[ale] OT Just bought my 1st & 2nd "lighting-class" LED bulbs

[Ron Frazier (ALE)]

Hi James,

I see what you're saying, BUT ...

Essentially every person on the planet knows what a 40W, 60W, 75W, and 100W lightbulb does, and how using it affects their lives.  They have no clue that an 800 lumen bulb, for example, does the same thing as a 60W bulb used to.  So, the old wattage scale is the closest thing we have as a way to classify and compare bulbs.  This is exactly why the packaging lists the bulb as 60W replacement or 60W equivalent, because the manufacturers know the customers would have no clue as to what to buy.  If I get one or more of these for my Dad, you can bet I'll say it's a replacement for a 60W bulb.  It will probably be that way for at least a decade while we transition.

Now, if the manufacturers want to cooperate and develop a universal luminosity scale and make it so the customer can easily tell what he / she's buying, no matter what brand it is, that would be great.

I'll even give them a hint as to how to do it.  You could use "I" for intensity, with the following standard designations, which I just made up, with the following equivalences to the old wattage system.

I1 - 4 W - nightlight
I2 - 25 W - refrigerator bulb
I3 - 40 W - appliance bulb
I4 - 60 W - room light
I5 - 75 W - room light
I6 - 100 W - room light
I7 - 150 W - bright room light

So, someone could go into any store and buy any I5 bulb, and he / she would get the same light output no matter what.  Fat chance of this cooperation happening.

The next best thing would be a standard chart of lumens using the same increments.  But, that's still less user friendly, and the numeric sequence would be much harder to remember than the simple example I gave.  Now, how many lumens do I need to light my living room?  I have no clue.  Neither would my Dad.

Right now, I know what I need to light my living room.  I need 2 ea 100 W equivalent CFL's and 2 ea 60 W equivalent CFL's, or similar LED's if I could afford them.

Lumen designations are not useful to consumers as a sole differentiator of bulbs unless they're in standardized increments and consumers are exposed to them for a long enough period of time to get them familiar with them.

The old watts designations were, at least, fairly comparable amongst bulbs of the same filament based technology.

For what it's worth, I'll try to observe the lumens when I buy bulbs, but I will probably take a good amount of time before I'm as comfortable using that to determine my needs versus the old wattage system.

Keith also mentioned the enclosure thing.  I read all the fine print on the packaging and they don't mention any such exclusions.

I'm glad you have such a low electric bill.  Mine is twice that when I'm not running cryptocurrency mining.  For my case, although I've abandoned incandescents, I don't think lighting is a huge percentage of my bill.  My electric also includes the dryer, water heater, freezer, dehumidifier, and heat pump.  But, using less $$$ for lighting is always good.

Sincerely,

Ron



James Sumners <james.sumners at gmail.com> wrote:

>Do yourself a favor and learn to distinguish bulbs by their lumen
>output,
>not their incandescent wattage equivalence. That's a practice that
>should
>never have been implemented. It's not really a direct equivalence, and
>it
>just ends up making folks say the wrong thing (e.g. saying 40w when
>they
>really have a 7w).
>
>Also, make sure the Crees are rated for enclosed installation before
>putting them in your outdoor fixtures. Most brands are not. I use the
>ULTRA
>bulbs by Sylvania and the off-brand EcoSmart bulbs. Neither, of those
>that
>I have bought, have been rated thus.
>
>My favorite LED bulbs so far are the Phillips (damn expensive, but
>coming
>down; still worth it, though) and the ULTRAs. Just about every bulb in
>my
>house is a LED. My power bill, with a SEER 10 A/C unit running, for May
>was
>$99 after taxes and fees. They make a huge difference.
>
>On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, Ron Frazier (ALE) wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just thought I'd throw this out there since you guys like geeky
>stuff.  I

-snip-

>
>
>-- 
>James Sumners
>http://james.roomfullofmirrors.com/
>
>"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts
>pathological
>personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to
>the
>corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a
>condition to which they are quickly addicted."
>
>Missionaria Protectiva, Text QIV (decto)
>CH:D 59
>



--

Sent from my Android Acer A500 tablet with bluetooth keyboard and K-9 Mail.
Please excuse my potential brevity if I'm typing on the touch screen.

(PS - If you email me and don't get a quick response, you might want to
call on the phone.  I get about 300 emails per day from alternate energy
mailing lists and such.  I don't always see new email messages very quickly.)

Ron Frazier
770-205-9422 (O)   Leave a message.
linuxdude AT techstarship.com
Litecoin: LZzAJu9rZEWzALxDhAHnWLRvybVAVgwTh3
Bitcoin: 15s3aLVsxm8EuQvT8gUDw3RWqvuY9hPGUU