It’s the same story for basically any part of a home. Faucets, furniture, tubs, windows, doors, floors, lamps, you name it.
What a testament to the manufacturing advances that have made it profitable to cater to every possible taste, budget, and architectural layout. It’s incredible actually.
I just wish there was some way to replace the LEDs on these things when they inevitably die. And, no matter what large number of years or decades are slathered on the box, inevitably at least one LED panel will blow out three to six months after purchase, nominally still in warranty but good luck getting any service under it, I'm sure. If there was, there could be a place for at least some of these in a house, but the amount of crap that you have no choice but to throw out as soon as the LEDs fry is insane.
This is why my "fancy" lighting fixture is an old track (whose proprietary lights died a long time ago) wrapped with an extension cable with 5 standard sockets on it, and some standard light bulbs in it. We dress it up with ribbons and stuff for the seasons. It doesn't look as nice as any of the things in that article, not even the gaudy and tasteless ones, but when a bulb burn out, I put a new one in and get on with life, I don't throw out an entire fan and buy a new one.
I'm old enough to remember when I was promised LEDs would last approximately forever without having to be replaced.
> I'm old enough to remember when I was promised LEDs would last approximately forever without having to be replaced.
Yep, I remember that when Obama banned most incandescent lights because 'LED lighting is the future and 100 year lifespans blabla'.
Mind you, we used CFLs in the warm season, and incandescent in cold seasons. Incandescents are 100% efficient in cold seasons (heater AND light).
As much as I deign to admit, Trump reversed Obama's ban. And Biden reinstated it. I don't think Trump reversed Biden's reinstatement though. He's been way too busy with wrecking the country for shits and giggles.
But what the LED manufacturers figured out is they could overdrive LEDs and use substandard electronics for driving them. So sure, LEDs are more efficient, but they're the same old burnout cycle that's forced on us.
And we know all of this by the fact that Phillips makes "Dubai Lamps", and you can't buy them at any price. <a href="https://hackaday.com/2021/01/17/leds-from-dubai-the-royal-lights-you-cant-buy/" rel="nofollow">https://hackaday.com/2021/01/17/leds-from-dubai-the-royal-li...
What do you mean by "inefficient"? 100W goes into the bulb and the same 100W go out. Energy remains in the room. How is it different to burning gas to get the same 100W? Or am I missing something?
A 100 Watt light bulb consumes 100 Watts. It emits 100 Watts. That's 8,190 BTU every 24 hours, and it is perfectly efficient at doing this.
At $0.1745 per kiloWatt hour, it costs $0.419 to produce those 8,190 BTUs.
A natural gas furnace at 90% efficiency, meanwhile: Yeah, 10% goes right out the pipe and is lost.
But if natural gas costs $1.346 per therm, then producing 8,190 BTUs of useful heat costs closer to the realm of $0.123.
One thing thing costs about 42 cents. The other thing costs about 12 cents. 42 moneys is more than 12 moneys. :)
---
I might opine that the most cost-efficient way of dealing with an incandescent light bulb is to immediately replace it with an LED bulb, and then landfill the old thing even though it still works.
4-packs of 100 Watt-equivalent LED bulbs are $12.97 at Wal-Mart, or about $3.24 per bulb. If it's the heating season and natural gas is being used at 90% efficiency, then replacing the incandescent pays for itself in about 300 hours of use. The LED will then continue to work and save money for thousands of additional hours.
Gshaheen · · focus · HN ↗
What a testament to the manufacturing advances that have made it profitable to cater to every possible taste, budget, and architectural layout. It’s incredible actually.
jerf · · focus · HN ↗
This is why my "fancy" lighting fixture is an old track (whose proprietary lights died a long time ago) wrapped with an extension cable with 5 standard sockets on it, and some standard light bulbs in it. We dress it up with ribbons and stuff for the seasons. It doesn't look as nice as any of the things in that article, not even the gaudy and tasteless ones, but when a bulb burn out, I put a new one in and get on with life, I don't throw out an entire fan and buy a new one.
I'm old enough to remember when I was promised LEDs would last approximately forever without having to be replaced.
nekusar · · focus · HN ↗
Yep, I remember that when Obama banned most incandescent lights because 'LED lighting is the future and 100 year lifespans blabla'.
Mind you, we used CFLs in the warm season, and incandescent in cold seasons. Incandescents are 100% efficient in cold seasons (heater AND light).
As much as I deign to admit, Trump reversed Obama's ban. And Biden reinstated it. I don't think Trump reversed Biden's reinstatement though. He's been way too busy with wrecking the country for shits and giggles.
But what the LED manufacturers figured out is they could overdrive LEDs and use substandard electronics for driving them. So sure, LEDs are more efficient, but they're the same old burnout cycle that's forced on us.
And we know all of this by the fact that Phillips makes "Dubai Lamps", and you can't buy them at any price. <a href="https://hackaday.com/2021/01/17/leds-from-dubai-the-royal-lights-you-cant-buy/" rel="nofollow">https://hackaday.com/2021/01/17/leds-from-dubai-the-royal-li...
usefulcat · · focus · HN ↗
That's resistive heating, which is the most inefficient means of heating. Worse than natural gas or heating oil, and much worse than a heat pump.
KETHERCORTEX · · focus · HN ↗
ssl-3 · · focus · HN ↗
A 100 Watt light bulb consumes 100 Watts. It emits 100 Watts. That's 8,190 BTU every 24 hours, and it is perfectly efficient at doing this.
At $0.1745 per kiloWatt hour, it costs $0.419 to produce those 8,190 BTUs.
A natural gas furnace at 90% efficiency, meanwhile: Yeah, 10% goes right out the pipe and is lost.
But if natural gas costs $1.346 per therm, then producing 8,190 BTUs of useful heat costs closer to the realm of $0.123.
One thing thing costs about 42 cents. The other thing costs about 12 cents. 42 moneys is more than 12 moneys. :)
---
I might opine that the most cost-efficient way of dealing with an incandescent light bulb is to immediately replace it with an LED bulb, and then landfill the old thing even though it still works.
4-packs of 100 Watt-equivalent LED bulbs are $12.97 at Wal-Mart, or about $3.24 per bulb. If it's the heating season and natural gas is being used at 90% efficiency, then replacing the incandescent pays for itself in about 300 hours of use. The LED will then continue to work and save money for thousands of additional hours.