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

There's something off about LED bulbs

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 966 posts

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#211

Post by meepmorp »

organsnyder wrote: post #161
userbinator wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the limits of their ratings. They could make LED bulbs last many orders of magnitude longer and be more efficient, but they don't (unless forced to[1]) because they prefer planned obsolescence. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27093793

I've been installing Kauf brand smart-bulbs, which come pre-flashed with ESPHome for integration with Home Assistant. Some of my earlier bulbs failed, and I recently noticed that the founder of the company commented on the issue and said he specced a more robust capacitor after early failures: https://github.com/KaufHA/kauf-rgbww-bulbs/issues/31#issueco... I haven't contacted them for replacements yet, but seeing the…

Thanks! Having flashed esphome to smartbulbs the hard way, ootb support sounds lovely.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#212

Post by gabereiser »

stevenkkim wrote: post #205

I came across this article on HN recently: https://www.sevarg.net/2023/02/11/how-your-leds-are-killing-... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34902429 After reading it, I realized that having overhead led lights in our home were possibly contributing to my worsening sleep and general tiredness over the past few years. Granted, we used 4100k lights which are much bluer than 2700k. We swapped all our leds back to inc…

The light temperature plays a lot into it. It's why those industrial edison bulbs are so trendy and popular. The warmer the light, the cozier at night. Warm being color and not tempurature. 2700k being the ideal.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#213

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

derbOac wrote: post #58
eig wrote: post #6

The irony of this article is that the author is suffering from “too much choice”. LEDs have so much more capability than fluorescent and halogen bulbs that the burden has fallen on the consumer to sort out what dimmability, temperature, and lumens they need. It used to be that you only had one option so you didn’t have to think about it. Anyone who works in stage lighting or art knows that light is complicated. We sh…

I had a similar reaction to the article. I actually am opposed to bans on traditional incandescent bulbs but vastly prefer LEDs and have no desire to go back to them. Using LEDs was a shock to me initially mostly because, as you point out, with traditional household incandescents there wasn't a whole lot of options. So suddenly when I had to pay attention to color profiles and so forth more carefully, I wasn't expect…

> I actually am opposed to bans on traditional incandescent bulbs

AFAIK, there are no simple bans on them [ EDIT: in the USA ]. What exists are energy performance standards, which these bulbs do not meet. If you want, you can say that this is nit-picking, and that of course that's a ban.

But when we have energy performance standards for, say, cars, nobody says it is a ban on cars, just a effective end to the production of inefficient ones.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#214

Post by whateveracct »

the_af wrote: post #79
eig wrote: post #6

The irony of this article is that the author is suffering from “too much choice”. LEDs have so much more capability than fluorescent and halogen bulbs that the burden has fallen on the consumer to sort out what dimmability, temperature, and lumens they need. It used to be that you only had one option so you didn’t have to think about it. Anyone who works in stage lighting or art knows that light is complicated. We sh…

What if you don't want to become an expert, which is something that wouldn't scale for every piece of tech and equipment? (Maybe you enjoy tweaking with lights, but what about chairs, tabletop materials, woods, wall paints, and yes -- electronic gadgets?). With LEDs, what's the "I don't want to deal with this, I just want something that will work as intended and not introduce weird artifacts"?

why are you acting like you need a college credit in an LED survey course in order to buy incandescent-replacement LEDs? It's like a new vocabulary of like 5 terms/concepts that can all be summarized in a sentence or two.

When I upgraded my house, I spent maybe 30 min reading some articles and then 30 more going through product listings [1]. To upgrade a core piece of infra for my whole house.

[1] I can already hear people saying "an HOUR???" But guess what now I know about LED bulbs forever.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#215

Post by rusk »

throwaway173738 wrote: post #180
tomatotomato37 wrote: post #150

I hate how many of these things aren't limits of the technology but rather the result of cost optimization and general apathy towards the customer. We know how to mass-produce quality LEDs to the point entire TVs are made of the things. We know how to mass-produce rectifiers pretty much ever since diodes existed. We know how to cool mass-produced objects in compact spaces. But because we apparently can't have nice th…

The problem is, as always, the MBAs.

It’s not MBAs place to set public policy though is it? If it’s the MBA’s fault at all it’s because they’re doing their job which is optimising the product to the market. If the markets not optimising the right things then that’s a failure in the market. Maybe the market is being manipulated somehow has it was for the old incandescent bulbs - but that’s not necessarily the fault of the management tier … some economise regulate for consumer value … some for profit

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#216

Post by OJFord »

smallerfish wrote: post #14
blakesterz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm finding this true with the bulbs I've bought in the past 5 or so years. The first one I bought about 15 years ago is still going, but most, if not all more recent LEDs have died. Even the ones in the basement that are mounted with no case to increase the heat around them. I read the "guarantee" when I buy new bulbs but who keeps receipts or track of light bulbs?

You can write the install date (and store name) on the bulb housing with a sharpie when you put it in the socket. It's not a receipt but it at least gives you a shot at getting a return when it fails early.

You could also just write an arbitrary date and the name of the most convenient shop when it fails, so I really don't see what good that does, it's very far from a receipt.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#217

Post by amluto »

oh_sigh wrote: post #177
amluto wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same light quality is vastly more expensive to achieve with LEDs, even if you account for high electricity prices. In a screw base, maybe. But compare: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/luminus-devices-i... $25 for an excellent 700mA driver, 86% efficient. https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/bridgelux/BXRH-30... $3.45 for a very nice, ~2000lm 97 CRI LED, about 99 lm/W. (Efficiency goes up quite…

Where exactly would you mount a light like the one you linked? 10 hours per day sounds like a crazy amount of time to use a light. I think we use some lights in our house maybe 4 hours per day on average max. Maybe I just have a lot of windows and don't live in Alaska in the winter.

On a nice piece of thick metal, with heat sink compound, aimed at a reflector or diffuser?

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#218

Post by brodouevencode »

basch wrote: post #210
brodouevencode wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine paying $150 for a six pack, when Home Depot's private label LEDs are $12 for a six pack. I could replace it 10 times before I hit that mark - not sure it's worth that.

that doesnt really fix the flickering problem.

I had one room that had a flicker problem. Replaced the fixture (was going to do this anyway because The Wife Said So) and it went away. I guess that's why some of the complaints seem foreign to me.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#219

Post by stevenkkim »

gabereiser wrote: post #212
stevenkkim wrote: post #205

I came across this article on HN recently: https://www.sevarg.net/2023/02/11/how-your-leds-are-killing-... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34902429 After reading it, I realized that having overhead led lights in our home were possibly contributing to my worsening sleep and general tiredness over the past few years. Granted, we used 4100k lights which are much bluer than 2700k. We swapped all our leds back to inc…

The light temperature plays a lot into it. It's why those industrial edison bulbs are so trendy and popular. The warmer the light, the cozier at night. Warm being color and not tempurature. 2700k being the ideal.

Nice little rhyme, never heard that one.

Yes, I think 2700k would have been better, we had originally picked 4100k because we prefered the look.

But the article says that even 2700k leds have a blue light spike (albeit smaller than the 4100ks) since the led source is blue light.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#220

Post by mindslight »

Waterluvian wrote: post #151
sbradford26 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DC actually tends to be more efficient at long distances at the same voltage. DC lighting does exist in the commercial space where lighting costs actually start to add up more than household use. The main barrier to DC systems in homes is simply that it would require houses to be rewired and a whole new standard for plugs and such. The benefit is also hard to describe to the customer.

The limitations you describe make sense. But they seem like we can overcome them. My home has 3 non-plumbing busses: AC to every room. Twisted pair to like 6 rooms that will never see use. Coax to 7 rooms that is only used for a modem in one room. If we can run all that wiring, I think we can introduce a new standard for upcoming homes. In fact, now that I think of it, my home has a trait that the homes I grew up in…

It's definitely a path dependency issue. Last mile neighborhood distribution is still done with traditional transformers, so trying to push in this direction you'd ultimately just be adding another conversion step in homes. IMO the only time it makes (individual) sense is if your home has a huge bank of storage batteries for off-grid operation.

The main advantage you'd get is no 120Hz flickering (light bulbs would still need power electronics because LEDs are driven by current rather than voltage), no 60Hz hum on motors, etc. But you'd be stepping away from the massive economies of scale of the consumer market.

FWIW what voltage(s) would you pick, and why? There's no free lunch here.

Post reply on HN