Maker Pro
Maker Pro

CON Ed - CONNING US with HIGH VOLTAGE!

N

N9WOS

Jan 1, 1970
0
Actually they aren't. They are very efficient. the lumens/watt isn't much
different between my 9 watt and my 25 watt CF's.

Fluorescent lights don't exactly follow the same rules that other lights do.
Other lights gain a performance advantage with size and wattage. The
elements are a lot hotter than surrounding temperatures. So, on a small bulb
with a small element, a large portion of the heat generated is lost to the
outside environment. It has to waste a lot more energy per lumen to maintain
operating temperature. When you increase the size, it's internal volume, to
outside surface area ratio goes up. The energy loss from the exposed surface
of the element is smaller in reference to it's wattage and lumen output, so
it wastes less heat maintain operating temperature, and efficiency goes up.

Fluorescent lights are not a lot hotter than their environment. What
determines their efficiency is the energy/current density of the discharge
in the tube. That determines how effectively it drives the phosphor on the
walls of the tube. You have a sweet spot. If you drop below that density,
the efficiency goes down. If you go above that level, efficiency goes down.


CF's from 3W to 25W usually have about the same lumens per watt because of
the fact that energy densities, and tube diameters are roughly the same for
all wattages. The more wattage, the longer the discharge tube. While the
factors that determine the efficiency of every inch of discharge tube is
about the same. The discharge current levels are at the maximum the
materials allow. They run the tube as hard as they can without destroying
the phosphors, to make the light as small as possible for the wattage it's
rated That causes efficiencies to be close to the bottom of the fluorescent
family. About 60 lumens per watt.

You have to start getting into the 32W T8's and up to the 110W T12 high
outputs to get a good gain in lumens/watt as compared to CF's
..
The linear T8's and T12's don't operate so close to the maximum operating
edge.

T8 15W lights run around 65 lumens per watt
T12 40W lights run around 75 lumens per watt.
T8 32W lights run around 85 to 95 lumens per watt. About 50% more than
compact fluorescent lights.
T12 60W lights run around 95 to 100 lumens per watt.
T12 110W lights run around 88 lumens per watt
If you go up to T12 215W very high output lights, you get back into the
current densities that you find in CF's tubes. A 96 inch 215W T12 is being
driven has hard as it can without destroying the phosphors. So you end up
with about the same efficiency as a CF. around 60 lumens per watt.
 
L

Lectr0Nuis

Jan 1, 1970
0
30 Jun 2005 16:30:47 GMT
in MID:<[email protected]>
all but just your comment. Only morons can't go back and read the comment
you are referring to.
...is that righhhht phil??
Then pray tell *why* it is that everyone reading this crossposted troll is not
aware of Gymmy Bob / J P Bengi's phuckun sick attitude to social interaction?
Never mind **his** 'technical' abuses, when are responders to his shit going to
learn to go back and READ HIS SHIT before responding to the arsehole?
His garbage is everywhere..all over the joint FFS!!
Like when its "too hard" to do that,, what bloody hope is there in expecting
posters to quote selectively!
These days UseNET education in these things is akin to pissing in the wind.
Some folk need licence testing before being PERMITTED to BUY a computer!!

LN
 
J

JoeSixPack

Jan 1, 1970
0
In sci.engr.electrical.compliance TokaMundo <[email protected]>
wrote:
| On 29 Jun 2005 03:31:48 GMT, [email protected] Gave us:
|
As long as someone is willing to manufacture decent lighting products,
I will continue to use them. Once LEDs become truly viable (including
solving some remaining spectrum issues), I will migrate to that. But,
until then, it will be incandescent for me. All mercury based products
will not be permitted in my house, anyway.

Sounds like chemophobia to me. Unless you break the glass and suck out the
contents, it's not likely to hurt you. Have you had all your old mercury
amalgam fillings drilled out yet? Smashed all the old mercury thermometers?
Did you fight the doctor who tried to shove one up your rectum?

Good grief. Anal beyond belief.
 
J

JoeSixPack

Jan 1, 1970
0
Derek Broughton said:
I can't let this pass without comment. You may well be right about the
efficiency of LED's, at least with regard to the amount of light output
for
the input current. However, it depends what you want to do with the
light.
Why use a string of 5W bulbs on a Christmas tree, when you can get the
effect with a 5W string of LEDs. A 1W LED can provide enough light to
read
a book - so why use even a 4W CF? When I walk my dogs at night, I carry
an
LED flashlight. It doesn't put out enough light to distinguish between a
skunk and a cat - but it puts out plenty of light to see "an animal" and
where to stoop-and-scoop, and I've been using it for six months so far
without changing batteries. My 6V incandescent flashlight probably emits
10 times the amount of light - but I changed batteries (much more
expensive
than the ones in the LED light) every couple of months.

Since you're out for exercise anyway, why not use one of those squeeze-type
generator lights that require no batteries at all?
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mercury isn't used in thermometers for the last 20 years.

Dentists are ceasing to install mercury amalgams. Plastic style ines are
very common now.

This stuff is already happenning. Have you been hiding for the last 20
years?
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Digital ones do. Mercury ones are very scarce if at all.
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Not the "grammer police"

Where is the "gramper police" when you need them?
 
V

Vlad

Jan 1, 1970
0
Daestrom
You come across as a person with 40+ years, intelligent and with vast
knowledge.I thank you for sharing you time with this a other groups.
You are the type of person whose company would improve the taste of my
after none express coffee.
Again, we must thank you for that.
You don't mention where you are, or how cold it is in winter time. Heating
with resistance heating can be very expensive. Yes, in your situation the
heat generated by incandescent lamps isn't a 'waste' if you would just have
to replace that heat with your electric baseboard/furnace instead.

Mean temperatures are 12f (January) and 72f (July) at my location.
The cost of heating with resistance is not that different from fossil
fuel if one takes advantage of having different temperatures in
different rooms. The source is hydro and I have little choice.
Depending on your climate, you could save a *lot* of money by switching to
another form of heating. Fossil fuel (NG or propane) can be much cheaper.
In the right climate, an air-source heat pump can also save a lot of money.

Your statements about the waste heat from lighting not really being a
'waste' are true, but only if you use resistance heating. And it is only
true during the heating season.

True. When heat isn't required, I usually replace the most used lamps
with lamps of the florescent type

My house, a raised bungalow, has about 120 square feet of double side
glass facing south. That is very good in a cold and sunny winter day
but a pain at night and in the summer.
I have played with motorized foam and mirror panels, a hobby that I am
about to give up.The time has come to revert the house to it's
original condition an lose the title given by neighbors of the "crazy
scientist"

Regards

Vlad
Some people associate the name Vlad with Vladimir Putin
I prefer the association with Vladimir Horowitz, my preferred pianist
 
J

JoeSixPack

Jan 1, 1970
0
|
|>
|>As long as someone is willing to manufacture decent lighting products,
|>I will continue to use them. Once LEDs become truly viable (including
|>solving some remaining spectrum issues), I will migrate to that. But,
|>until then, it will be incandescent for me. All mercury based products
|>will not be permitted in my house, anyway.
|>
|
| No mercury products? Why... out of curiousity? The mercury in
| fluorescents is small and sealed into the tube. It can't harm you
| unless you break it. You can buy CF's in just about any color
| temperature and they do save money on energy. Here in the US, there
| are organizations that will recycle your expired fluoresent tubes in
| case you are worried about contaminating the environment.


It's more of a political thing than a scientific concern. Actually it's a
bit more like religion. People love to embalm themselves in a belief system
that is unaffected by reality. It's much more comfortable than accounting
for the facts.
 
J

JoeSixPack

Jan 1, 1970
0
TokaMundo said:
Dumbass. Power supply ratings are for their total useable capacity
within a specified ripple spec, it does NOT designate how much they
consume, EVER!

The consumption is related to your system utilization, PERIOD.

If your mobo usage, your HDD usage, and your video card usage are
added together, you will get the total requisite power required to
operate the system. Placing a 500 Watt PS on your computer does NOT
mean that your computer suddenly jumps up to the new wattage of 500
Watts!


Go back to school, or ask someone that DOES know, because you do
not.


Doesn't apply to regulated power supplies. Higher voltages push more amps
thru everything else.
 
D

daestrom

Jan 1, 1970
0
Vlad said:
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 16:53:53 GMT, "daestrom"


Mean temperatures are 12f (January) and 72f (July) at my location.
The cost of heating with resistance is not that different from fossil
fuel if one takes advantage of having different temperatures in
different rooms. The source is hydro and I have little choice.

True. When heat isn't required, I usually replace the most used lamps
with lamps of the florescent type

My house, a raised bungalow, has about 120 square feet of double side
glass facing south. That is very good in a cold and sunny winter day
but a pain at night and in the summer.
I have played with motorized foam and mirror panels, a hobby that I am
about to give up.The time has come to revert the house to it's
original condition an lose the title given by neighbors of the "crazy
scientist"

Well, you just have to review your income tax forms. If you make enough
money, you can claim to be 'eccentric'. If you are in the bottom
tax-bracket, then you're just 'crazy'. Middle tax bracket would only
qualify you for 'some kind of kook' (like me).

A lot of alt.solar.thermal discussions have taken place about using large
amounts of sun-facing glass and finding some way to cover them up at
night/clouds. Unfortunately, most of them are either manual, or not very
satisfactory. One idea that seems promising is to build another solid wall
just inside the glass (or add glass outside of existing wall) and control
the ventilation to the 'sun space'. But then you lose whatever view you
have (and I like to have a view).

I like the idea of passive solar over 'active' systems (higher reliability
and lower maintenance). But getting a system that doesn't lose more heat in
winter than it gains is a bit tricky. Especially for my cousin who lives
about 46 degrees N. Here in NY, although the latitude is better (only 41N),
we have a lot of cloud cover from Lake Ontario (and a lot of 'lake-effect'
snow). The number of sunny days in Jan *and* Feb can usually be counted
your fingers with some left over.
Vlad
Some people associate the name Vlad with Vladimir Putin
I prefer the association with Vladimir Horowitz, my preferred pianist

I prefer full orchestral music myself (mostly the three B's)

daestrom
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
always assuming 100% efficiency of course...

TokaMundo said:
They are regulated, but they are regulated SWITCHING POWER SUPPLIES.
ALL modern PC POWER SUPPLIES are.

They are switchers. At idle, they consume little, regardless of the
input voltage (within the rated window). At full consumption, they
utilize their rated draw. If PFC corrected, they do so even at higher
input voltages with not much noticeable difference in input
consumption (draw) up to their rated maximum. Most modern switchers,
especially those for PCs can now even auto-switch on the input side
from around 90 volts all the up to around 265 volts AC input.

MY point was the FACT that pulling a 300Watt supply out of your
computer and adding a 500Watt supply does NOT change what the computer
uses, it merely changes the total capacity of the integrated system.
In other words, it changes the maximum number of power consuming
devices that the system can handle before reaching the 500 Watt
Maximum loading the supply is rated at.

If the PC only has 220 Watts worth of gear inside it drawing power,
then a 500 Watt PS is NOT going to have any more than a 220 Watt load
on it, just like the 300 Watt supply would reflect as well.

Pretty simple. What the supply comsumes is related to its loading,
NOT the sticker on the side of the supply that declares its MAXIMUM
OUTPUT capacity. It will only consume that much on the input side
when the output loading approaches that level. If you hook it up to
an XT, it will consume less than 80 Watts.
 
J

JoeSixPack

Jan 1, 1970
0
TokaMundo said:
They are regulated, but they are regulated SWITCHING POWER SUPPLIES.
ALL modern PC POWER SUPPLIES are.


That's what I said, if you can read.

Light bulbs, old-style power transformers, electric motors, and anything
else that doesn't use a REGULATED POWER SUPPLY draws more amps when the
voltage is higher.

Understand?
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eat shit asshole

If you have a hard time comprehending posting then get out.
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
I thought you were a professional. I made no such claim.

Case dismissed, you cannot read.
 
J

John P Bengi

Jan 1, 1970
0
You wanted me to bottom post. Now what is your problem?

It took you four whole minutes to think of a better comeback?

Tisk...tisk... You don't think too no good do ya'?
 
D

Don Kelly

Jan 1, 1970
0
Freedom Fighter said:
CON Edison - CONNING US with HIGH VOLTAGE!

Shocking (literally) how this greedy utility monopoly and others like it get
away with their screw-the-public practices. I've noticed that my light bulbs
burn out faster than they should. I am an electronics engineer and have test
equipment, so I measured the line voltage and found it to be high, 126
volts. When I enquired, CON Ed told me that up to 128 volts is acceptable.

NO, IT ISN'T!

This is 6.7% OVER the rated voltage (120 volts) for most light bulbs and
appliances. As power is proportional to the voltage squared, this means that
all our appliances are being force-fed about 14% more power than they were
designed for. CON Ed of course does this to increase your monthly bill by up
to 14% over what it would be at the optimum 120 volts.

But it costs us far more than this. With a 6.7% overvoltage a light bulb
burns brighter but burns out much faster, lasting only half as long as it
would at the rated voltage. Excessive voltage is harmful to and reduces the
life of all appliances without regulated power supplies, which means most of
them. Do you think CON Ed will take any responsibility when your expensive
air conditioner fails prematurely? And of course all that unnecessary power
generation is doing wonders with our resources and environment.

So we pay for this corpseration's arrogant greed not only with higher bills,
but with reduced appliance life and even with reduced lifespans due to their
pollution - or from the fact that a shock from 128 volts is more likely to
kill you than one from 120 volts.

Don't look to government for help. The present administration couldn't care
less about protecting consumers and the environment, and encourages
corpserate monopolies like CON Ed to soak us for all they can and poison our
air and water in the process.

By the way, have you noticed the price of gasoline, despite the record oil
company profits?

Aren't you glad now that you voted RepubliKKKan-KKKon$ervative?
----------
Actually the allowable voltage is 120 +/- 10% -all over the US and Canada.
This has been standard for many decades as when loads on feeders vary, the
voltages will change. This is not Con -Ed's fault and utilities do try to
keep within +/- 5% so their acceptable limit of 128V is quite reasonable.
This can be overcome but you would find the price of bulbs cheap in
comparison. You may be near the start of a feeder and the voltage is set to
keep all customers within limits, including those at the far end. Your
location may be the problem.

Since the light bulb is a non-linear resistance, the power will not be
increased by 14% as the bulb resistance will be higher. However, to make
your worries larger, incandescent lamp life is roughly proportional to the
13th power of the voltage! Manufacturers, unlike you, know of the
variations from nominal and take them into account.

As far as your air conditioner is concerned an overvoltage of this magnitude
won't hurt its life at all.- The starting inrush current will be higher but
will die away sooner because of a higher starting torque and the running
current will be lower (Ohm's Law doesn't apply). In fact its efficiency
might be marginally better at 126V than at 120V.

with regard to shock - load of nonsense. Negligable increase in risk from
120 to 128V.

However, I am sure that Con Ed will be happy to put a good recording meter
on the system to get an actual record of voltage variations over a period of
time. This is quite often done.
 
D

Don Kelly

Jan 1, 1970
0
Sorry, came in late and missed a number of messages until later.
 
Top