With a background in heat transfer ( a while back....uniwat '82), and a few years in energy conservation consulting, I have a different appreciation for the current trend towards low wattage light bulbs. With the governments now backing off a mandatory requirement to eradicate incandescent light bulbs (Huff Post article) I have time to stock up on incandescent bulbs..... Or await the new tech bulbs arriving including LED.
The reasons for this are several, the most prevalent being that the light from compact fluorescent light bulbs is simply annoying at worst, a distraction at best. Newer LEDs show promise with a balanced colour temperature (5000-5500 K) .... more akin to what I like.
The marketing message says the CFL (compact fluorescent lamp) also lasts longer. This may be true for most users, but, where I live, the hydro fluctuates between 108 & 122 volts....which is in part a cause for many bulbs blowing - including CFLs. Expensive.
Another message is that the energy savings are substantial. True, for many applications, but not all. 'They' don't tell you that your heating bill will go up .... In Canada's winter, a research paper by engineers says "While the intention to reduce electricity consumption is noble, the “switch” from electrical and fossil-fuel based space heating may drive up GHG emissions in certain regions." An incandescent light bulb turns electricity into about 90-95% heat and the rest into light.......
You have to replace that heat. For instance, I have a 100 watt light bulb on a switch, hanging inside my boat, under the tarp, to keep it dry.... no one is reading books under there :)
This whole jump to "energy efficient" bulbs brings up memories of a night I awoke at 0300 hrs, wide-eyed. It was back in the 1980s when I was part of a team completing an energy audit of the CN Headquarters in Montreal. CN heated the building with steam at roughly $0.06+ per kWh equivalent. Electric energy back then was at about $0.015 per kWhr. It occurred to me, somehow in the wee hours, to leave all the lights on in the CN building. The key here is cost conservation rather than energy conservation. A key recommendation in our report was to leave the lights on ALL THE TIME in the winter, in order to save money. This was a 12-15 storey office building. Might have been a tough sell under the banner of energy conservation - public opinion being what it is. (I completed a very detailed analysis of heat (light) loss by radiation through windows through shape factors and the fact that the heat was primarily in the ceiling space, but would be drawn in through the recirculating vents ... ) In the end, it remained a clear conclusion to leave the lights on.
I won't get into the fact that CFLs have mercury and could be hazardous in some circumstances, because this is a very small amount.
In the end, I resent governments telling me what light to choose, when alternatives are not the same - either in cost or in operation. The quality of light from CFLs is simply inferior. In my world, they simply cost more all around -- with the early burnout I experience.
I am pleased though that new LED (light emitting diode) lights have far better color temperatures and the light quality is far better, in my eyes, ..... perfectly acceptable even. Hopefully, before governments ban our good choices, we'll have a good selection of sizes and wattages of acceptable alternatives.
But, How will I heat my boat ? And my heating bill will still go up. I accept that and generally applaud good efforts to reduce energy usage .... properly implemented.
ps.... First post with 'Posts for iPad' app. I also have 'blogsy' app & 'DraftCraft' app, and will review each at a later date.
No comments:
Post a Comment