Have light bulbs become overpriced?

elstimpo

Stompa wrote: »

I agree. It makes little economic sense to change from CFL to LED until the price of LED bulbs becomes comparable to those of CFLs.

Of course, if the startup delay or quality of light bothers you then that's another matter.

It obviously depends on usage. If LED will save you 50% in energy costs compared to a CFL and usage is heavy then surely LED is a no brainer.

Megaman 12w CFL Gu10 costs £4.50 and has a lifespan of 8000 hours yet a good 6w LED Spot for £10 will last 25,000 hours. I doubt it's going to take long to recover the extra £5.50 for the LED and it's going to last 3 times as long.

Obviously in rooms where usage is very low, then in terms of savings, it might make sense to stay with CFL if thats your perogative.

elstimpo

Nada666 wrote: »

I haven't seen LED bulbs that match CFLs - is their improvement longevity/robustness? They seem to still use 7 to 9 W but have much lower luminosity than 9/11 W CFL.

What lumens do you want from an LED Bulb? There are loads out there with Lumens that not only match CFL's but beat them.

9w LED Bulb, Warm White - 780 Lumens, £10
9w LED Bulb, Natural White - 800 Lumens, £10
7w LED Bulb, Warm White - 640 Lumens, £9
7w LED Bulb, Natural White - 650 Lumens, £9

This Megaman 11w CFL has 600 Lumens
http://www.megamanuk.com/products/cfl-lamps/tubular/liliput/311224/

Stompa

elstimpo wrote: »

Megaman 12w CFL Gu10 costs £4.50 and has a lifespan of 8000 hours yet a good 6w LED Spot for £10 will last 25,000 hours. I doubt it's going to take long to recover the extra £5.50 for the LED and it's going to last 3 times as long.

If we assume 10p/kWh, it would take 9167 hours of use to recover the extra £5.50. So, if the light is on for 4 hours per day, 365 days per year, it would take 6.27 years. IMO, you'd need to have great faith in the predicted lifespans to go down the LED route at the moment. And more importantly, since the payback time is so long, there's a very high chance that cheaper and more efficient LEDs will come along in the meantime. In my view, sticking with CFLs is a no brainer.

I've no doubt that LEDs will become the best option at some point, but personally I don't think we're there yet.

savemoney

I just replaced some of my lights from Halogen gu5.3 and also CFL gu10 (bathroom) and am pleased with the output especially bathroom even though the cost saving isnt a huge amount compared with kitchen. That said wouldnt replaced CFL's in rest of house until perhaps costs come down for led's. I did change the light in kicthen from gu5.3 to gu10's primary as I didn't like that light.

MarilynMonroe_2

I used to pay something like 59p for a candle bulb not that long ago, now I am hard pushed to find any but can expect to pay over £1.
Not all lights can use energy saving bulbs and boy are they charging for it!
You also shouldnt be near an energy saving bulb, so side lamps use ''normal' bulbs and keep energy saving for main top lights.

lstar337

MarilynMonroe wrote: »

You also shouldnt be near an energy saving bulb, so side lamps use ''normal' bulbs and keep energy saving for main top lights.

Why Pray tell?

MarilynMonroe_2

Cos they are dangerous to your health, they could possibly cause cancer. It's generally advised to keep them to a top light and not a side lamp nearer you.

victor2

MarilynMonroe wrote: »

Cos they are dangerous to your health, they could possibly cause cancer. It's generally advised to keep them to a top light and not a side lamp nearer you.

Must have missed that bit of general advice. But given that life also generally gives you cancer, I won't worry too much about them being all over my house.

lstar337

MarilynMonroe wrote: »

Cos they are dangerous to your health, they could possibly cause cancer. It's generally advised to keep them to a top light and not a side lamp nearer you.

Please point me to the scientific study that provides the evidence to support this wild claim.

rogerblack

lstar337 wrote: »

Please point me to the scientific study that provides the evidence to support this wild claim.

http://www.arpansa.gov.au/radiationprotection/factsheets/is_cfl.cfm

Found that 4 of the 24 tested lights breached safety standards.
If you place them 10cm from the skin, and use them 8 hours a day.

At 25cm, there was no issue.

The amount of UV emitted at 10cm was comparable (in those four lamps) to 10 minutes of noonday bright sun.

At 50cm, it's about equivalent to 10 seconds.

Can this be of concern, if you are one of the unfortunate people who need to go outside in complete blackout clothing that lets no light through whatsoever, as any sun at all will cause you to burn, even with the strongest suncreams, in moments sure.

This is a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.

Even this very small output is greatly reduced in 'double envelope bulbs' - bulbs with an outer shell like this one: http://www.johnlewis.com/philips-8w-cfl-candle-bulb/p151218#default