CURRENT ISSUE
Contests
Priority IntErrupt
|
|
Issue #232 November 2009
Keeping the Lights On
by Steve Ciarcia
Americans like to think that Thomas Edison came up with the light bulb in 1879 all by himself. But a patent settlement clearly gives equal credit to Joseph Swan, an English inventor. More importantly, while those early designs have evolved from glowing carbonized bamboo in a vacuum to radiant tungsten in argon gas, the concept and implementation of incandescent light bulbs have remained pretty much untouched for 130 years. Certainly no other electrified invention can claim so much history, so why dump it all now?
Barely 6% of the energy powering an incandescent bulb is light. And, while 94% radiated as heat might seem absurd, it isn’t always viewed as a complete waste when there is 3' of snow outside and you’re heating a house in Connecticut with $4-per-gallon heating oil. Of course, personal rationalization aside, the vast majority of the world views incandescent bulbs as grossly inefficient. As of September 1, you can no longer purchase them in Europe, and the same situation will exist here in 2012. The primary lighting source for the immediate future is supposed to be compact fluorescent lights (with LEDs a bit more down the timeline).
Invented about the same time as the incandescent bulb, it took until the 1970s for us to have a workable CFL design, and it wasn’t until the 1990s that they became affordable—today they are $1.50. They use about one-fourth the power of an equivalent-lumen incandescent bulb, last 10 times longer, and run a whole lot cooler. What’s not to love? ;-)
I am probably a very unique case, but let me just tell you some of the realities of no more incandescent bulbs from my perspective. And, before any newbie readers e-mail me to chastise me for my energy inefficiency, let me remind you that I have 10,760 W of PV panels powering my house and right now my latest electric bill ($0) says that I still have a 700-kWHr surplus (they owe me). Based on what the electric company will give me for the surplus power when we settle up at the end, it’s actually cheaper for me to continue using the remaining incandescent bulbs I have versus the cost of buying more CFLs.
OK, I’ll stop ranting. I understand the bigger picture regarding energy waste, but simply substituting CFLs or LEDs for every incandescent light bulb is a myth. The naive truth is “maybe.”
If you have a light next to your easy chair where you sit to read Circuit Cellar, it is a perfect candidate for a CFL replacement. If your Home Control System (HCS) automatically turns that light on or the wall switch controlling the light is a dimmer switch, good luck! If you have a 150-W motion-controlled flood light on your front walkway, it might seem to be the perfect candidate for a 38-W CFL flood light replacement—provided the controller uses a relay and not a triac, and that you don’t mind being 10 seconds past the point of needing light before you actually see any.
I might have a unique case of triple witching (electronically speaking), but I think there are a lot of Circuit Cellar readers who utilize powerline or wireless communication and control technologies. You may not be running a complete HCS like I do, but the inoperability of any automated device is just as frustrating.
CFLs are wonderful, except when they don’t work. For the most part, they don’t like low temperatures, short-duration power cycling, or semiconductor-based power controls (like dimmers or lamp modules). X10-type automated lighting controls should be tested with the specific CFL to be used to make sure that it works and that leakage currents don’t cause the CFL to flash. If you have automated lighting or high-traffic areas where the CFL constantly cycles (like a staircase), be prepared to see an 85% reduction in lifespan on most brands. If you need to keep the dimming capability and still want a CFL, be prepared to pay three to five times more for a “dimmable” CFL and wait a few seconds longer for it to light.
In my opinion, CFLs are an interim fix on the road to better lighting efficiency, but they certainly aren’t the solution. In the long run, I believe LED lighting is the answer, but be careful before you jump off that cliff right now too. So far, half of the lights at my house are fluorescents in one form or another. I live with the lower lifespan in some places simply because 5 W trumps 60 and I feel like I should try. In another dozen places, I’m using LED bulbs. Their fast turn-on and long cycle life is great for staircases, bathrooms, and hallways, but they are still too expensive for general implementation (some high-brightness bulbs also radiate too much RFI). I’m currently testing a 15-W 40" fluorescent tube replacement that looks promising, but at $70 versus $3 I need a lot more reason to swap out the 50 or so fluorescent tubes I have.
The reality is that I have a very eclectic mix of lighting solutions that are constantly evolving. Much to the chagrin of the politicians, I have to honestly say that a few of my lighting applications are best handled with regular incandescent (or halogen) bulbs. For anyone critical enough to take me to task over it, I just say that when you’re generating your own power too, we’ll talk. ;-)
Priority Interrupt Archive List
|
