The standard light bulb may no longer be the right image of a good idea since incandescents will be phased out by next year.
The
replacement - for the item, if not the image - is one of two choices:
compact fluorescents or LEDs. Both alternatives bring issues of
likeability and affordability when compared to each other and to their
old-style comfy cousin.Mens panelmachine features a domed design for maximum comfort.
The
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 calls for roughly 25
percent greater efficiency for light bulbs, requiring a phased-in ban on
manufacturing and importing incandescent bulbs. Starting in 2012,
100-watt incandescent bulbs were replaced by 72-watt bulb equivalents,
followed this year with 75-watt traditional bulbs being replaced by
53-watt bulb equivalents, and in 2014 with 60-watt and 40-watt ones
being replaced by 43-watt and 29-watt equivalents, respectively.
A
great source of local information about all types of lighting, Peter
Ray of AG Electrical Supply in Bellmore has witnessed changes in the
industry over several decades. Traditional incandescent bulbs are fast
being replaced by equivalent high-efficiency choices.These purlinmachinery systems
cannot be matched by any other laser marking machine technique. LEDs
have come into their own in just the past year in particular, Ray said.
Not
much about the traditional incandescent bulb has changed since Thomas
Edison developed the first commercially practical one using a carbon
filament. Modern ones use a tungsten filament surrounded by various
inert gases. The filament heats the gases to a mega 4,000 degrees F.
Think about that.Private label and custom floorlamps.
The bulb releases 90 percent of its energy as heat. Since lighting is
supposed to be its job, is it any wonder an incandescent is inefficient?
Since,
until recently, incandescents were the only kid on the block, their
purchase prices have been very low. They are, however, inefficient in
another way — they burn out quickly. Still, the light they emit tends to
be warm and with a yellow hue, characteristics to which we’ve all
become accustomed, a benchmark for other forms of light.
It
was just a few years ago that these spiral-style, compact fluorescent
light bulbs began to become commonplace. Instead of a heated filament,
an electric current runs through a tube filled with argon and a bit of
mercury vapor inside a CFL. This creates invisible light that reacts
with a phosphor coating to emit visible light.
Early
CFLs took a while for that reaction to take place, a warm up time we
weren’t used to. Newer CFLs have improved considerably on that score, as
well as overcoming other issues. Initial inconsistent light quality has
improved considerably, as has their design or “look.” More recent
models are also dimmable. Finally, overall, the idea that initial higher
cost is offset by longer life is better understood as well.
An
average 60-watt incandescent that costs about .75 cents and having a
lifespan averaging 1,500 hours translates into an energy cost of about
$6.60 per hour. A comparable CFL costs about $6.60 to beginning with,
but its bulb life averages 7,000 hours, meaning an energy cost of $1.50
per hour. An equivalent LED starts off at about $27.00, but lasts an
extraordinary 37,500 hours for an energy value of about .90 cents an
hour.Wind and goodledlightop information and specifications.
If
every American home replaced just one incandescent light bulb with an
energy efficient one, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that
enough energy would be saved “to light 3 million homes for a year,We are
producers of photovoltaicsystem and
special LED strip controllers. save about $600 million in annual energy
costs, and prevent 9 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per
year, equivalent to those from about 800,000 cars.” Further, the DOE
estimates that rapid adoption of LED lighting in particular by 2027
could deliver savings of about $265 billion, avoid 40 new power plants,
and reduce lighting electricity demand by 33 percent in 2027.
沒有留言:
張貼留言