Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

designingwithleds.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 189 posts

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#111

Post by jcampbell1 »

nsxwolf wrote: post #47

I like the color temperature of incandescent bulbs. That alone is worth the extra electricity expense. It's a bit funny how many of us obsess about the calibration of our monitors and tablets, even installing utilities that change the color temperature at different times of day to be easier on our eyes. But we don't seem to care as much about the ambient light that we see everywhere. Also, many of my fixtures expose…

You can match the color temperature. The problem is the color rendering. With CFLs, 10 different shades of red that you can distinguish under incandescent bulbs all look the same.

The CRI of incandescents is 100, LEDs are around 90, and CFLs are around 70. Under real world tests, the human eye can't distinguish additional colors in LED vs incandescent bulbs.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#112

Post by cheald »

ssmoot wrote: post #16
ams6110 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying... that the LED bulbs have a much higher energy and environmental "cost" in manufacturing, compared to a standard incandescent? That's quite likely true and has to be considered in the big picture (similar issues with electric vehicles, that their proponents like to ignore). For me the answer is simple: $13 is way too much to pay for a light bulb, I don't care how efficient it is…

OTOH, my entire house is fluorescent and LED. My monthly electricity bill is $65. For a house! I never have to replace burnt out bulbs. At $13 I'd guess the LED is actually about at break-even over the life of the bulb vs incandescent unless you're buying incandescent in the big packs of 30 bulbs for $10. The only gas in my house is my central heating, and my old water heater. I plan to replace that with point-of-use…

Where do you live, and what's the square footage of the house? My monthly bill is hundreds per month, but the significant majority of that is AC - I live in Arizona, and cooling in the summer here takes a crazy amount of juice.

Lighting is all CFL, though - the bulbs are about $1.40 apiece and consume 13w of juice, which works out to around $11/year to run 24/7. A 60w incandescent would cost around $52/year to run 24/7. We obviously don't run them constantly, but even if the incandescents were free, the CFLs are a better deal over the bulb's lifetime.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#114

Post by EliRivers »

dsfasfasf wrote: post #97
EliRivers wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good enough to see, not good enough for fine work. 60W was enough for me a decade ago. Now for fine work I need 100W. I can still see with 60W, but what was enough for fine work a decade ago is not enough now. I understand this will get worse as I get older. I don't have any particular visual conditions; I'm just aging.

Another simple explanation, your sight is not as good as it used to be. 10 years is a long time. Just saying.

That's kind of my whole point. In fact, not "kind of". That is my point.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#115

Post by jseliger »

com2kid wrote: post #76

I am unimpressed by 60 watt equivalent bulbs. A 60 watt equivalent is about enough to be a desk lamp, if I need to provide light for even a small room it is a useless amount unless I get a large number of bulbs together. Unfortunately 60 watt equivalent has become some sort of benchmark for new light bulb technology. If you really want to replace lighting in some meaningful way, start quoting 100 watt equivalent numb…

If you really want to replace lighting in some meaningful way, start quoting 100 watt equivalent numbers to me.

Here you go: http://store.earthled.com/products/switch-switch100-led-ligh... , though note that the upfront cost is high. Scroll down to see the performance specs.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#117

Post by sigkill »

smackfu wrote: post #69
tocomment wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they say that, but then in that same article look at the advice for cleaning up a broken CFL. If it's no big deal, why do I need to open the windows, wear gloves, etc? What is the proper way to handle a broken CFL? Open the windows and let the room air out for 15 to 30 minutes, then remove as much material as possible without a vacuum cleaner. Using disposable gloves, scoop the glass onto a piece of cardboard an…

Overly paranoid article.

More like CYA article.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#118

Post by hosh »

com2kid wrote: post #98
ajross wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only someone made a "fixture" for lighting with multiple bulb sockets in a convenient, attractive mounting that could be attached to the ceiling of a room. The 60W incandescent light bulb has been the "standard lightbulb" since before most of us were born. Honestly I don't understand this criticism at all. Certainly LED lighting is available in many form factors other than a 60W bulb...

> If only someone made a "fixture" for lighting with multiple bulb sockets in a convenient, attractive mounting that could be attached to the ceiling of a room. My condo's living room doesn't have a ceiling mounted light fixture, or a place to install one at. I'm sure the job could be done, but it'd be a major pain. > The 60W incandescent light bulb has been the "standard lightbulb" since before most of us were born.…

You might want to start thinking in terms of lumens and color temperature. So 800 lumens at 2700K. Philips make ones at higher lumens and lower (warmer) color temperatures. I have one for my one and only floor lamp and it fills up the room and still enough for reading.

Granted, I tend to prefer darker rooms anyways and I'm quite happy to have candle light in the evenings (about 100 - 200 lumens).

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#119

Post by hosh »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #108
drakaal wrote: post #87

This is Spam. There are a few dozen of these with better economics on Amazon. And if you want to light a house on the cheap, the LED "ropes" are more efficient, and will last longer. Also a CFT would be 12W and cost $2 ($1.25 if you look around). Over 10 years in most markets that would be cheaper. PS: My Home is almost 100% LED's. I love them. But that doesn't mean they are always the cheapest, the most efficient, o…

I dislike the consistent color across dimming. The whole point of dimming lights is to lower the color temperature. It is impossible to get a candle like ambiance with LEDs. If you want less total light, it is easy to just turn fewer lights on.

What an amazing insight! Turn on less lights! ;-)
Post reply on HN