Monday, November 17, 2008

Illuminating the Unintentional Consequences of Futzing with Light Bulbs

I was in the light bulb aisle today to get a 60 watt bulb to replace the hall light.  We use different light bulbs throughout the house.  Some need only 25 watts, some get 45, a few get 60, and the Easy Bake Oven gets 100.  We tried 45s in all our lights to save energy.  In some rooms it works, in others we need something more.  You know, just those regular consumer decisions we regular joes make every day.  But 45 is too dim for the hall and 75 is too bright.  60 is just right. 

Today, however, when I realized we had exhausted our stash of 60 watt bulbs, I was surprised to see that the wattages have all changed.  35s are now 34.  45s are 37, 60s are 52, and 75s are now 67 watts. 

What. The. Heck?

So I assume that the light bulb people want me to replace my 60 watt bulb with the new 52 watter.  Well, I don’t really need to assume that because they tell me on the box that they want me to replace my 60 watt bulb with a 52 watt bulb.  But I know from experience that 45 is too dark and that 60 is the minimum we need so that I don’t trip over the flat floor on my way to the bathroom.  I don’t want to split the difference.  I want a 60 watt bulb.  So instead, I chose a 67 watt bulb, thus using more energy and defeating the purpose of messing with light bulb wattages.

In the words of the infamous Chris Crocker, “Leave GE aloooone!”

(11) Comments
Posted by Wendy at 1807 hrs
Culture

  1. I’m not doubting what your eyes are seeing.  But is there supposed to be something about the engineering of these lights (which I presume are incandescent at those wattages) that allows them to emit the same amount of light with less power?  Remember, a watt is simply a unit of power.

    Is there any indication on the box as to how many lumens the light gives off?  That’s a better measure of light intensity, and also allows you to compare fluorescent and incandescent bulbs to one another.

    Posted by Recess Supervisor on November 17, 2008 at 1920 hrs


  2. Good point RS.  Let us know the lumens on the 75 to 67 Owen.  If they are actually more efficient, that would be wonderful…if not time to start loading up on 75 and 100 waters…..  The flourescents work great in some appications….but they are just plain awful in others.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2008 at 1940 hrs


  3. We hold that each man is the best judge of his own interest.
    - John Adams

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2008 at 2048 hrs


  4. Wendy,

    How is that Easy Bake Oven working for ya? You’d better have that Thanksgiving turkey in now.

    Posted by Steve Burri on November 17, 2008 at 2132 hrs


  5. Can’t put the turkey in yet.  The pumpkin pie has been in there since last Wednesday.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2008 at 2207 hrs


  6. I work for an electrical distributor and recently noticed that lamp wattage was going up.  We used to stock the 52 watt lamp you mention, but now it’s a 57 watter.

    I have CFLs in my apartment, but I’m anxiously awaiting LEDS.

    Posted by The Chad on November 17, 2008 at 2212 hrs


  7. And in the words of Mick Jagger….“You can’t always get what you want”.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 18, 2008 at 1012 hrs


  8. RS is correct.  Wattage is a measure of power (amps multipled by volts) while Lumens is a measure of brightness.  There is also Candelas… it gets funky trying to explain the difference.

    Anyway… most light bulbs also print the intensity of light in one or both of those units, as well as in their wattage.  And yes, different types of glass, as well as the engineering of the filament, among other things can affect the intensity of light given off for a particular wattage.

    This gets even funkier when you try to explain compact florescents, since when they first came out, people thought they were getting “dimmer” light bulbs because the wattages were so much lower.  Since their inception though, they have begun to mark the packaging with the eqivolent wattage of an incandescent light bulb on them.

    Posted by Nick on November 18, 2008 at 1527 hrs


  9. The flourescents work great in some appications….but they are just plain awful in others.

    Agreed.

    I actually like the CFL’s in the coach-lights on the outside of the house and the light column by the driveway.  I use the 200W equivalent CFL’s in the garage too.

    In the house… Ugh..  The CFL’s just look horrible.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 18, 2008 at 1732 hrs


  10. We hold that each man is the best judge of his own interest.
    - John Adams

    Bravo…  Words to live by…  And I’m not talking lightbulbs anymore.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 18, 2008 at 1733 hrs


  11. It reminds me of that scene in the movie Mr. Mom, when Jack meets his wife’s new boss.  He makes a poor attempt to be more “manly” than he really is:

    Jack: I’m going to completely redo the electrical in here.
    Boss of Jack’s wife: Oh yeah? You going to make it all 220?
    Jack (confused): Yea…220…221…whatever it takes.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 19, 2008 at 1014 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.