kami said:


> Did you read the article that you posted? Here is what the light source was in the experiment
> 
> _"I used a powerful (2W) white LED in the light box. This is not a truly multicoloured white light source like the rays from the Sun for example. As a result the spectrum is not quite so perfect as you would see produced by small rain drops in the wonderful display of a rainbow."
> 
> _The photo on the web page is showing pretty much the full spectrum of light_ - _there are no visible gaps


I included that to illustrate what I meant by full spectrum lighting. 

If the light box was set up to produce a full clean spectrum then the interior lining will be white and probably contain phosphors. If it is intended to show the quality of the light source the lining would need to be flat black. The experiment speaks only to that particular bulb/lightbox set-up. 

So called white LEDs may or may not offer full spectrum output, it depends entirely on their design.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> I included that to illustrate what I meant by full spectrum lighting.
> 
> If the light box was set up to produce a full clean spectrum then the interior lining will be white and probably contain phosphors. If it is intended to show the quality of the light source the lining would need to be flat black. The experiment speaks only to that particular bulb/lightbox set-up.
> 
> So called white LEDs may or may not offer full spectrum output, it depends entirely on their design.



"Full spectrum" may not be what people actually want, truth be told. The sun is full spectrum, but it's white balance is also off centre which produces a yellowish light compared to pure white light. I think most people prefer the yellowish light whether they realize it or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> "Full spectrum" may not be what people actually want, truth be told. The sun is full spectrum, but it's white balance is also off centre which produces a yellowish light compared to pure white light. I think most people prefer the yellowish light whether they realize it or not.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Most CFBs have both Gaps and spikes in the spectrum. It does not make for pleasant lighting.

LEDs are much better than CFBs but have still seen them make produce in a grocery store look absolutely repulsive. 

Personally I prefer a slight shift to the yellow but my photo background demands the entire spectrum be present and accounted for.

For judging color balance on prints I will stick with a good halogen bulb. Reading lights have to be incandescent. 

It all comes down to how one uses the lighting in their home. An incandescent in the off position uses a lot less juice than an LED or CFB that is turned on. 

Our home has good daytime lighting so no lights at all except in the bathroom. Those are on a fair bit less than an hour a day, so energy savings obtained by switching would never be noticeable in the monthly bill. We have one light in the kitchen which is on for as much as 10 hours a day in the winter. However that portion of the house tends to be too cold anyhow so zero energy wasted, and the only reason to risk making food look ugly is if you are trying to lose weight.

Other than that a tripower reading light. Big base, tripower combo makes alternate bulbs very expensive. If someone is reading it's always on the lowest setting, daylight it's off, after dark it's on but it's also on a dimmer. All other lights are less than 5 minutes a day and at least half of them are probably less than 15 minutes a month.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

If anyone is worried about the light "quality" look for the CRI value of the bulb.
Unfortunately most manufacturers don't list it on the package.

CFLs are around 50 which is pretty bad
Worst I have seen for LEDs is 80 which is reasonably good - a higher number is better, the highest it can be is 100
An LED with a CRI of 90 or better is excellent


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

And if anyone is interested in a good deal on LEDs right now:

TSC is offering their60 Watt equivalen at a final price of $2.99 each
Regular price is $10.99, on sale for $5.99 plus a $3.00 "Save Energy" coupon brings the price down to $2.99 each

Home Hardware is offering a 60 Watt equivalent LED two packfor $8.97 (Regular price is $12.99)
Those bulbs are Sylvania/Osram so they should be pretty good although I don't have any.

For any of those I would recomment you try one to see how you like it.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> However that portion of the house tends to be too cold anyhow so zero energy wasted, and the only reason to risk making food look ugly is if you are trying to lose weight.



Awesome! 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Amiga2000HD (Jan 23, 2007)

I moved from an all-utilities-included apartment to a house about three years ago. Most of the lights in the house were burnt out so each time I viewed the place I had to unscrew one of the few working light bulbs and take it with me from room to room, but it gave me the opportunity to change over to energy efficient lighting when I moved in. That was front of mind at the time since I hadn't been exposed to paying utility bills directly before and I wanted to keep the operating costs down. LEDs weren't affordable at the time so I bought compact fluorescents instead.

I wasn't thrilled about about the startup times or the quality of the light they threw off but the thing that got me was when I spent most of the day in the basement assmebling furniture and I got a sunburn down one side of my face. I wondered if it might have been one of the unshaded CFLs throwing off ultraviolet light because I couldn't think of any other possible UV source that would've accounted for that since it was the middle of February when that happened and I was not spending any time outdoors so it couldn't be sunlight at fault. I did some research and found out that depositing the phosphor coating on the inside of the small diameter spiral tubes can be difficult and result in uneven coatings that allow UV to leak out. Sure enough, when I checked there was clear glass where flecks of phosphor were missing, and it made sense. I pulled the CFLs and replaced them with incandescents after I found out that most LED lighting works the same way except it's a diode generating the UV to excite phosphor instead of a mercury discharge tube.

Since then, my electricity bill has gone down significantly. I replaced the electric water heater with a gas one. If I were to replace the electric stove with a gas one and the clothes driver with a gas fired one, my electric bill would drop further. Changing the light bulbs didn't really affect the electric bill all that much but getting rid of the 3,000 watt water heater element that switched on every time someone ran the hot water made a huge difference. Replacing the stove would probably make a huge difference too since the bake element in the oven is another 3,000 watt element and there's probably several thousand more watts used by the stovetop burners whenever it's time to cook dinner. There's far more kilowatt hours to be saved elsewhere besides lighting, and I don't mind paying for good quality electric light for the little of it I actually do use.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Amiga2000HD said:


> I moved from an all-utilities-included apartment to a house about three years ago. Most of the lights in the house were burnt out so each time I viewed the place I had to unscrew one of the few working light bulbs and take it with me from room to room, but it gave me the opportunity to change over to energy efficient lighting when I moved in. That was front of mind at the time since I hadn't been exposed to paying utility bills directly before and I wanted to keep the operating costs down. LEDs weren't affordable at the time so I bought compact fluorescents instead.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Now we're talking. It was never about conserving energy; it was about forcing people to pay more money for light bulbs. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> Now we're talking. It was never about conserving energy; it was about forcing people to pay more money for light bulbs.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Bingo! As I've said before swapping out light bulbs is extremely unlikely to make even a minor dent in the electrical bill. Especially in Alberta where more than half the bill is in the form of privatization gouge fees.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Amiga2000HD said:


> I did some research and found out that depositing the phosphor coating on the inside of the small diameter spiral tubes can be difficult and result in uneven coatings that allow UV to leak out. Sure enough, when I checked there was clear glass where flecks of phosphor were missing, and it made sense. I pulled the CFLs and replaced them with incandescents after I found out that most LED lighting works the same way except it's a diode generating the UV to excite phosphor instead of a mercury discharge tube.


Don't know where you got the information that LED bulbs emit a lot of UV but that is wrong.
All bulbs we use in the house emit some UV, but LED bulbs emit hardly any UV and ertainly less than the existing incandescent bulbs.
More detail here:
What Light Bulbs Do Not Emit UV Radiation? | The Classroom | Synonym


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

fjnmusic said:


> Now we're talking. It was never about conserving energy; it was about forcing people to pay more money for light bulbs.


For the manufacturers, that was probably the primary incentive to make and promote them. 

I'm just happy that almost everyone is ignoring the incandescent "ban", and you can still buy them all over the place, because the LEDs are definitely NOT lasting anywhere near as long as advertised. If they do last longer than incandescents, the difference is negligible. Nowhere near enough to justify their cost. They also don't work at all in my outdoor fixtures when it gets below -20C. Unfortunately, my new fixtures only use proprietary LEDs, so I just have no front light when it's cold.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

krs said:


> Don't know where you got the information that LED bulbs emit a lot of UV but that is wrong.
> All bulbs we use in the house emit some UV, but LED bulbs emit hardly any UV and ertainly less than the existing incandescent bulbs.
> More detail here:
> What Light Bulbs Do Not Emit UV Radiation? | The Classroom | Synonym


Pretty sure he was referring to CFBs not LEDs. 

BTW Besides Mercury CFBs also contain another toxin, Phosphors. Those are included in a failed attempt to smooth out the color output.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

eMacMan said:


> 2012, 13 and 14 I spent quite a bit of time traveling and more than a few nights in motels. CFBs were unavoidable and I can say with absolute certainty that in the bath area, lights other than incandescent either make me look like a corpse or a heart attack waiting to happen. Full visible spectrum is a big deal!


As an artist, I find it to be a big deal as well. Drives my wife nuts that I work in the dark, but it's the only way I can get a reasonably accurate impression of the colours coming off my monitor. We do this in the office too -- all of the flourescent balasts within 40 feet of the colour dept have their bulbs removed, and we have colour accurate viewing booths when we need to look at proofs and reference material.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

krs said:


> Don't know where you got the information that LED bulbs emit a lot of UV but that is wrong.
> All bulbs we use in the house emit some UV, but LED bulbs emit hardly any UV and ertainly less than the existing incandescent bulbs.
> More detail here:
> What Light Bulbs Do Not Emit UV Radiation? | The Classroom | Synonym


That isn't entirely true either:

Nouvir Lighting - News



> The photo above shows a UVX Radiometer using a 200nm-300nm head (UVB and UVC) in the actual testing of a major brand "white" LED luminaire. The meter shows a UV output of 3.8"W/cm2 for their "cool white" LEDS. The spectral power distribution from the manufacturer's website shows peak output for this LED to be roughly the same intensity, 3.7"W/ cm2. *Their "warm white" LEDs show even worse results, a peak output of 1.9"W/cm2 and a short wave UV output of 2.9"W/cm2. The bottom line is that these fixtures put out as much UV as they do blue light. *
> 
> *Despite some manufacturer claims, LED sources are not UV and IR free. Their high short wave UV output makes them particularly dangerous for art and artifacts. Without significant secondary UV filtering LEDs are not acceptable light sources for fugitive or fragile materials and do not meet IESNA guidelines for museum lighting. *


To be fair, most people don't need museum quality lighting to protect sensitive artifacts, and most people don't make their living from colour accuracy, so the concerns the Nouvir find critical to their business obviously won't be much of a concern to most people.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

heavyall said:


> For the manufacturers, that was probably the primary incentive to make and promote them.
> 
> I'm just happy that almost everyone is ignoring the incandescent "ban", and you can still buy them all over the place, because the LEDs are definitely NOT lasting anywhere near as long as advertised. If they do last longer than incandescents, the difference is negligible. Nowhere near enough to justify their cost. They also don't work at all in my outdoor fixtures when it gets below -20C. Unfortunately, my new fixtures only use proprietary LEDs, so I just have no front light when it's cold.


I don't think you will have the problems you mention if you buy a quality LED bulb from a major manufacturer.
I have had LED bulbs for about three years now and so far not a single one has burnt out, I also have four LED bulbs outside and at -28C they work just fine.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

It's clockwork. Any brand. They do not work when it's cold, and always work fine as soon as it warms up a little bit. 

I get about 6 months out of the bulbs that get left on the most, which is pretty much the average for any bulb in any fixture that we've used. In low use areas, yeah, they've lasted much longer. But so do incandescents.


----------



## Kami (Jul 29, 2002)

heavyall said:


> As an artist, I find it to be a big deal as well. Drives my wife nuts that I work in the dark, but it's the only way I can get a reasonably accurate impression of the colours coming off my monitor. We do this in the office too -- all of the flourescent balasts within 40 feet of the colour dept have their bulbs removed, and we have colour accurate viewing booths when we need to look at proofs and reference material.



Just curious, are you using LCD monitors for your viewing booths? If you are using LCDs, are they using fluorescent tube or LED backlighting Does one have an advantage over the other for colour accuracy checks?


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

heavyall said:


> That isn't entirely true either:
> 
> Nouvir Lighting - News
> 
> ...


Depends where you read - the first entry I came across on google says basically the opposite:



> Unless you’re lighting your home, office, or factory with tanning-bed lamps, the main concern with certain lighting types—including CFLs and high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps—is that they emit enough UV to damage artwork and fabrics over time. *High quality LEDs—thanks to their low UV emissions—are now the lighting type of choice for museums striving to protect treasured artifacts and maintain their original colors and patina*. In commercial and residential applications, LEDs save carpets, window coverings, and painted surfaces from the degrading effects of UV radiation.


In any case, I think we can all agree that UV radiation from LED bulbs is not an issue for home use - one would certainly not get a sunburn from them.

Lighting and UV radiation: where do LEDs fit in? - LeapFrogLighting


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

eMacMan said:


> Pretty sure he was referring to CFBs not LEDs.


Why are CFBs being brought up constantly in this thread - the subject of the thread is specifically about "LED home lighting"


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

heavyall said:


> I get about 6 months out of the bulbs that get left on the most............


Lucky you - that means with LED bulbs you will get free replacements and probably also the next generation LED bulb.
When an incandescent burns out after 6 months you are SOL.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

krs said:


> When an incandescent burns out after 6 months you are SOL.


No, you are out 50¢



krs said:


> Lucky you - that means with LED bulbs you will get free replacements and probably also the next generation LED bulb.


I was just reading about a gentleman who had an LED head light burn out. Turns out the manufacturer believed the bulbs would last forever. Result was that he had to pay several hundred to replace the bulb as they also had to remove the bumper to get to the bulb. I am sure he will be glad to learn that big hole in his wallet is wholly in his head.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

krs said:


> Lucky you - that means with LED bulbs you will get free replacements and probably also the next generation LED bulb.
> When an incandescent burns out after 6 months you are SOL.


And get another LED bulb that i also will have more problems with? No thanks. I just won't buy LEDs again, and be done with the problem for good. The cost of replacing incandescents is much cheaper than the trouble it takes to get a refund on the LED.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

krs said:


> Depends where you read - the first entry I came across on google says basically the opposite:


It SAYS the opposite, but the Nouvir guys didn't just take the manufacturers word for it, they TESTED the UV emissions and found that the mfrs claims were misleading at best. An easily detectible level of UV was being emitted from the bulbs.



> In any case, I think we can all agree that UV radiation from LED bulbs is not an issue for home use - one would certainly not get a sunburn from them.


Absolutely, we are on the same page there. They aren't for everyone, but most people will be blissfully unaware of any difference whatsoever.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Kami said:


> Just curious, are you using LCD monitors for your viewing booths? If you are using LCDs, are they using fluorescent tube or LED backlighting Does one have an advantage over the other for colour accuracy checks?


Our monitors are in the dark. We use "Colour Critical" GB-R LED backlit NEC monitors with integrated calibration. We have small GTI light booths by our desks, and a couple of huge GTI light booths in the scanning and proofing areas. Those all use ridiculously expensive colour accurate fluorescents. Those booth have a timer on them that beeps at you when the bulb have passed their colour accurate stage. The only way to make it stop beeping is to replace the bulbs!!

It's overkill, for sure, but dead on colour accuracy is what we sell. We need to be absolutely sure that when a client or printer says they think the colour is off that they are the one who is out, not us.


----------



## polywog (Aug 9, 2007)

krs said:


> Lucky you - that means with LED bulbs you will get free replacements and probably also the next generation LED bulb.
> When an incandescent burns out after 6 months you are SOL.


I don't think I've ever had incandescent bulbs burn out that quickly. I used to get several years out of them, then again they were on a dimmer...

I must admit I've had splendid luck with LEDs. 2-3 years in and they are fine, and they run from just before we wake up until we go to bed daily. Wondering if there isn't some other cause for such short service life on the LEDs OP mentioned? Wiring fault?


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

heavyall said:


> And get another LED bulb that i also will have more problems with? No thanks. I just won't buy LEDs again, and be done with the problem for good. The cost of replacing incandescents is much cheaper than the trouble it takes to get a refund on the LED.



It would be nice if they made, say, 42w, 63w and 104w incandescent bulbs. Then the consumer would have choice again and the manufacturer wouldn't be breaking any laws. You can still buy 65w incandescent floodlights, for example. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

polywog said:


> I don't think I've ever had incandescent bulbs burn out that quickly. I used to get several years out of them, then again they were on a dimmer...
> 
> I must admit I've had splendid luck with LEDs. 2-3 years in and they are fine, and they run from just before we wake up until we go to bed daily. Wondering if there isn't some other cause for such short service life on the LEDs OP mentioned? Wiring fault?


That is pretty good life. For comparison there was a span of time when we had 2 CFBs in our previous home. 

One was at the bottom of the basement stairs. Because the switch was not easy to find, we let that one go 24/7. Typical life was 10 months, compared to one month incandescent.

The other CFB was in a hallway. That one stayed on overnight, for about 12 hrs/day, as father-in-law was up 2 or 3 times a night to use the batroom. That bulb would deliver 6 months max, which was maybe an extra 2 months over an incandescent.

So obviously from a lifespan point of view LEDs are a bargain in areas where they need to be left on.

I do suspect that much of the "energy-savings" is lost by people leaving lights on for extended periods. Lights that other wise might see only a few minutes of use per day. BTW it's really only energy savings if you have to use AC to cool off heat produced by incandescents. Otherwise that heat is not being wasted. Especially in Canada!


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

fjnmusic said:


> It would be nice if they made, say, 42w, 63w and 104w incandescent bulbs. Then the consumer would have choice again and the manufacturer wouldn't be breaking any laws. You can still buy 65w incandescent floodlights, for example.


I'm still having no problem finding regular 60w and 100w incandescents in stores.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

heavyall said:


> I'm still having no problem finding regular 60w and 100w incandescents in stores.


Me neither, bought six more today.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> That is pretty good life. For comparison there was a span of time when we had 2 CFBs in our previous home.
> 
> One was at the bottom of the basement stairs. Because the switch was not easy to find, we let that one go 24/7. Typical life was 10 months, compared to one month incandescent.
> 
> ...



Actually, if you leave a light on, it can last a very long time. Think about it: when do lights usually burn out? When you flick the switch on. Leave it on, and it gets no surge. Leave it in with a dimmer, and you can make the thing last damn near forever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> Actually, if you leave a light on, it can last a very long time. Think about it: when do lights usually burn out? When you flick the switch on. Leave it on, and it gets no surge. Leave it in with a dimmer, and you can make the thing last damn near forever.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


We had actually thought about dimmers on those two bulbs. Sadly boxes from both switches had been tapped after the house was wired and there just was not enough room left in the boxes. Hence the CFBs. That was more than 10 years ago so obviously LEDs were not a choice.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

This deserves to be read in its entirety; no pull quotes as a result:

For 90 years, lightbulbs were designed to burn out. Now that's coming to LED bulbs. / Boing Boing


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> This deserves to be read in its entirety; no pull quotes as a result:
> 
> For 90 years, lightbulbs were designed to burn out. Now that's coming to LED bulbs. / Boing Boing


Thanks for posting--that is really awful!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

The world is going to hell quicker than we think.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> This deserves to be read in its entirety; no pull quotes as a result:
> 
> For 90 years, lightbulbs were designed to burn out. Now that's coming to LED bulbs. / Boing Boing


Their greed goes marching on!


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

All I can say - vote with your wallet.

I didn't know Pilips pulled such a stunt - so no more purchases of Philips products.
Problem is that this information is not widely known to impact Pilips sales.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

krs said:


> All I can say - vote with your wallet.
> 
> I didn't know Pilips pulled such a stunt - so no more purchases of Philips products.
> Problem is that this information is not widely known to impact Pilips sales.


Good idea. Advice taken. Thanks.


----------

