Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • harshitguptaiitr
    • By harshitguptaiitr 5th Oct 17, 9:43 PM
    • 89Posts
    • 14Thanks
    harshitguptaiitr
    Money saving light-bulbs
    • #1
    • 5th Oct 17, 9:43 PM
    Money saving light-bulbs 5th Oct 17 at 9:43 PM
    Not sure if I am posting on the right thread.
    But would like to know valued suggestions on what are the most effective money saving light bulbs - considering initial cost and running cost
Page 1
    • Neil Jones
    • By Neil Jones 5th Oct 17, 10:45 PM
    • 1,019 Posts
    • 561 Thanks
    Neil Jones
    • #2
    • 5th Oct 17, 10:45 PM
    • #2
    • 5th Oct 17, 10:45 PM
    A lot depends on the socket type you need and prefer but they can be as low as half a penny a day.

    Here's a calculator:
    https://www.sust-it.net/lighting-energy-calculator.php
    • Raxiel
    • By Raxiel 5th Oct 17, 11:27 PM
    • 487 Posts
    • 253 Thanks
    Raxiel
    • #3
    • 5th Oct 17, 11:27 PM
    • #3
    • 5th Oct 17, 11:27 PM
    I did a full inventory of my lighting earlier this year, replacing the last of my 'old energy saver' compact fluorescents with LED. The whole house including external security lights is 156.4w

    Works out at 1.7p an hour on my current tariff if I lit everything at once.

    The absolute lowest running cost (and nicest looking IMO) lamps are the filament LED's, I have several 6w lamps in sockets that would have held 60w incandescents, and even some 2w lamps in bedside lamps that replaced 6.3w compact fluorescents (replaced because they look nicer and contain no mercury more than the energy savings, but that was nice too) that themselves were equivalent to 30w incandescents.

    The up-front cost is a bit higher at £4-£5 a go, but you can often see them on multibuy at places like B&Q or Tesco. It can also be hard to find anything other than warm white in retail stores, I had to go to Ebay to find a cool white lamp for the bathroom.

    Because they are so efficient, they run very cool and should last a really long time though.

    The cheapest efficient lamps you can get that aren't a waste of money are the ones from Pound Land (Not Poundworld, there is a difference) but they (last I checked) only go up to 5w for a more 'traditional' LED lamp style, which is the equivalent of a 40w incandescent, not the best for lighting a room by itself. Their 3W GU10 halogen replacements are pretty good I hear.
    • reeac
    • By reeac 6th Oct 17, 7:54 AM
    • 1,139 Posts
    • 456 Thanks
    reeac
    • #4
    • 6th Oct 17, 7:54 AM
    • #4
    • 6th Oct 17, 7:54 AM
    I recently discovered Luxform led lamps available at the redoubtable Elmers shop in Kesgrave, Suffolk. They are £2.49 each in any power up to 9 watts (75 watts incandescent equivalent). One failed almost immediately and the shop replaced it without question ... no other problems. So far I've bought around 10 of them ..will buy more to replace compact fluorescents in due course.
    • matelodave
    • By matelodave 6th Oct 17, 8:55 AM
    • 3,187 Posts
    • 1,905 Thanks
    matelodave
    • #5
    • 6th Oct 17, 8:55 AM
    • #5
    • 6th Oct 17, 8:55 AM
    I replaced 10x50 halogens in my kitchen with 10 x 4 watt LEDs about 5 years ago - that saves's me around 6p for every hour that they are on. Say an average of 1 hour a day that's £22 a year, so I've save well over £100 since I've had them and they cost me around a fiver each so I'm in profit by about £60. The halogens used to fail quite often - these have been totally reliable.

    If and when I need to replace them they'll be a lot cheaper.

    All of our lamps are LEDs and I now get cheapies either as multipacks from ALDI or £1 each from poundland. Even my 300w halogaen security ligth has been replaced with two 10 watt LED units which give a better spread and save about 3.5p per hour.
    Love makes the world go round - beer make it go round even faster
    • footyguy
    • By footyguy 6th Oct 17, 9:20 AM
    • 3,898 Posts
    • 1,546 Thanks
    footyguy
    • #6
    • 6th Oct 17, 9:20 AM
    • #6
    • 6th Oct 17, 9:20 AM
    Not sure if I am posting on the right thread.
    But would like to know valued suggestions on what are the most effective money saving light bulbs - considering initial cost and running cost
    Originally posted by harshitguptaiitr
    Depends.

    We have some lights we vvery rarely, if ever, use; I feel sure you probably do too!
    In this situation, any investment in a new light bulb is not worth it.

    However, for lights that are heavily used, then low energy lightbulbs can save you significant energy.
    We still have a cupboard full of low energy lightbulbs the energy companies sent us for free a few years back. As these were either free, or sometimes cost us maybe 10p each, these are the cheapest option for us. Typically CFL.

    Nowadays, LED bulbs are becoming more favourable. Not because they save much more (if any) energy than CFL, but they do come to full brightness quicker. However, the downside is the still the quite expensive capital cost (unless you find a cheap one offered) - look to pay £5-£10 each full retail price.
    Be careful of buying cheap LED bulbs - reduced price ones would be a better option

    If you want dimming capability, then it complicates matters even further.
    We have not yet changed any of our dimming bulbs, but tend not to use them much nowadays either.
    • jack_pott
    • By jack_pott 6th Oct 17, 12:06 PM
    • 4,295 Posts
    • 5,518 Thanks
    jack_pott
    • #7
    • 6th Oct 17, 12:06 PM
    • #7
    • 6th Oct 17, 12:06 PM
    I decided to replace the 14 tungsten bulbs as and when they failed, but I still haven't used up the two spare bulbs I bought 16 years ago. The striplight in the kitchen has had one new tube in 28 years, but by comparison, the CFL in the lounge has been replaced 4 times in 11 years.

    I bought a pack of 3 LEDs earlier this year when the last CFL in the lounge failed, so I now have three spare tungsten bulbs.
    I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
    Friedrich Nietzsche
    • NineDeuce
    • By NineDeuce 6th Oct 17, 12:12 PM
    • 540 Posts
    • 480 Thanks
    NineDeuce
    • #8
    • 6th Oct 17, 12:12 PM
    • #8
    • 6th Oct 17, 12:12 PM
    The cheapest to run are those with the lowest wattage. You arent really going to see much difference however, between LEDs and CFLs in the grand scheme of things.
    • reeac
    • By reeac 6th Oct 17, 12:49 PM
    • 1,139 Posts
    • 456 Thanks
    reeac
    • #9
    • 6th Oct 17, 12:49 PM
    • #9
    • 6th Oct 17, 12:49 PM
    Although we're in the process of changing to led lighting our kitchen, laundry room and garage have the long tube type fluorescent lighting which is actually more efficient than CFL in terms of lumens / watt and, of course give a better spread of illumination which is suited to utility areas so I'll stay with them.
    • Raxiel
    • By Raxiel 6th Oct 17, 1:31 PM
    • 487 Posts
    • 253 Thanks
    Raxiel
    The cheapest to run are those with the lowest wattage. You arent really going to see much difference however, between LEDs and CFLs in the grand scheme of things.
    Originally posted by NineDeuce
    The most important thing is lumens per Watt. The objective is still to provide illumination first and save energy second.
    In my experience Filament LED's (in glass bulbs with a small metal cap like the old incandescents) give about 120-135 l/W
    My older Ikea LED lamps (the type with the chunky plastic base and a light guide in the middle) get between 63-77 l/W
    CFL's are around 50-60 l/W, and incandescents around 16 l/W.

    You are right about the grand scheme of things, if you're replacing energy savers with better energy savers you are getting well into diminishing returns. The only low hanging fruit remaining in most homes is halogens either in downlights or external security lights.
    • NineDeuce
    • By NineDeuce 6th Oct 17, 2:26 PM
    • 540 Posts
    • 480 Thanks
    NineDeuce
    The most important thing is lumens per Watt. The objective is still to provide illumination first and save energy second.
    In my experience Filament LED's (in glass bulbs with a small metal cap like the old incandescents) give about 120-135 l/W
    My older Ikea LED lamps (the type with the chunky plastic base and a light guide in the middle) get between 63-77 l/W
    CFL's are around 50-60 l/W, and incandescents around 16 l/W.

    You are right about the grand scheme of things, if you're replacing energy savers with better energy savers you are getting well into diminishing returns. The only low hanging fruit remaining in most homes is halogens either in downlights or external security lights.
    Originally posted by Raxiel
    The OP asked which is the cheapest to run. The lowest wattage lamps are the cheapest, logically. The subject of lm/W is really only relevant if you are designing something, and more so in a commercial environment. Nobody at home notices/cares too much the difference between the odd few lumens given that even the most basic CFLs now work well in almost any domestic environment.

    We have been using incandescent bulbs ranging from 40-100W that differ much more in lm/W. The difference between CFLs and LEDs at home is no way as disparate.
    • nic_c
    • By nic_c 6th Oct 17, 2:40 PM
    • 1,125 Posts
    • 640 Thanks
    nic_c
    This tends to be more a question when a new energy saving comes along, not established ones. New technologies tend to be higher priced until volume manufacturing brings the cost down.

    Incandescent bulbs were the normal, the CFL came along and it was initial cost vs saving over the lifetime. Then there was a promotion and subsidies by BG - I remember them being sold for 1p each. Then we had LED which would often cost a lot more but lasted a lot longer than CFL and a lot less wattage, so it was initial cost vs lifetime savings.

    Costs of LED bulbs have come down to almost same as any other bulb type. You can pick up 2W or 4W bulbs for a quid or two and you can even get dim-able ones now.

    the act that you can now get filament style bulbs mean there should be no reason to get anything other than LED for 240v installations
    • jack_pott
    • By jack_pott 6th Oct 17, 2:47 PM
    • 4,295 Posts
    • 5,518 Thanks
    jack_pott
    The OP asked which is the cheapest to run. The lowest wattage lamps are the cheapest, logically. The subject of lm/W is really only relevant if you are designing something, and more so in a commercial environment.
    Originally posted by NineDeuce
    If you're going to disregard the brightness of the lamp the cheapest option is to switch off and live in the dark. The only way to make any meaningful comparisons between lamp running costs is by comparing them on a like for like basis.
    I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
    Friedrich Nietzsche
    • Raxiel
    • By Raxiel 6th Oct 17, 3:13 PM
    • 487 Posts
    • 253 Thanks
    Raxiel
    The OP asked which is the cheapest to run. The lowest wattage lamps are the cheapest, logically. The subject of lm/W is really only relevant if you are designing something, and more so in a commercial environment. Nobody at home notices/cares too much the difference between the odd few lumens given that even the most basic CFLs now work well in almost any domestic environment.

    We have been using incandescent bulbs ranging from 40-100W that differ much more in lm/W. The difference between CFLs and LEDs at home is no way as disparate.
    Originally posted by NineDeuce
    Come on, by that metric, the cheapest is to do away with lighting all together. [Edit: Jack_pott beat me to it]

    It's implicit in the question (and pertinent to the overall discussion regardless) that the OP still wants to be able to see things. Putting 1w pygmy bulbs in SES fixings all over the house will use very little electricity but will be very gloomy.

    You're right that most people can't discern a couple of hundred lumens, the human eye is wonderfully adaptable to light levels, but they can discern the difference between 800 and 200.

    I don't have a light meter, so I'm going off manufacturer provided numbers and subjective opinion, I have an 8w Filament LED lamp in my bathroom that is a lot brighter (950L according to the manufacturer) than the 12w CFL it replaced. Elsewhere 6w lamps replaced 18w at the cost of (an unnoticeable) 200 less lumens.

    The extra efficiency comes from the fact these lamps have a large number of smaller diodes than earlier models, meaning the internal voltage once divided among them all is much closer to mains voltage and less is wasted as heat from the driver in the cap.

    I already acknowledged that comparing energy savers is dealing with fractions of fractions. Replacing a working CFL with any type of LED doesn't make much sense based on total cost, but the tech has improved a lot since it was first introduced. Something that those who are holding out because of how terrible the first generation of energy savers were (as lamps) would benefit to discover.

    As for Incandescents, according to Wiki (feel free to rebut if you have a more authoritative source) a 40w has an efficiency of 12.6 lm/W, 60w 14.5 lm/W and 100w 17.5 lm/W, so a 100w bulb puts out a bit more light than a 60w + 40w paired together, but it's hardly a big spread.
    Last edited by Raxiel; 06-10-2017 at 3:17 PM.
    • NineDeuce
    • By NineDeuce 6th Oct 17, 4:09 PM
    • 540 Posts
    • 480 Thanks
    NineDeuce
    If you're going to disregard the brightness of the lamp the cheapest option is to switch off and live in the dark. The only way to make any meaningful comparisons between lamp running costs is by comparing them on a like for like basis.
    Originally posted by jack_pott
    Thats a rather silly comment. How about we do a survey and we see if sitting the dark is more akin to sitting under a CFL lamp than an LED?

    Oh.... we already know that 60lm/W is closer to 65 than 0lm/W.....
    • AndyPK
    • By AndyPK 6th Oct 17, 5:17 PM
    • 2,491 Posts
    • 663 Thanks
    AndyPK
    I can't recommend energizer LEDs enough.

    They are bright (brighter than incandescent)
    Perfect colour match (can't tell the difference!)
    Instant start being LED
    Inexpensive. Less than £5 each

    b&m sell them.

    I've tried candle, GLS, GU10, shaving light.
    Last edited by AndyPK; 06-10-2017 at 6:51 PM.
    • jack_pott
    • By jack_pott 6th Oct 17, 5:37 PM
    • 4,295 Posts
    • 5,518 Thanks
    jack_pott
    Thats a rather silly comment.
    Originally posted by NineDeuce
    Reductio ad Absurdum
    How about we do a survey and we see if sitting the dark is more akin to sitting under a CFL lamp than an LED?

    Oh.... we already know that 60lm/W is closer to 65 than 0lm/W.....
    You weren't comparing lm/W in post 11, you were rejecting that in favour of comparing power consumption alone.

    I repeat again if you don't compare lamps of equivalent brightness the comparison is meaningless. What would you say if Tesco told you their bags of potatoes are half the price of Lidl's whilst neglecting to tell you they're also half the size? Why do you think there's legislation requiring that the package must tell you how much light (or potato) you're getting for your money?
    Last edited by jack_pott; 06-10-2017 at 5:43 PM.
    I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
    Friedrich Nietzsche
    • Cardew
    • By Cardew 6th Oct 17, 10:32 PM
    • 27,114 Posts
    • 13,226 Thanks
    Cardew
    I can't recommend energizer LEDs enough.

    They are bright (brighter than incandescent)
    Perfect colour match (can't tell the difference!)
    Instant start being LED
    Inexpensive. Less than £5 each

    b&m sell them.

    I've tried candle, GLS, GU10, shaving light.
    Originally posted by AndyPK
    IMO £5 each is not inexpensive, Firms like Screwfix are selling a variety of LEDs - including dimmable - for £2 each.
    • nic_c
    • By nic_c 7th Oct 17, 8:46 AM
    • 1,125 Posts
    • 640 Thanks
    nic_c
    IMO £5 each is not inexpensive, Firms like Screwfix are selling a variety of LEDs - including dimmable - for £2 each.
    Originally posted by Cardew
    The cheapest LED in the likes of screwfx tend to be for fairly dim bulbs, below 300lm. Most of my bulbs tend to be 1100-1600lm since I want to be able to see. lol

    You can get them in supermarkets too. I was looking for a filament style LED golf ball for 450lm and Asda was cheaper than screwfix.
    • AndyPK
    • By AndyPK 7th Oct 17, 10:14 AM
    • 2,491 Posts
    • 663 Thanks
    AndyPK
    I said less than £5 each.

    They are certainly a lot brighter than the ones I got from screwfix.

    The energizer one always impress me by being brighter than incandescent.
    It must be their goal, to ensure the customer isn't put off the brand/LED products it makes.

    To see some of them:

    http://www.bmstores.co.uk/search?q=energizer

    more fitments are available.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,209Posts Today

5,597Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @bearface83: @MartinSLewis check out the @Missguided new 60% off offer. Upping the cost of items almost double to make us think it?s a?

  • RT @efitzpat: Thank you SO SO much @MartinSLewis for your Student Loans refund advice! I just got a grand refunded right before Xmas! Whoop?

  • Have a lovely weekend folks. Don't do anything (fiscally) that I wouldn't do!

  • Follow Martin