manickavasagamt
Contributor
i want to know if cfl bulbs are real money savers . they are costly than incandescent bulb. do they realy last longer than incandescent bulbs. but true they give better light and save power
cfl bulbs , are they real money savers
- Thread starter manickavasagamt
- Start date
- Status
^Yeah they are.
Here's a simple math -
Suppose there are 6 60W rated bulbs in a typical household (garage, balcony, bathrooms, store rooms etc). Total consumption accounts to 360W power draw from the mains (not taking into account the efficiency of the bulb
). Whereas a CFL of a similar luminous intensity consumes about 10~15W. So that is 90W.
Suppose you run them each for P hours a day for a month and a unit of power costs Q Rs/kWh, your electricity bill for the bulbs alone would be 360xPxQ Rs. The math for the CFLs would work out to be 90xPxQ Rs. The ratio is a quarter.
Essentially, on a monthly basis, you would end up saving almost a quarter of what you end up paying if you were to use the incandescent bulbs. Besides, CFLs have a higher lifespan and the manufacturer generally gives a warranty but comes at a slightly higher initial expense which is easily waived off due to the R.O.I.
Here's a simple math -
Suppose there are 6 60W rated bulbs in a typical household (garage, balcony, bathrooms, store rooms etc). Total consumption accounts to 360W power draw from the mains (not taking into account the efficiency of the bulb
). Whereas a CFL of a similar luminous intensity consumes about 10~15W. So that is 90W. Suppose you run them each for P hours a day for a month and a unit of power costs Q Rs/kWh, your electricity bill for the bulbs alone would be 360xPxQ Rs. The math for the CFLs would work out to be 90xPxQ Rs. The ratio is a quarter.
Essentially, on a monthly basis, you would end up saving almost a quarter of what you end up paying if you were to use the incandescent bulbs. Besides, CFLs have a higher lifespan and the manufacturer generally gives a warranty but comes at a slightly higher initial expense which is easily waived off due to the R.O.I.
kishore.chander
Contributor
To be frank, they are not money savers, rather they produce light to the wattage they consume. Where as a normal incandescent bulb does not. If a normal bulb is rated at 100 watts, it does not provide 100 watts of light, its efficieny is less.
CFL they say its money saver because of its efficiency and nothing else, yes they last longer.
CFL they say its money saver because of its efficiency and nothing else, yes they last longer.
sato1986
Herald
@OP: yes. Here's the comparison between a regular tungsten incandescent BULB and a CFL:
PROs
1. Average LIFE:
Good company CFLs Osram (german), Energetic (usa), last much much longer than an average incandascent lamp. Also, they come with 1 yr guarantee.
Specs:
LED: Avg. 50000hrs
CFL: Avg. 5000hrs
Regular/Tungsten bulb: Avg. 1000hrs
2. Average Light-Output:
CFL: 62 lumens/watt
Bulb: 14 lumens/watt
3. Diffused Light is easy on the eyes
Cons:
1. Initial Cost is much higher
2. Big in size, and hence hard to fit in smaller fittings.
3. CFL light has a much lower penetration through glass shade.
Overall recommendation: T5 tubelight is the best for lighting up the room. CFLs are okay for utility lighting. For very fancy fixtures, incandescent bulbs are better.
PROs
1. Average LIFE:
Good company CFLs Osram (german), Energetic (usa), last much much longer than an average incandascent lamp. Also, they come with 1 yr guarantee.
Specs:
LED: Avg. 50000hrs
CFL: Avg. 5000hrs
Regular/Tungsten bulb: Avg. 1000hrs
2. Average Light-Output:
CFL: 62 lumens/watt
Bulb: 14 lumens/watt
3. Diffused Light is easy on the eyes
Cons:
1. Initial Cost is much higher
2. Big in size, and hence hard to fit in smaller fittings.
3. CFL light has a much lower penetration through glass shade.
Overall recommendation: T5 tubelight is the best for lighting up the room. CFLs are okay for utility lighting. For very fancy fixtures, incandescent bulbs are better.
Yeah, even I prefer those slim tube lights to CFL.
But hey, here's another interesting phenomenon I noticed at my boss's home - if the tube light is switched on, the STB remote (Airtel STB btw) will not work. Some sort of resonance phenomena but the remote just refuses to work if the tube in the hall is switched on irrespective of the range.
But hey, here's another interesting phenomenon I noticed at my boss's home - if the tube light is switched on, the STB remote (Airtel STB btw) will not work. Some sort of resonance phenomena but the remote just refuses to work if the tube in the hall is switched on irrespective of the range.
^^ i agree with Raks, even i find the light concentrated near the source. but Raks he is comparing with bulbs and not tubelights.
From money saving perspective, it depends on usage, for an average home user I really dont think so they are money savers, as they cost cost many times more than traditional bulbs so it would take a long time for your return on investment to start paying. and that is hard to calculate.
however for those who have to keep them on for long hours or even during daytime like shop keepers/showrooms, it would help them bring the cost down.
But we all should use these CFL or even LED bulbs as they use less power and together it would lead to less consumption of our state electricity.
To add another point, it also does not emit heat as compared to incandescent bulbs therefore, the A/C usage could also reduce.
From money saving perspective, it depends on usage, for an average home user I really dont think so they are money savers, as they cost cost many times more than traditional bulbs so it would take a long time for your return on investment to start paying. and that is hard to calculate.
however for those who have to keep them on for long hours or even during daytime like shop keepers/showrooms, it would help them bring the cost down.
But we all should use these CFL or even LED bulbs as they use less power and together it would lead to less consumption of our state electricity.
To add another point, it also does not emit heat as compared to incandescent bulbs therefore, the A/C usage could also reduce.
me too read that as orgasm at first.. corrupted mindsDesecrator said:Read that as orgasm initially. :ashamed:
--- Updated Post - Automerged ---
But in a household, would anyone use a bulb in a room which has AC? Quite a contradiction IMO.
Well, not for a house hold but showrooms do. Many still have those small tungsten bulbs. donno what they are called.
kishore.chander
Contributor
i guess you are referring to the small halogen bulbs which they use as show lights.... yeah they infact emit a lot of heatMalique said:me too read that as orgasm at first.. corrupted minds
Well, not for a house hold but showrooms do. Many still have those small tungsten bulbs. donno what they are called.
malhotraraul
Galvanizer
A 14W CFL feels kind of dull compared to a tube light, but I find an 18W CFL much brighter than the usual 40W Tube light. Its true that light is much more intense near the CFL, but the light still reaches all parts of the room and as on par with a tube light.raksrules said:
As for the question of saving money, yes it does result in a considerable savings compared to a tube light or incandescent bulb. The initial cost for a branded CFL is somewhat high (I got my 18W branded CFL for 150 bucks), but I think the reduction in power consumption offsets that.
Just for info, I bought a unbranded (Chinese) 15W CFL for 30Rs a couple of years back and used in another room. It was by no means a bad deal. The light was pretty good and on par with a branded CFL and it lasted for about an year and a half. My previous 14W branded CFL lasted about 3 years I think.
Since I have replaced with CFL bulbs I found many advantages:
1. My electricity bill has reduced 40%
2. Bulbs sometimes even last for 3 years.
3. My 500 VA inverter is able to light up 5 rooms of my house with fans, with longer duration.
So definitely it is more advantaceous. Also, regarding dimness- check if voltage at you house is ok. From personal experience, I found that luminence increases with when voltage increases from 215V to 230V. Also, I have noticed that brightness do decrease gradually over time, so I change the placing of the bulbs(old vs new) accordingly.
1. My electricity bill has reduced 40%
2. Bulbs sometimes even last for 3 years.
3. My 500 VA inverter is able to light up 5 rooms of my house with fans, with longer duration.
So definitely it is more advantaceous. Also, regarding dimness- check if voltage at you house is ok. From personal experience, I found that luminence increases with when voltage increases from 215V to 230V. Also, I have noticed that brightness do decrease gradually over time, so I change the placing of the bulbs(old vs new) accordingly.
kishore.chander said:
Malique said:
I agree to a CFL not being an option to a tubelight. Nothing beats the throw and consistency of light that a tube has.
A single CFL does not have the power to light up an entire room. Two CFLs (or an array of CFLs) can light up a room or a large space but some areas remain dark.
I have found however that CFLs are good in small spaces as bulb replacements for eg: in bathrooms. Again, to me, white light seems to light up better than yellow light.
My major gripe against CFLs is that they need to retrofit these CFLs for all types of sockets. I have threaded bulbs(and not the regular push and turn) in my fancy lighting around the house and I really want to replace them with CFLs but the threaded variety does not seem to have come to India...at least it had not come 5 years ago when I got the lighting work done. I'm not in tune with what's available right now.
blr_p
Pilgrim
I have no idea what gurantee ppl are refering to here with CFL bulbs, but the made in India ones DO NOT HAVE ANY GUARANTEE WHATOSEVER. They do not last all that much longer either, if you notice their brightness tends to go down after 6 months. Lifetime for domestically made are under a year (closer to 9 months) and thats using it 8hrs a day, every day. These are OSRAM, & HAVELLS, 20W which are equivalent to 100W. I've seen a foreign made one go for close to Rs.500, maybe these are the ones ppl are referring to. But why pay that much, and how long will it really last anyway, better to go twice with local ones for over half that cost.
Oh and those comparing one cfl bulb to a tubelight, what you want to do is use 2CFL's at 20W each to equal a 40W tubelight. Course then your paying Rs.300+ vs Rs.50 for the one tubelight.
One thing i've heard with getting CFL bulbs to last longer is to have the bulb up and socket down, but with most ceiling fittings, its the other way around with the bulb down and the socket up, apparently this leads to heat buildup which shortens the life time fo the bulb, by shortening the lifetime of the electronic components in the base. This is what typically kills the bulb.
I recently compared a Phillips softone 100W incadescent bulb to a 20W OSRAM and the Phillips defnitely was brighter and looked nicer. I think i might just dump CFL and go back to the old types. I do not like tubelights with white light at all, it just is too sharp and makes everything look wierd colorwise and unnatural. An incadescent approximates sunlight upto 90%, tubelights & CFL's only get upto 40%. Better CFL's get closer but you will never see them here as they will be much more pricey.
What i found missing in the earlier analysis of energy savings is the break even time. After how long do i start making money if i go with a CFL vs sticking with incadescent ?
My guess is roughly 3 months assuming daily use, for a bulb that costs Rs.180.
Oh and those comparing one cfl bulb to a tubelight, what you want to do is use 2CFL's at 20W each to equal a 40W tubelight. Course then your paying Rs.300+ vs Rs.50 for the one tubelight.
One thing i've heard with getting CFL bulbs to last longer is to have the bulb up and socket down, but with most ceiling fittings, its the other way around with the bulb down and the socket up, apparently this leads to heat buildup which shortens the life time fo the bulb, by shortening the lifetime of the electronic components in the base. This is what typically kills the bulb.
I recently compared a Phillips softone 100W incadescent bulb to a 20W OSRAM and the Phillips defnitely was brighter and looked nicer. I think i might just dump CFL and go back to the old types. I do not like tubelights with white light at all, it just is too sharp and makes everything look wierd colorwise and unnatural. An incadescent approximates sunlight upto 90%, tubelights & CFL's only get upto 40%. Better CFL's get closer but you will never see them here as they will be much more pricey.
What i found missing in the earlier analysis of energy savings is the break even time. After how long do i start making money if i go with a CFL vs sticking with incadescent ?
My guess is roughly 3 months assuming daily use, for a bulb that costs Rs.180.
- Status