Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

dimmer switches: power savers?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

val189

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 7:10:59 PM7/16/07
to
Or do they merely lessen the light output?

Rod Speed

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 7:18:05 PM7/16/07
to
val189 <gweh...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Or do they merely lessen the light output?

They do both.


New Leaf

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 7:30:10 PM7/16/07
to
On Jul 16, 4:10 pm, val189 <gwehr...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Or do they merely lessen the light output?

Val, I think your idea of scheduling bulb cleaning is one of the most
effective ways to save on electricity for lighting. A clean 60W gives
as much light as a dusty 100W, especially if it's in an enclosed light
fixture that you've also cleaned.

Viv

Don K

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 7:44:35 PM7/16/07
to
"New Leaf" <noo...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1184628610....@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Is that something you measured or did the 60W/100W relationship come
to you as some sort of revelation?

Will a slightly dusty 75W give off less light as a dusty 100W but
more than a clean 60W?
:)

Don


Bob F

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 7:54:50 PM7/16/07
to

"val189" <gweh...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1184627459.0...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> Or do they merely lessen the light output?
>

Using dimmers will result in less light for the power used. A low
wattage bulb is more efficient at producing less light.

Bob


Logan Shaw

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 9:21:09 PM7/16/07
to

Hmm, I'd never thought of this before, but I suppose that is
one advantage of 3-way bulbs: 3 different light levels, each
with all filaments involved burning at full power and thus
maximum efficiency.

- Logan

Rod Speed

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 9:28:05 PM7/16/07
to

Yep, except that the full on format isnt as efficient as just one filament of that power.


Bob F

unread,
Jul 16, 2007, 10:20:04 PM7/16/07
to

"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:469c1985$0$4716$4c36...@roadrunner.com...

And they make 3-way compact flourescents also.

Bob


<RJ>

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 10:15:54 AM7/17/07
to

And a new 17W Compact flourescant
gives as much light as a 100W Incandescant bulb

Prices are down ( especially at WalMart.
Time to start switching over to CFL's

<rj>

Chloe

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 10:28:36 AM7/17/07
to
"<RJ>" <bara...@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:hkjp93lj1mbt64ktu...@4ax.com...

They're coming out with more varieties, too. I was pleased to find CFLs
recently at Home Depot that put out the equivalent of 15 watts and have an
adapter that fits either lamp base or regular. I have several little lamps
sitting around in dark corners of rooms, a bathroom with no windows, etc.
where I like to keep a lamp on all the time in the daytime. Now the cost
will be so minimal I can do it without guilt <g>.


Don Klipstein

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 2:06:07 PM7/17/07
to
In <hkjp93lj1mbt64ktu...@4ax.com>, bara...@localnet.com wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:30:10 -0700, New Leaf <noo...@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 16, 4:10 pm, val189 <gwehr...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>> Or do they merely lessen the light output?
>>
>>Val, I think your idea of scheduling bulb cleaning is one of the most
>>effective ways to save on electricity for lighting. A clean 60W gives
>>as much light as a dusty 100W, especially if it's in an enclosed light
>>fixture that you've also cleaned.
>>
>>Viv
>
>And a new 17W Compact flourescant
>gives as much light as a 100W Incandescant bulb

I find that it takes 25-26 watts of compact fluorescent to match the
1670-1750 lumens that a decent 100W incandescent produces.

An 18-20 watt CFL I find produces about as much light as a good 75W or a
lousy 100W incandescent (1100-1200 lumens).

- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)

New Leaf

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 2:19:47 PM7/17/07
to

Well, I guess this depends on how dusty your house is. I think a dusty
100W at my mom's house would equal a clean 40W!

Viv

Ward Abbott

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 5:09:24 PM7/17/07
to
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:28:36 -0400, "Chloe" <just...@spam.com>
wrote:

>They're coming out with more varieties, too. I was pleased to find CFLs
>recently at Home Depot that put out the equivalent of 15 watts and have an
>adapter that fits either lamp base or regular

My issue is the COLOR of the light. Most of them remind me of being
in a VFW basement congregation hall. The light is almost
unbearable.
Nothing beats a bright white halogen bulb.

Don Klipstein

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 5:38:54 PM7/17/07
to

I like 3500K ones, such as N:Vision and Sylvania "Bright White",
available at Home Depot and Lowes respectively. This is a "whiter shade
of warm white". I find it quite pleasant generally, though it can be a
bit "dreary gray" or "dreary with some sort of a greenish tinge" at dimmer
lighting levels.

As for a more incandescent color, I find most non-Sylvania spiral CFLs
15 watts or less do that fairly well. They may turn "off-color" towards
white or greenish white if they overheat in small enclosed fixtures or
recessed ceiling fixtures.
Higher wattage spirals I often find a bit less yellowish and more
pinkish, so they may do well if they run a little hotter than optimum.

As for ones that "err away from green", as in being pinkish (as well as
a bit whiter than most CFLs), try Sylvania spirals of their usual 3000K
color.

- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)

Chloe

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 5:46:00 PM7/17/07
to
"Ward Abbott" <pre...@terian.com> wrote in message
news:2tbq93pvm2bfjer8s...@4ax.com...

The light from these little 15-watt bulbs is slightly whiter than the
incandescent bulbs I used to use. But the difference is hardly noticeable.


Ward Abbott

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 6:26:45 PM7/17/07
to
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:46:00 -0400, "Chloe" <just...@spam.com>
wrote:

> 15-watt bulbs is slightly whiter than the
>incandescent bulbs I used to use. But the difference is hardly noticeable.

That is your perception. I find the color nauseating.

Logan Shaw

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 9:32:19 PM7/17/07
to

There are 3 main things related to light quality:

1. flicker
2. color temperature
3. color rendering index

Most CFLs have #1 pretty much completely solved with a high-frequency
ballast.

There are CFLs that have #2 right (they get something really close to
what an incandescent does), but you have to know to look for CFLs
with a color temperature around 2800K.

Most CFLs aren't so hot on #3, but some are better than others and
improvements have been made. The ideal is 100, and incandescents
get close to that. Some CFLs are supposed to be over 90 now, but
only the ones which claim to be "full spectrum" or something along
those lines. Typical ones are down around 80.

My point (if I have one) is that if you don't like CFLs, (a) they
are improving, and (b) make sure you are looking at ones with good
specs. Checking the specs is not necessary with incandescent bulbs
because they all have good light quality, so it's not something that
is obvious to most people. (It wasn't obvious to me when I first
bought a few CFLs.)

> Nothing beats a bright white halogen bulb.

Well, sunlight does. :-)

- Logan

Anthony Matonak

unread,
Jul 17, 2007, 10:34:38 PM7/17/07
to
Logan Shaw wrote:
...
> 2. color temperature
...

> There are CFLs that have #2 right (they get something really close to
> what an incandescent does), but you have to know to look for CFLs
> with a color temperature around 2800K.

I find that CFLs down around 2800K are way too red. They color looks
more like what you get when you dim incandescents or sit next to a
fire. While it may be quite romantic it looks too ugly for words.
I may be an unusual person but I prefer the ones in the 6400K range.

This is obviously an area where tastes (and eyeballs) vary so it's
important to actually see the CFL in operation so you can judge for
yourself.

The starting behavior of CFLs also vary pretty wildly. It's a good
idea to buy just one and try it before investing heavily in CFLs
that you might not like.

Anthony

Ward Abbott

unread,
Jul 18, 2007, 7:09:20 AM7/18/07
to
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:32:19 -0500, Logan Shaw
<lshaw-...@austin.rr.com> wrote:

>Well, sunlight does. :-)

As long as it isn't cloudy...and it only works half the time. If our
trucks only worked half the time...we would call them very unreliable.
VBG.

Dennis

unread,
Jul 18, 2007, 4:05:59 PM7/18/07
to
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:09:20 -0400, Ward Abbott <pre...@terian.com>
wrote:

Even if they worked half the time every day for 4 BILLION years?

Dennis (evil)
--
"There is a fine line between participation and mockery" - Wally

Zilbandy

unread,
Jul 18, 2007, 7:23:48 PM7/18/07
to
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:05:59 -0700, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>As long as it isn't cloudy...and it only works half the time. If our
>>trucks only worked half the time...we would call them very unreliable.

>Even if they worked half the time every day for 4 BILLION years?

LOL, good one!

--
Zilbandy

0 new messages