Re: Pearls Before Swine: Rat The Luddite

On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 08:51:17 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

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:

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...

>
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.

The responses suggest some followup:

the local official website
<https://www.seattle.gov/utilities/your-services/collection-and-disposal/where-does-it-go#/item/light-bulbs>
explains:

Fluorescent tubes and CFLs are banned from the garbage because they
contain mercury, which is highly toxic.

It also lists the bulbs that can go into the garbage:

Incandecent, LED, Halogen, LED commercial downlights and Xenon light
bulbs

Apparently, LEDs etc have no mercury.

CFLs can be picked up for $5 ("Limit: two 1-gallon bags per collection
for single family residence"), or taken to a special location for free
(up to 10) recycling (the latter includes tubes).

Nothing about CFLs being "electronics", which also have special
rules/locations/pickups. But whatever works.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"