Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] modern light sources



I am personally very concerned about the move to drop incandescents. I am one of those who are very sensitive to the strobe effect of fluorescent bulbs (my eyes have what is known as a high "flicker fusion frequency"). I avoid stores that use fluorescents as much as I practically can and I light my office with incandescents.

However, I am very encouraged about the development of LED lighting. I have an LED lamp that I use in my lab and I am quite comfortable working with it on - just as much as with incandescent. LED's are currently rather expensive, but I am sure the cost will come down. I would hate to see fluorescents mandated to the detriment of research on LEDs.

Bob at PC

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-
bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of John Denker
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 1:52 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] modern light sources

On 01/15/2011 10:01 AM, David Willey wrote:
Why use that wonderfully organized source
of energy, mains electricity, in a manner that makes no use of that
organization? Better drive a heat pump with it,

An excellent point.

We should also keep in mind that in an office building of any
reasonable size, there is no need for heating of any kind --
not from heat balls, heat pumps, or anything else -- because
the people and the office equipment produce more heat than is
needed. They have to run the cooling equipment year-round.

Therefore if they waste energy by using heat balls, non-green
computers, and/or anything else, they have to pay for that
energy _twice_. They pay once to operate the heat ball, and
pay again to operate the cooling equipment.

Furthermore, the labor involved in changing a light bulb
costs more than the bulb itself, so there is an advantage
to anything with a long service life.

Altogether, switching away from incandescents is a win/win/win
proposition.

On 01/18/2011 10:07 AM, Vern Lindberg wrote:
Also exempt are several classes of specialty lights, including
rough service bulbs, ......

For rough service, you don't want incandescents anyway.
For a flashlight (that might get dropped) or for an
aircraft landing light (mounted on the engine cowling
and subject to LOTS of vibration) you really want LEDs,
even if the initial cost is 10x or 20x higher.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/teledynelandinglight.php
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l