We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Fluorescent tube
Options
Comments
-
gefnew said:I wouldn't attach a great deal of weight to that information.The site appears to be aimed at selling LEDs in the USA(?) marketplace. I couldn't confirm the USA origin because the contact details are limited to a gmail address. And their privacy policy consists only of "Suggested text".1
-
He has a 4ft fluorescent tube and and until recently a 150w bulb as well, now replaced with a 9w LED.0
-
gefnew said:Hopeless American site, the bloke simply hasn't a clue, producing dozens of howlers such as these."On average, a fluorescent tube will use between 20 and 30 watts of energy."LEDs are much brighter than fluorescents. The reason for this is that LEDs emit their light along a single spectrum, while fluorescents have a much broader range of light wavelengths. This allows LEDs to produce much sharper diffused light, which is what makes them more efficient and brighter."Led tubes have been known to work for as long as 40 years."A fluorescent tube has a higher light output per watt than a LED bulb. Thus, fluorescent tubes use lesser energy to generate brighter light. Fluorescent tube, on the other hand, gets adversely affected by temperature and require ballasts to convert electricity. The ballast also dims with age. The fluorescent tube also flickers, and it takes some time for our eyes to adjust to the changing light."Fluorescent tubes are more energy-efficient than Led bulbs. However, fluorescent tubes produce about ¼ of the light emitted by incandescent bulbs."1
-
@Gerry1 I was going to ask you to explain in more detail what you meant by some comments until I realised you were quoting all the garbage from that site
@Benny2000 I hope you mean that the 150W bulb has been replaced by a 9W LED and not the 4ft fluorescent!Benny2020 said:He has a 4ft fluorescent tube and and until recently a 150w bulb as well, now replaced with a 9w LED.
Depending on the make etc of that LED it could have a light output of about 806 lumens.
A 150W incandescent could be about 2500 lumens but will be dependant on brand also clear or frosted.
A 36W 4ft fluorescent will be about 3350 lumens but remember that's radiated all round the tube (beam angle 360 degrees) whereas with a 4ft LED tube it will be about 1600/1800 lumens maybe upto 2000 (brand dependent) and the beam angle is usually somewhat less than 360 degrees (but could be upto 320 degrees - brand dependant) so in a lot of cases the LED tube will seem as bright as a fluorescent.
With a standard older 4ft fluorescent fitting using a conventional ballast (not an electronic one) about 10W will be wasted in the ballast, so total consumption will be just under around 50W., however what the meter clocks may be dependent on the power factor, I usually assume worst case. You can retrofit 4ft LED tubes in those fittings BUT it depends on the brand of tube if the fitting needs it's wiring altering, so CHECK before you buy - the easy ones come with a dummy replacement starter and you just replace the tube. Power consumption is about 16/18W, no ballast wastage.
If the fitting has an electronic ballast, it's a rewire job.0 -
50W 3hrs average a day over a year 54.7kwh at 30p £16.440W 3hrs 43.8kwh £13.1
0 -
markin said:50W 3hrs average a day over a year 547kwh at 30p £16450/1000 x 3 x 365 = 54.75 kWh which is £16.40 , still a significant cost when every penny counts though.Made me think though, my kitchen light is on more like 8 hours a day, so it is costing me £44 a year. Maybe I should look to replace it with a couple of 10W LEDs.....I want to go back to The Olden Days, when every single thing that I can think of was better.....
(except air quality and Medical Science)
1 -
I've been using the Philips LED tubes, and they seem to be well made. They are available at a reasonable cost from Toolstation and are easy to fit. As others have said, if it is a normal ballast, all you need to do is to replace the starter with the one supplied with the tube and then fit the tube. Light output wise, it seems to be about the same as the old tube so no real change. Consumption wise, it is definitely less according to our IHD.0
-
facade said:
Made me think though, my kitchen light is on more like 8 hours a day,0 -
Ultrasonic said:facade said:
Made me think though, my kitchen light is on more like 8 hours a day,It is on when I can't see properly, and fluorescents don't like being switched on & off, so 5pm 'till bedtime, and in Winter, about 2 hours at getting up time.Probably 8 hours is bit of an over estimate, maybe an average of 6 over the whole year.If I had LEDs, I could switch them off every time I leave the kitchen. I need to replace the fluorescent soon anyway as the tubes will get harder to find.I want to go back to The Olden Days, when every single thing that I can think of was better.....
(except air quality and Medical Science)
0 -
markin said:50W 3hrs average a day over a year 547kwh at 30p £16440W 3hrs 438kwh £131
Unless I need another coffee and countdown numbers round?
So worse case on 6 hours a day average £32.86 a year
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards