Old Wives Tale or not? Flourescents - switching on costs more than leaving it on

Sooetie

OK my dad always used to leave the light on in the kitchen as he said that the energy used to switch it on took more than to leave it on for more than an hour.

Is this true and are newer fittings more cost effective?

Thanks

Coopdivi

' In general, a start-up sequence takes around 1-2 hours off the tube's life.'

I replaced the fluorescent tube in my kitchen eight years ago and it's still going strong so a couple of hours of lost performance is neither here nor there. Admittedly I had to buy a new starter a few years ago which was difficult to source but as it came as a twin pack so I've got no worries about a replacement any time soon.

cing0

It is certainly true that switching on any electrical appliance consumes close to an infinite amount of energy, but only for an inversely proportionate amount of time though.
The cost is probably damage to the tube and starter, not kwh consumption.

RichardD1970

Coopdivi wrote: »

' In general, a start-up sequence takes around 1-2 hours off the tube's life.'

I replaced the fluorescent tube in my kitchen eight years ago and it's still going strong so a couple of hours of lost performance is neither here nor there. Admittedly I had to buy a new starter a few years ago which was difficult to source but as it came as a twin pack so I've got no worries about a replacement any time soon.

I've never had to change the tubes in my kitchen and we had the light installed when we had the house rewired as a condition of the mortgage. We moved in, in Dec 1995.