EcoRenovator  

Go Back   EcoRenovator > Improvements > Lighting
Advanced Search


Blog Register 60+ Home Energy Saving Tips Recent Posts Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-01-08, 06:45 PM   #1
Eco-Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pugetropolis, WA
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Most efficient lighting

You may be surprised by the efficiency of different light sources, ranked by Lm/W look at these sources:
  • 200 Low pressure sodium
  • 150 Metal Halide
  • 100 28w t5 florescent tube
  • 93 36W t8 florescent tube
  • 60 cfl light
  • 26-70 LED (Very directional)
  • 24 quartz halogen
  • 15 standard incandescent
I have actually seen 35 watt metal halide lamps. They make very good outdoor lighting for constant on/long term on situations.

ac7ss is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-08, 06:48 PM   #2
Administrator
 
SVOboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 291
Thanks: 3
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Neat stuff. Where did you get this from?

PS: Welcome to ecorenovator!
SVOboy is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-08, 06:58 PM   #3
Eco-Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pugetropolis, WA
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

a quick google search got me this page for the numbers. However it can be surprising what people assume vs. reality.
ac7ss is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-08, 07:08 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Daox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 4,640
Thanks: 400
Thanked 253 Times in 205 Posts
Default

Very nice comparison. I always wondered about industrial lighting.
__________________
Current project -
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Daox is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-09, 11:09 AM   #5
Helper EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

are those all "same wattage" bulbs?
Sandcruiser is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-09, 02:40 PM   #6
Lurking Renovator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 22
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

My understanding is that all of them have different spots where they are most efficient.

And what was a 'prototype' white LED back in 2006 is pretty standard now. So, LED would be up over a 100 and with a lens, you can disperse the light in many different patterns.

I thought metal halide was more like 65-115 lm/W.

Another consideration is quality of light. I do not like the light produced by low pressure sodium fixtures for indoor use.
ldjessee is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-09, 04:07 PM   #7
Helper EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

the reason I ask is that I'm under the impression that for most single lamps, lumens/watt falls off as you increase wattage.

ie: a 25 watt bulb is not 1/2 the brightness of a 50 watt bulb (in incandescent)

in comparison: if you go from 20 watts of LED lighting, up to 50 watts of LED lighting, you have increased the number of emitters, not just the wattage. The same holds (more or less) true for FL tubes-- a 4ft, 40w tube is putting out about the same Lumens/watt as a 2ft 20w tube (from my recollection) but my memory tells me that a 500w metal halide is not twice the brightness of a 250w metal halide, nor are 5 x 100w metal halides the same brightness as 1x500w metal halide.

Still, the comparison of different technologies is interesting, at least.

I'd like to see an additional column added for embodied energy and toxity. ie: it is pretty cheap and easy to build an incandscent bulb, with little toxicity. It is expensive (for now) to build an LED. We all know which lasts longer and which is more efficient, but if you are looking at using one vs the other for a light that is only one for a few hours/year (in theory)... at what point is there true break-even?

I suppose that the issue is even more complicated when you talk about heavy metals found in halides or florescent lights. The costs of disposal/recycling or pollution are much higher for those lights (around here, they are all going to end up in landfill or burn-pile. I no longer buy floro tubes because of this problem).
Sandcruiser is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-09, 04:12 PM   #8
Helper EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

startup time is another good column. A CFL that takes 4 seconds to fire up isn't a good candidate for a motion-detector light. A metal halide pendant that takes 30-60 seconds to full-brightness would be absurd in a garage door opener, or as a refrigerator light (just to pick obvious failures). In an office or workshop, it might not be a problem to wait a minute until you get full-intensity, and MH lighting can be had in very pleasing CRI (color rendering index?) values.
Sandcruiser is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-10, 12:26 AM   #9
Apprentice EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 113
Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Cree LED's have reached over 200 lumens per watt,earlier this year, but are not yet on the market, but several emitter manufacturers are selling lamps at over 100 w/l. The GE and Philips lamps that are being sold in the box stores are way overpriced.
But LED's pay for themselves in off grid situations and in situations where changing burned out lamps is expensive. As far as I can tell LED's are the lamp of the future. We use them for most of our lighting and are completely satisfied with them.

nibs is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO
Ad Management by RedTyger
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design