JWS: ‘In case you missed this article, it describes the same disappointing experiences I have had with a couple of dozen CFLs (which you have lauded from time to time).’
☞ I’ve had some die, too. The dimmable ones seem most problematic. But most just keep burning and burning, saving a ton of energy.
That said . . .
$7 LEDs FOR YOUR CANDLEABRA
Bill Bruno: ‘OK these are not very bright (billed to take the place of 40-watt bulbs) … but 1.5 watts! And unlike CFLs they don’t put out all kinds of radiofrequency interference, don’t have mercury, and don’t have high frequency flicker.’
It’s a stretch to say they’re equivalent to a 40-watt incandescent. But one bulb is enough to light a small room sufficiently to keep you from banging into things. And one clamped to a shelf just above my head makes for an acceptable reading light.
Leaving all 4 on night and day for a full year would cost about $6. Compared with $160 to run 4 40-watt bulbs all year . . . a saving, if you have some reason to leave lights on all year around the clock – which I hope you do not – of $154 a year on a $40 investment.
The saving is lower in comparison with CFLs, but still significant.
This brand is not recommended for dimmers.
SIMPLE ELECTRIC MATH
An easy benchmark from which to make back of the envelope estimates:
One Watt, One year, One dollar
by Eric Drexler on March 8, 2009
For residential customers in the U.S., the average price of electricity has recently been at $0.115 per kilowatt-hour. This works out to almost exactly $1 per Watt-year: Leave a 100 Watt light bulb on for a year, pay $100. I found this surprising when I calculated it. The number is simple, memorable, and encourages conservation. Pass it on.
☞ Pass it on, indeed.
(A kilowatt is 1,000 watts. Draw 1,000 watts for 1 hour, and you’ve consumed 1 kilowatt-hour. As there are roughly 9 thousand hours in a year, running 1 watt all year requires 9 kilowatt-hours of electricity, which at 11 cents or so each costs $1.)
But how exactly did they get sheep to do this?