Re: Re: An end to high-energy bulbs

[Jim Noble <yahoo-groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul Bendall wrote:
> In some situations an Incandescent can be more efficient than a
> Fluorescent. I'm thinking of garage lights where they are on for less
> than a minute. The current needed to start the fluroescent will outway
> the savings in such a short time.
>

Maybe in the early days of fluorescent tubes, but not these days.

Mythbusters covered this in their "Lights on or off" feature:

http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/12/episode_69_22000_foot_fall_lig.html

> Based on the amount of energy consumed turning on the bulb, they were
> able calculated how long the bulb would have to be turned off in order
> to make it worth the energy savings, i.e. "It's best to turn off
the
> bulb if you are leaving the room for":
>
>     * Incandescent: 0.36 seconds
>     * CFL: 0.015 seconds
>     * Halogen: .51 seconds
>     * LED: 1.28 seconds
>     * Fluorescent: 23.3 seconds
>

Jim