FAQ: The End of the Light Bulb as We Know It

[second_pancake]

At the risk of making some even more furious, here is an article about an even more efficient bulb:

New LED Puts Incandescents, Fluorescents to Shame



Seoul semiconductor has created a light emitting diode that emits roughly 240 lumens and claims the highest efficiency (amount of electricity to amount of light) of any light source. Fluorescents hit 70 lumens per watt, incandescents max out at 15, but this new LED emits roughly 100 lumens per watt. The results, if and when this technology gets cheap enough for the mass market, will be smaller, more efficient light sources, and lights that can exist in far different form factors than the current bulb or tube shapes. The devices also have applications in consumer electronics, specifically LCD back lights and projectors.

LEDs with similar efficiencies have been produced at universities, but this is the first time a corporation has begun creating these superefficient LEDs. Seoul Semiconductor says that, while this advancement is significant, they're moving forward with even more efficient LEDs. They expect, for example, a 145 lumen per watt LED by 2008, which would double the efficiency of standard compact fluorescents. We just have to wait and see how expensive they are.

That's it.  I'm lobbying for a new law.  LEDs FOR EVERYONE!!!!   

[Charleston native]

While this technical discussion has been quite interesting, the fact remains that this so-called energy bill should have been returned to Congress with a request to craft a REAL energy bill.

This bill will do nothing to enhance effieciency or even begin to solve our energy supply problems.  There is nothing in the bill to increase domestic energy production, streamline the nuclear power development process, or provide incentives for refinery construction.  The first version of the bill from the House even included a provision for increasing taxes on suppliers which would have further increased the prices of an already artificially high commodity. Every alternative fuel at this point provides nowhere near the efficiency of current fossil fuel products.  And if you think the magical alternative is going to show up in the next 20 or 30 years I have a bridge I would like to sell you unless you've found the efficient catalyst to crack hydrogen from seawater.

More efficient lighting = drop in the bucket.  Smaller cars = better gas mileage = more miles driven(unless gov't plans on controlling that also) = no gain.  Ethanol = lower efficiency = higher fuel prices = higher food prices = waste of resourses.

As has been correctly stated, this is government interference at it's most unproductive level.  They have outdone themselves.  Not content with interference on the supply side they have started to hit the demand side as well.  You can't get any more efficient at creating an even larger problem.

The present administration and Congress seem content to wait for disaster to strike.  Considering the current price spikes caused by speculators manipulating risk factors and the inaction of government to take any concrete steps to so improve energy matters, a single major disruption in supply will cause major problems for our economy and security.  Unfortunately, I believe this will have to happen before there is enough of an outcry to take constructive action.

Wow, jaxnative, I couldn't have said it any better. We can all get caught up in the technical aspects of a fricking light bulb, but it won't change the facts that you have just said and that I have been trying to convey. This bill is government counterproduction/inefficiency/bureaucracy at its best (or worst). Fantastic post!

[Jason]

I'm talking about sources of power. The sources of power is what is important, and it shouldn't effect the standards that millions of households have in their equipment. Again, as I'm also repeating myself here, the intentions of this bill is to force people to use a product that many do not want. If the government wants to make power more efficient and cleaner, mandate innovations in power creation. Note that the bill did not address anything like that. My message to our government (including GWB, who I'm tired of defending and will not anymore): quit screwing with the average citizen.

True, the source of power in this state is very dated and there is no desire to change that even at the state level.  Nuclear power is very much needed, IMO, but requires a 15-20 year process to even get approval to finally start construction which can take another couple of years.  In the long run I would love to see nuke plants springing up across this state and rest of the country.  But in the short term we have to work with what we have, and what we have is an aging power generation system that relys on increasingly more expensive fossile fules (petrolium coke, and coal) that are harder and harder to find and very expensive to store.  Doing what we can today to help releave some of the burden of power system will benefit us in the short term as well as the long term, if and when we finally get nuke plants or even some other form of electrical power generation.

If power generation becomes the target of legislation like this then we'll most certainly see increases on our utility bills.  Besides, no matter how the power is produced (save some revolutionary new technology) only so much can be produced before the distribution system is spread so thin that brownouts still run rampant.  And if a revolutionary new technology is discovered it will be decades before it can become mainstream.  It is up to the consumer to do what they can to decrease their consumption and persue alternative methods of power generation themselves.  Solar and wind power are gaining steam and companies are springing up that offer cheaper start-up costs, redundant power supply when a connection to the utility is maintained, and built-in emergency power during storm situations.  If these consumer based power generation options become widespread we will all benefit from less pollution generating power plants, be them coal-fired or nuclear.  Again, in the end it will be up to the consumer, IMO.

As far as the car discussion is concerned, almost every major advancement in the American automobile (from seatbelts to airbags to fuel-effeciency) has been the result of federal legislation.  This bill extends over a 12 year period and is a slower paced "phase-out" of incandescent light bulbs and gas guzzling vehicles.  Both of these industries are already advancing toward meeting these criteria.  Not a year goes by that 10 new cars, trucks, or SUVs hit the market boasting increased fuel effeciency.  Its going to happen one way or the other but this bill, IMO, hurries the process a bit.  I can understand your concerns on the government toying with the market, but I don't see this as being a cataclismic doomsday for the US market.  Its just a small push for the consumer to start doing more help the whole.  The technology is already there, it just needs to be implemented.

I'm sorry, this is unproven. I'll believe it when I see it...then again, I can't really trust media sources anymore.

I did the math for you on the first page.  I am in the process of converting all of my incandescent bulbs over to CFLs and when I get a couple of months of usage on my bill I'll share the numbers with everyone.

[Jason]

That's it.  I'm lobbying for a new law.  LEDs FOR EVERYONE!!!!   

LEDs are absolutely amazing.  There are endless applications for the things and they are only getting better.

[second_pancake]

Solar and wind power are gaining steam and companies are springing up that offer cheaper start-up costs, redundant power supply when a connection to the utility is maintained, and built-in emergency power during storm situations.

Just to further emphasize this statement, if you produce your own power and remain 'on-the-grid', not only will your costs be offset by the power company, but you could even receive a check in the mail from them to you.  What a change, eh?  Imagine, getting a check every month FROM JEA instead of having to pay them!

[Jason]

^ That is true.  However, JEA nor FPL currently participate in that program.  I'm sure that they would consider it if the use of solar and wind power became more widespread.

Here is the website of a company that offers a cheap solar alternative by taking the amount you currently pay to the power company and locking in that rate for 20 years.  The kicker is that they want a $500 deposit up front to design the system.  You essentially rent it from them for 20 years at a locked in rate.  They design, install, and maintain it and if you decide you don't want it they come and take it away.  I've been considering this for quite sometime and am just waiting to find someone who has the system installed that would be willing to answer a few questions.

http://renu.citizenre.com/

[Charleston native]

...I did the math for you on the first page.  I am in the process of converting all of my incandescent bulbs over to CFLs and when I get a couple of months of usage on my bill I'll share the numbers with everyone.

Will you also include the $1200 cleanup charge for proper cleanup and disposal of a broken bulb into your math? Also, be sure to show your receipt for the total amount of bulbs you had to pay for.

[second_pancake]

Will you also include the $1200 cleanup charge for proper cleanup and disposal of a broken bulb into your math? Also, be sure to show your receipt for the total amount of bulbs you had to pay for.

We've already debunked your "hazardous materials" issue, so $1200 is not an issue.  I'm sure he'll not only include the initial cost of the replacement bulbs, but will also factor in the cost of purchasing incandesent bulbs at least once a month,  over the 2 year lifespan of a CFL.

[Jason]

Charleston and Second_Pancake...  I'll include all you've requested in my full report! 

[Jason]

The $1,200 clean up fee was by an environmental contamination expert.  If a break a bulb I'll try to approximate the cost of vacuming it up with my bagless vacuum cleaner and then dumping the contents into a plastic bag and tying it shut.  I could also assume the cost of a vacuum cleaner bag for those that don't have a bagless vacuum.

[lindab]

Jason, your comments have been amazing and I have learned so much. Thanks for taking the time.
Here is the info from JEA about their solar incentive program and net metering.
We are getting ready to install a PV system this month.

JEA will net meter for residential solar PV or wind generation systems. ....

Residential net metering requires first that the system be installed in accordance with JEA rules and regulations and that JEA inspect the system to ensure it complies. JEA will then install a meter that, essentially, turns backwards when the customer system is generating more electricity than the customer uses. This is subtracted from the amount of electricity that JEA has delivered to the customer. The amount of electricity that a customer is billed for by JEA is reduced by the amount of electricity exported to JEA.

JEA does not pay the customer for any electricity delivered to JEA. JEA, in effect, provides credit at the full retail rate. If the situation ever arises that the customer sends more electricity to JEA than JEA sends to the customer, the customer pays the basic customer charge for service.

[Charleston native]

We've already debunked your "hazardous materials" issue, so $1200 is not an issue.  I'm sure he'll not only include the initial cost of the replacement bulbs, but will also factor in the cost of purchasing incandesent bulbs at least once a month,  over the 2 year lifespan of a CFL.

That issue was hardly "debunked", because it still is an issue in terms of being good stewards of the environment. Jason himself even admitted that was a legitimate argument.

Jason, I'm sure that is a good way of disposing it, but I don't think a plastic bag can eliminate the possibility of mercury seeping into the ground. If you truly want to help the environment, I'm sure you want to follow the government guidelines on proper disposal. I'd hate to see you get in trouble.  So, if you were following proper guidelines, I would think you'd include the disposal fee.

[Jason]

Jason, your comments have been amazing and I have learned so much. Thanks for taking the time.
Here is the info from JEA about their solar incentive program and net metering.
We are getting ready to install a PV system this month.

What system are you installing, if you don't mind my asking?

[Jason]

Jason, I'm sure that is a good way of disposing it, but I don't think a plastic bag can eliminate the possibility of mercury seeping into the ground. If you truly want to help the environment, I'm sure you want to follow the government guidelines on proper disposal. I'd hate to see you get in trouble.   So, if you were following proper guidelines, I would think you'd include the disposal fee.

I'm going to look into the proper method to dispose of mercury.  From what I do understand it is bagged up in a hazmat bag and taken to a special facility.  I'll get back with you on what I find out.

[lindab]

Solar modules made by BP in Connecticut for flat roofs, 5KW system.