cfl bulbs , are they real money savers
- Thread starter manickavasagamt
- Start date
- Status
blr_p
Oracle
Maybe CM should offer some incentives to use CFL's don't you think. In fact i've never understood why BESCOM never encourage their customers to do so. Maybe because 90% only use tube lights so there isn't that much to be saved. In the end, i'm looking for how good the experience is and have to say lightwise incandescents are much better.
Re
ower woes, maybe KEB should increase power generation potential in the state, we are definitiely under served compared to neighbouring statesd because we cannot seem to build more power stations. I wonder why that is ?
Build more power stations is the answer, saving power will get you very little in comparison.
Re
ower woes, maybe KEB should increase power generation potential in the state, we are definitiely under served compared to neighbouring statesd because we cannot seem to build more power stations. I wonder why that is ?Build more power stations is the answer, saving power will get you very little in comparison.
why are people comparing 14 or 20 watt cfl light intensity to a 40watt tube and saying its dimmer? ofcourse its dimmer than a 40w tube. try comparing it with 2x 20w cfl and you will see the difference in light intensity. its much better than what a tubelight can give in 40 watts. plus since cfl's have inbuilt choke whereas tubelights do not, you people fail to realise that those chokes also have an energy consumption which might be around 10-15 watts. so in all a tube might take 55 watts of energy.
@blr_p, power situation in whole of india is miserable. IMO india needs more nuclear power stations. cheaper than thermal and hydro and more cost efficient in long run. will help in bringing down power tariffs definitely.
@blr_p, power situation in whole of india is miserable. IMO india needs more nuclear power stations. cheaper than thermal and hydro and more cost efficient in long run. will help in bringing down power tariffs definitely.
^^ Actually for a avg sized bedroom, a 18W CFL matches a 40W tube light pretty good IMO. I have an 18W CFL on one wall of the room and a tube light on the opposite side wall. I have never felt the difference between the two to be significant enough to be noticeable except for the fact that the tube light has more uniform light.
Hacker
Contributor
Off topic6pack said:
A green peace guy caught me once and started explaining the benefits of cfl over a normal bulb I told him there is no need to explain coz I already hav cfls in my house. He then asked if I will sign a petition to support solar and wind energy instead of nuclear energy. I said do you really think you can power a country like India with solar and wind energy, why dont you do the opposite and support nuclear energy. Had a little debate on nuclear energy, in the end he got pissed off and left. Good times
Karthikeyan29
Contributor
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:Hacker said:Off topic
A green peace guy caught me once and started explaining the benefits of cfl over a normal bulb I told him there is no need to explain coz I already hav cfls in my house. He then asked if I will sign a petition to support solar and wind energy instead of nuclear energy. I said do you really think you can power a country like India with solar and wind energy, why dont you do the opposite and support nuclear energy. Had a little debate on nuclear energy, in the end he got pissed off and left. Good times
robertjohn
Contributor
For small rooms => Use branded CFL (they eats what is written on their wattage).
For large rooms => Use tubelight with electronic choke (eg, bajaj electronic ballast. Checked it with ampere meter, as per voltage it eats only 25 to 33 watts, rated is 28 watts. Also, compared electronic ballasts from Osram and Philips they eat 40 watts, not lower than this, and rated on them is 40 watts).
For large rooms => Use tubelight with electronic choke (eg, bajaj electronic ballast. Checked it with ampere meter, as per voltage it eats only 25 to 33 watts, rated is 28 watts. Also, compared electronic ballasts from Osram and Philips they eat 40 watts, not lower than this, and rated on them is 40 watts).
blr_p
Oracle
Are you sure about this ?robertjohn said:
Therefore the total consumption of a 4-ft tubelight isrobertjohn said:
40W + 30W or 40W + 40W ~ 70-80 W
depending on the ballast used ?
Has this question been answered yet ? I think not.manicksavant said:
- For starters going from the article i posted earlier, see the section CFL equivalence
Our standards put the 100W light bulb as emitting only 1246 lumens, whereas other sources place it at least a third higher. This is why i found a 100W bulb to be brighter than the 'claimed' equiv CFL of 20W. We've basically lowered what a light bulb can put out and then said 20W CFL is equivalent to 100W light bulb which is wrong. If the equivalence is wrong then surely the savings claimed are likewise over optimistic by 25%. If you expect to get the same light as a 100W light bulb you want a 23W CFL and NOT a 20W one. Basically whatever the box says as equiv, take the next model up to get the 'real' equivalent' light.
- I've already spoken about my experiences wrt to 'claimed' lifetime which seems wildly optimistic in comparison to real life use. OSRAM claims a life of 6000 hr on the box which works out to 5.5hr/daily for about 3 years. So that ought to be 2 yr for 8 hrs daily right ? Not even close, it works fine for upto 6-8 months then the ouput decreases from 30-50% after, by which time it is dead. So I would say it lasts a third as long as claimed. An incandescent on the other hand lasts 3-4 months, its light output is constant or no noticeable diminishment is observed.
Another point is if you look at this BEE document is that the minimum required to get this certification is 10 lamps, and 50% can fail (!). So your chances of a bulb failing are 1 in 2, tho after using about 10 bulbs i can say the lifetime was never less than 9 months. Never had a bulb fail in less time to date.
- The guarantee mentioned by other posters here is fiction, none of them has ever RMA'd a CFL and got a free replacement. No where on the box does it mention there is a warranty nor will any seller honor such.
- What exactly is the break even period for these lamps ?
Let' s say to get 100W we use a equiv 23W CFL. Simplifying means a CFL consumes a quarter.
Cost of a 23W is Rs.200 and a bulb is Rs.40.
After how long will we break even ?
At Rs.5/unit, we can run a 100W bulb for 10 hours or a 23W CFL for 40 hours.
After 50 days @8hrs everyday, the bulb will have cost Rs.200 to run whilst the CFL would have cost Rs.50
so total cost after 50 days @8hrs/day,
for the bulb is 40 + 200 = 240
for the cfl is 200 + 50 = 250
Break even time is a few days after which means 1.7 months.
After 4 months, avg lifetime of a bulb,
you will be out Rs.40 + Rs.480 = Rs.520
with the CFL it is Rs.200 + Rs.120 = Rs.320
After 8 months, avg lifetime of a CFL,
you will be out 520x2 = Rs1040
with the CFL it is Rs.200 + Rs.240 = Rs.440
So you save roughly half going with the CFL over the 100W bulb. But that Rs.500 is divided over 8 months ~ Rs.60/month, for just one bulb, you may or may not notice the difference in your bill.
This of course assumes your CFL lasts through its lifetime and does not die prematurely.
- CFL's need to be kept cool so are not advisable in enclosures where there is little or no ventilation. So there might be a need to replace light fittings if needed and their due costs taken into account.
- They also do not like to be power cycled too many times.
- They can't be installed in rooms with high humidty ie bathroom where there is a chance of shorts occurring on the PCB.
- Their colour rendering index is crap compared to light bulbs.
- CFL's have a power factor of 0.52 which is pretty low, whilst you won't be paying for the extra VA's the power draw of a 15W CFL is in effect a 30VA. This coupled with the fact they don't like to power cycled means ppl are more likely to leave them on longer and this might actually result in more power being drawn from DISCOMS than just using incadescent light bulbs.
On the other hand you can always use a dimmer with a normal bulb and cut down power consumption proportinately but you cannot use dimmers with CFL's.
While I do have my own apprehensions regarding the lifetime and light output of CFLs, at least here, the warranty is being honoured for one year for almost all brands.blr_p said:
The shopkeepers mark the date of purchase, the shop's name and their initial on the ceramic body with a permanent marker. Once dead, take it to the dealer and within a minute, the replacement is given. Not even the bill is asked for. Had got two of them replaced recently.
blr_p
Oracle
That's interesting, anyone in other states have similar experiences ? Do the boxes say anything about a 1 yr warranty ?
I think this HAS to be a pan india thing, but over here they don't mark anything at all.
Here's an example of what happens here
There was a pilot program earlier
It's still on bescom's site, wonder if it is still ongoing, 25% discount on Phillips & Osram WITH a 12 month warranty, how bout that
BESCOM Efficient Lighting Program (BELP)
I think this HAS to be a pan india thing, but over here they don't mark anything at all.
Here's an example of what happens here
There was a pilot program earlier
It's still on bescom's site, wonder if it is still ongoing, 25% discount on Phillips & Osram WITH a 12 month warranty, how bout that
BESCOM Efficient Lighting Program (BELP)
^ in my place i get 12 month warranty on some cfl bulbs. The made in india unknown ones like AES or some other cheepo company products fail before or after 1 year use. I got a free replacement for a 11w cfl of AES when one of them failed in about 10-11 months time.
What the shop keepers do is write their shop name and date on the cfl with marker. I had actually asked whether I will get any warranty on the bulb and he just marked it.
I get Oreva, Wipro, Philips, GE in my place. Only the Oreva brand says 6 months warranty on their box.
What the shop keepers do is write their shop name and date on the cfl with marker. I had actually asked whether I will get any warranty on the bulb and he just marked it.
I get Oreva, Wipro, Philips, GE in my place. Only the Oreva brand says 6 months warranty on their box.
robertjohn
Contributor
blr_p said:
Not 99%, but 100% sure. I had checked on Philips CFLs with different ratings.
blr_p said:
No, it was total consumption of tube with electronic ballast, 25 to 33 watts with bajaj electronic ballast one. And furthermore, with normal copper and polyster ballast, it was eating what are saying at about 75 to 95 watts depending on voltage variance.
I think, what you are saying is all theory and never checked with voltage meters and ampere meters what is actually going in practical. My advise will be to you will be buy an ampere meter (especially clamp meter) to check all this.
blr_p
Oracle
Have you managed to RMA CFL's (within 12 months) in Bangalore as ppl here from the states of Kerela, Gujarat & Maha claim to have done ?adder said:
I'm was not going on any theory, my intention was to clarify further what you previously stated, which you did.robertjohn said:
It appears that the choice of ballast used in tubelights is much more significant than the one in CFL's.
- Status