Beware: CFL duds

That would be true. See below.

RTA in NSW estimate to save 10GWh/yr (10,400 tonnes of CO2/year) by changing to LED lights, with a total saving of $2.8M pa in annual energy, maintenance and upgrade cost.

formatting link

David

Reply to
David
Loading thread data ...

Yes, plus the lower power they consume compared to the lamps. This caused a major problem with the old traffic control boxes when they started switching over a while back. The boxes are designed to detect lamp failure and they had a real problem with the LED lamps. The LED lamp housing had a transformer in it, so it was being driven from the AC mains, at a very low current through cables that had a lot of noise on them.

Reply to
swanny

Yeah, I've run into plenty of duds too.

But my main problem with the CFLs is that you only get full brightness out of them on the first day. They seem to get dim *really* fast, & fade to near uselessness after a few months.

Reply to
Lionel

"David the Anonymous Fool" "

** Lets just break that pile of blatant PR drivel down into basic facts: 10GWh seems like a lot of energy - but is not.

What is the potential bill for each hour ( are traffic lights even metered ? )

10GWh / 365/24 = 1.14 MWh.

1.14MWh = 1140 kWh

At 10 cents = $ 114 per hour for * EVERY* traffic light in NSW !!!

What does even ONE maintenance crew and vehicle cost the RTA to have on the road per hour ?

And there are how many in NSW ???

Any real saving is entirely in reduced maintenance costs.

...... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

"swanny"

** Absolute BOLLOCKS !!

....... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

**Yep. And, unlike white LEDs, coloured ones have an indefinite life-span.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

Funny, I still have a brand new Phillips CFL in the box that never worked at all! Unfortunately I lost the receipt by the time I went to use it. My experience with other Phillips CFL's is not much better either, but then I think they are ALL crap! Standard fluoro tubes seem to last forever (at least ten times as long IME) so the fascination with CFL's has me puzzled.

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

They're talking about SAVING that amount. They are USING much more. Your figures are stunted....

Reply to
Jonno

Indefinite as in you never know how long they will last. :-) I certainly have replaced quite a few failed LED's over the years. But besides failing completely, they can also diminish in light output. I have a bar graph display that started out with 12 equal intensity LED's and now has about 3 distinctly different intensities. I guess like everything else it depends on the quality of the LED's.

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

**Certainly. Early generation LEDs did suffer the effects you speak of, but modern LEDs (anything beyond 1990 or so) of quality manufacture, is likely to last pretty much forever. I had LEDs in my last home (quality ones) which had not diminished in light output over a period of 15 years, whilst a couple of white LEDs had appreciably lost output (down to around 30%) over a period of 7 years.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

That equates to just under $1,000,000 pa saving on electricity. I wouldn't call that insignificant.

David

Reply to
David

I Agree But to get the whole picture, this page gives some more insight, >>> >

formatting link

Reply to
Jonno

"David the Anonymous Fool" "

** $114 per hour is a MINISCULE amount for a body like the RTA.

Running one vehicle with a two man crew is far more expensive.

PLUS they have to borrow $18M to carry out the work.

Only way it will ever be paid off is if there is a dramatic reduction in maintenance.

....... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

You've only just bought your first CFL? You can light your whole house with

100watts (and then drive to work and use 100,000 watts).

Michael

Reply to
Michael C

"Michael C" "Phil Allison"

** No way.

The first one I bought was 20 years ago, had an iron ballast inside it !

Musta bought about 10 more since then - none of them worth the money.

....... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

Yes bloody heavy buggers they were.

I've bought even more than that, all for one single light socket. Would have been far cheaper to put in a proper tube fitting in the first place, as I have done in some other spots. Even though I kept hoping for an improvement, they just seem to get worse!

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

Total savings is claimed at $2.8M pa, so if electricity saving is $1M pa, the maintenance reduction is approx $1.8M pa. This hardly makes the electricity saving *MINISCULE* compared to the maintenance costs, and this is only for about 30% of the traffic lights, not *EVERY* light.

Got any figures to back up your claims Phil, or are they just something you pulled out your ass?

David

Reply to
David

"David the Anonymous Fool" "

** $114 per hour is a MINISCULE amount for a body like the RTA.

Get real anytime - you PITA f****it.

** Sure - the interest on the $18M loan exceeds the puny energy saving.

The maintenance cost saving due to long LED lamp life is the ONLY thing the makes the deal potentially viable.

So IS the only economic reason for going ahead.

PR bollocks does not count.

........ Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

Neither does your unsubstantiated ravings.

I guess providing actual figures is a bit beyond your ability.

Without the $1M pa energy savings, the maintenance cost savings would only just meet the cost of the loan, thus the energy savings are the ONLY thing that makes the deal viable.

David

Reply to
David

What do you mean 'Philips seem to be good'? They are all the same. Monday is philips day, Tuesday is osram day . . . . . Friday afternoon is coles and woolies generic day. The only difference is the stamp they put on the glass. Go for a tour of a lamp factory and see for yourself.

Reply to
Two Bob

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.