Pearls Before Swine: Rat The Luddite
https://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2024/07/06
You just gotta wonder how many people are like Rat.
Lynn
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into
their pockets.
On 2024-07-06 21:53:05 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:
Pearls Before Swine: Rat The Luddite
https://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2024/07/06
You just gotta wonder how many people are like Rat.
Lynn
"It's supposed to last 100,000 hours" ... SUPPOSED being the important
word. Nobody actually knows because nobody has been able to test them
for that long.
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into
their pockets. They are not really any "greener" than normal old bulbs
and they do not last anywhere near that predicted lifetime (especially
in houses around here with silly in-ceiling light fittings), unless of >course you rarely switch them on. The problem is that shops also
wanting to make themselves look greener and make more money have been >'phasing out' regular light bulbs forcing people to buy the more
expensive ones. :-(
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into
their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once
it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W.
5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into
their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once
it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W.
5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
On 2024-08-06 03:14:09 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into
their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once
it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W.
5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
Yep. and none of that new greeny nonsense, including LED bulbs, are
actually any better for the environment than the old versions anyway.
So it's simply a waste of money "look good" promotional exercise.
On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 12:58:24 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-07-06 21:53:05 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:
Pearls Before Swine: Rat The Luddite
https://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2024/07/06
You just gotta wonder how many people are like Rat.
Lynn
"It's supposed to last 100,000 hours" ... SUPPOSED being the important >>word. Nobody actually knows because nobody has been able to test them
for that long.
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into
their pockets. They are not really any "greener" than normal old bulbs
and they do not last anywhere near that predicted lifetime (especially
in houses around here with silly in-ceiling light fittings), unless of >>course you rarely switch them on. The problem is that shops also
wanting to make themselves look greener and make more money have been >>'phasing out' regular light bulbs forcing people to buy the more
expensive ones. :-(
My actual experience with CFLs is that they do last longer -- a lot
longer -- than incandescents did in the same sockets. The last time I
bought light bulbs, they were LEDs at about $2/ea. So far, they appear
to also be lasting longer than incandescents did, but it is really too
soon to be sure and longevity compared to CFLs is unknown.
Which is, of course, the basic problem with these claims: they cannot
be verified. That the bulbs last longer and so don't have to be
replaced as often, OTOH, becomes apparent after a few months.
The high-level savings in electricity consumption would be impressive
if the power weren't being used for other things, like bitcoin mining. >Getting everyone to save electricity in their homes so someone else
can use it is /not/ conservation.
On Sun, 07 Jul 2024 09:00:35 -0700, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 12:58:24 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-07-06 21:53:05 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:
Pearls Before Swine: Rat The Luddite
https://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2024/07/06
You just gotta wonder how many people are like Rat.
Lynn
"It's supposed to last 100,000 hours" ... SUPPOSED being the important >>>word. Nobody actually knows because nobody has been able to test them >>>for that long.
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into >>>their pockets. They are not really any "greener" than normal old bulbs >>>and they do not last anywhere near that predicted lifetime (especially >>>in houses around here with silly in-ceiling light fittings), unless of >>>course you rarely switch them on. The problem is that shops also
wanting to make themselves look greener and make more money have been >>>'phasing out' regular light bulbs forcing people to buy the more >>>expensive ones. :-(
My actual experience with CFLs is that they do last longer -- a lot
longer -- than incandescents did in the same sockets. The last time I >>bought light bulbs, they were LEDs at about $2/ea. So far, they appear
to also be lasting longer than incandescents did, but it is really too
soon to be sure and longevity compared to CFLs is unknown.
Which is, of course, the basic problem with these claims: they cannot
be verified. That the bulbs last longer and so don't have to be
replaced as often, OTOH, becomes apparent after a few months.
The high-level savings in electricity consumption would be impressive
if the power weren't being used for other things, like bitcoin mining. >>Getting everyone to save electricity in their homes so someone else
can use it is /not/ conservation.
You think people wouldn't be bitcoin mining if you were using
incandescent bulbs?
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:25:08 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-08-06 03:14:09 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:No doubt you actualy have figures to prove that assertion is
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into >>>>> their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once
it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W.
5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
Yep. and none of that new greeny nonsense, including LED bulbs, are >>actually any better for the environment than the old versions anyway.
So it's simply a waste of money "look good" promotional exercise.
correct...
However, LEDs have the advantage over LCDs of being disposable in the landfill (ie, put in the trash as opposed to having to be dropped off
at special locations) when they stop working. Well, if that /is/ an advantage, of course. And both have the advantage over incandescents
that they work a lot longer.
On 2024-08-06, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
However, LEDs have the advantage over LCDs of being disposable in the
landfill (ie, put in the trash as opposed to having to be dropped off
at special locations) when they stop working. Well, if that /is/ an
advantage, of course. And both have the advantage over incandescents
that they work a lot longer.
LED lights are electronics and are collected along with other
electronics for recycling. At least in Europe.
Actually, according to the signage at the local station for bulk
waste, recycling, etc., LED tubes go into the same container as
fluorescents. Which seems odd.
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:25:08 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-08-06 03:14:09 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into >>>>> their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once
it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W.
5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
Yep. and none of that new greeny nonsense, including LED bulbs, are
actually any better for the environment than the old versions anyway.
So it's simply a waste of money "look good" promotional exercise.
No doubt you actualy have figures to prove that assertion is
correct...
On 2024-08-06, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
However, LEDs have the advantage over LCDs of being disposable in the
landfill (ie, put in the trash as opposed to having to be dropped off
at special locations) when they stop working. Well, if that /is/ an
advantage, of course. And both have the advantage over incandescents
that they work a lot longer.
LED lights are electronics and are collected along with other
electronics for recycling. At least in Europe.
Actually, according to the signage at the local station for bulk
waste, recycling, etc., LED tubes go into the same container as
fluorescents. Which seems odd.
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 21:40:02 +1000, Mad Hamish ><newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:25:08 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-08-06 03:14:09 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:No doubt you actualy have figures to prove that assertion is
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into >>>>>> their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once >>>>> it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W. >>>>> 5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
Yep. and none of that new greeny nonsense, including LED bulbs, are >>>actually any better for the environment than the old versions anyway.
So it's simply a waste of money "look good" promotional exercise.
correct...
It has been noted here already that the power saved by LCDs/LEDs is
power made available for other uses (bitcoin mining and, I should
think, EV charging and even heat pumps) so a lot of the power "saved"
isn't saved at all, just repurposed.
However, LEDs have the advantage over LCDs of being disposable in the >landfill (ie, put in the trash as opposed to having to be dropped off
at special locations) when they stop working. Well, if that /is/ an >advantage, of course. And both have the advantage over incandescents
that they work a lot longer.
As to utility rates and improvements -- you get what you pay for.
That's an /optimistic/ statement, of course.
But it is true that only thieves try to get without paying.
On 2024-08-06 11:40:02 +0000, Mad Hamish said:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:25:08 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-08-06 03:14:09 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into >>>>>> their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb
with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is
about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once >>>>> it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at
1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W. >>>>> 5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have
paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after
10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
Yep. and none of that new greeny nonsense, including LED bulbs, are
actually any better for the environment than the old versions anyway.
So it's simply a waste of money "look good" promotional exercise.
No doubt you actualy have figures to prove that assertion is
correct...
You simply have to look at the facts.
Electric cars are claimed to be better for the environment, mainly due
to the lack of exhaust gases. The reality is that the manufacturing and disposal of the battery pack is highly non-green, the extra weight of
the cars is causing all sorts of issues, and the generation of the extra electricity to charge them is often non-green as well (including the manufacture and disposal of solar panels, wind turbines, etc.).
And that doesn't even include the destruction / disturbance of large
areas of land and sea for electricity generation "farms" and the sheer "visual pollution" ugliness of loads of wind turbines.
Most of these ridiculous ideas have been rushed through simply to
appease the greeny brigade with zero actual thought of the full
consequences.
On 8/6/24 14:18, Your Name wrote:
On 2024-08-06 11:40:02 +0000, Mad Hamish said:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:25:08 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2024-08-06 03:14:09 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:
On 7/7/24 05:38, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2024-07-07, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
LED bulbs are largely a scam for bulb makers to stuff more money into >>>>>>> their pockets.
Here's some realistic numbers: I replace a 40 W incandescent bulb >>>>>> with a LED one. Aldi middle isle, 2 euros. Residental power is >>>>>> about 0.40 euros/kWh here, so the bulb will have paid for itself once >>>>>> it has saved 2/0.40 = 5 kWh. It produces the same illumination at >>>>>> 1/10 of the power of the incandescent, so it saves 40 - 40/10 = 36 W. >>>>>> 5000 Wh / 36 W = 140 h, so if used one hour each day, it will have >>>>>> paid for itself in under five months. If it eventually dies after >>>>>> 10,000 hours instead of a promised 30,000, so be it.
You can plug in numbers that are applicable to your situation and
in your part of the world.
That is theoretical saving. Down at the Power Company the
receipts are down due to power saving so to pay for maintenance
and emergency repair service they must raise the price of your
power. This is what happened in California at least in the
San Francisco Bay Area and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
is now mainly a power distribution company and they are putting
lines under ground now in sensitive areas which we are helping
to pay for. As well as Battery Farms to save all the wind & solar
power generated while the sun is shining and wind is blowing for
those times we call night.
And if stops some wild fires in sensitive areas
then it will be worth the additional cost because the day
after the sky turns red with smoke it comes down to where
we must breath.
bliss
Yep. and none of that new greeny nonsense, including LED bulbs, are
actually any better for the environment than the old versions anyway.
So it's simply a waste of money "look good" promotional exercise.
No doubt you actualy have figures to prove that assertion is
correct...
You simply have to look at the facts.
Electric cars are claimed to be better for the environment, mainly due
to the lack of exhaust gases. The reality is that the manufacturing and
disposal of the battery pack is highly non-green, the extra weight of
the cars is causing all sorts of issues, and the generation of the
extra electricity to charge them is often non-green as well (including
the manufacture and disposal of solar panels, wind turbines, etc.).
And that doesn't even include the destruction / disturbance of large
areas of land and sea for electricity generation "farms" and the sheer
"visual pollution" ugliness of loads of wind turbines.
Most of these ridiculous ideas have been rushed through simply to
appease the greeny brigade with zero actual thought of the full
consequences.
So you are a climate change denier?
Think that Global Warming is all a Chinese Scam?
Look at the numbers if your are not innumerate.
Do you not believe in the lack of Arctic Sea Ice?
Think that the changes in Antarctica ice pack are illusory?
Do you believe that the Moon Landing was faked?
bliss
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (1 / 15) |
| Uptime: | 160:18:10 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,056 |
| Messages: | 6,416,492 |