This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under
GDPR Article 89.
Re: Lights & Tom
- To: s*@listbot.com
- Subject: Re: Lights & Tom
- From: k*@pobox.com (Kragen Sitaker)
- Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 09:04:46 -0500 (EST)
Square Foot Gardening List - http://www.flinet.com/~gallus/sqft.html
Bill writes:
> *They [fluorescents] are 90% efficient where an incandescent is 25%
> about. You are at about 65%. Replace them. hard on ballast and
> waste electricity. Plants get less benefit. Estimate the date,
> write on bulb. Use for temp use in a laundry room if you must keep
> them.
According to http://www.state.sc.us/energy/efflight.htm, incandescents
are no more than 10% efficient, while fluorescents are "up to 5 times
more efficient", which presumably means 50% or less. A little further
down, it explains that low-pressure sodium lights are "the most
efficient light source presently available", with an efficiency of
35%. Another web page (http://www.holophane.com/School/HL-862.htm)
explains that LPS lights deliver 100-180 lumens per watt; 180 lumens
per watt is ten times the efficacy of a standard 100-watt bulb.
It's hard to find good info on absolute efficiency of light bulbs;
these figures obviously all contradict one another. Still, it seems
doubtful that fluorescents are 90% efficient.
One of the points the various lighting-efficiency pages made is that
you might be better off with a high-intensity discharge lamp (such as a
mercury light) in a situation like this. HID lamps have some
disadvantages for normal use --- they take a few minutes to turn on,
they're not available in small wattages, and they have relatively poor
color rendition --- but those don't seem to figure here.
> *Yeah... engineers are such jerks , huh. Always with blindres on.
> Can only see straight ahead, and only with that right hat on and
> matching coffee cup and pencil protector.
Uh, yeah. Thanks. Now, where did I put my "pencil protector"?
--
<kragen@pobox.com> Kragen Sitaker <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/>
The Internet stock bubble didn't burst on 1999-11-08. Hurrah!
<URL:http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/bubble.html>
The power didn't go out on 2000-01-01 either. :)
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to sqft-unsubscribe@listbot.com
______________________________________________________________________
Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com
Other Mailing lists |
Author Index |
Date Index |
Subject Index |
Thread Index