Thomas Edison: 164 Years and What Do You Get?

I fell for it.

Replaced about a dozen bulbs in my basement with CFL's...........why not? They use way less electricity, and they were supposed last for something like 10,000 hours.

In less than a year 2/3 of them had stopped working.

Are there even ten thousand hours in a year? Let me see... carry the two... No, there are not.

I have a number of friends who have tried them too, most with results that pretty much mirror yours here. These testimonials do not make me want to run to the store and purchase some any.

It isn't the gov. or the enviromentalists behind this crap. Guess who. You get one guess only.

My experience is that either they don't last long or they last really long. Most don't last very long...and they really take a beating in the bathroom from the humidity.

I installed the CFLs in my basement facing down, it gets cold down there and they get cycled on and off........maybe that's the problem.

If there are factors that shorten the life of these things, or areas where they shouldn't be used, it should be listed on the packaging. I don't care if it's tools or light bulbs..........I hate sh*t that doesn't work.

Hi guys. Thanks.

The trick for long life is that you just leave them on. Apparently the arcing (or sparking which is it in AC? Hmmm? ) from the disconnect is what fries the real thin plating in their circuitry killing them. So if you leave them on all the time, they are supposed to last longer.

So now instead of using a 100 watt bulb for a total of an hour in the bathroom, each day, you can leave on a 13 watt bulb for 24 hours a day and get long life and save greenhouse gas production / energy... uhh, 13 times 24 = 324watt hours vs 100 watts times 1 hour.

Does not compute!

Milo

And they're talking about making incandescents illegal in the US.......maybe it's already started.

I wonder why they can't miniaturize the ballast technology that make regular fluorescent tubes last so long, even when cycled on and off.

All I know, is that useless crap that doesn't work shouldn't even make it to the marketplace. Instead, we've got a government that wants to force us to use them, whether they work or not.

I'd also like to know how much energy it takes to make these things, vs. a regular incandescent. Anybody know? My guess would be a lot more.

So, I've got about 8 of these left. I don't dare even screw them in because I know they'll be dead within months..........and the solution is to run them 24 hrs a day. Great!!

And you will get much much longer life, if you just leave them off.

I have a 13 watt CFL in my shop that is attached to the main yard light circuit so it comes on at dusk and runs until dawn. Its been working that way for some 6+ years now regardless of summer winter temps. Thats at least 26,000+ running hours now!

Unfortunately the ones in my house that get switched on and off all the time rarely ever last any longer than the old incandescents they replaced did.

I started experimenting with the high output LED lighting now and so far they seem to be holding up better than the CFL's in regular on/off cycle usage but the one being ran in 24/7 as under cabinet lighting are showing noticeable fading issues. After about one year the are about half as bright as a new one and after two years they are very dim.

So much for that 100K hour life expectancy claim. I doubt these will make it 1/4 of that run time before they are completely dead.

I found this site interesting. Talks about all lighting, including new technologies.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Compact_Fluorescent_Lighting_(CFL)_Downsides

1. CFL's last longer if you mount them base-down (i.e., in a table lamp or such). Seems they generate enough heat that, when mounting them base-up (i.e., hanging light fixture) or in a closed housing, they overheat the electronics.

2. My experience with high-intensity LED's is blown capacitors. I mean, BLOWN capacitors- like the entire array is flying through the air. I suspect this is due to the use of Chinese capacitors by the manufacturers...

Same experience - Chinese built electrolytic capacitors are the weak link. This isn't limited to CFLs. I went through three surge protectors that failed within 48 hours due to capacitor failure. I don't trust any electronics coming from China.

Hi another Guest,

What's your replacement suggestion?

My computer, it works for over 4 years without any problems, completely and wholly "Made in China"! However, inside, I cannot check if everything is made in the same place.

"Made in China" gives work to more than 3/4 billion people, and supply things to over 4 to 5 billions another. Accept the fact that America and the Western world failed to make what we want to pay.

I respect the fantastic innovative feats of Thomas Edison in many areas of our life.

I just want to open your eyes that reality is fact and not improper patriotism or racism, Gil.

NB: Please, no more propaganda!

You mention a lot of countries in the process of banning them. If you done some research you'll find that they are already banned in Australia for a while now. The only thing close to an incandescent bulb is a small halogen bulb within a traditional 'bulb'...kinda weird looking.

I do have to say that the new lights are ***NOT*** as long lasting as claimed. I seem to change them over every 1.5 years.

Some history...Edison did not invent the light bulb

Hi another Guest,

I agree with you but at place of INVENTION, he only was an INNOVATOR!

We already have a big discussion about invention and innovation. It's a big difference and you have to learn that difference, Gil.

I wonder when some clever b#@tard is going to try outlaw candles in africa, Probably the same clever type that drives a car that emits a bigger footprint than the one he is trying to stamp out.

The humanity is gratefull to Mr Edison and his genious. [Electric incandescent lamp in just one of the creations of his great mind... He invented, also, the phonograph, the multiple ticker and many other things... The invention of lamp came along with an intire electrical network consisting by electric devices that he created, like generator, fuse e.t.c.... But his greater contribution was the creation of the "modern" R&D industrial laboratory... ]

However, the technology is evolved. We had to search for other more efficient lighting sources with less consumption. CFLs give us such a better efficiency. And, nowadays, such a thing is very critical. (However, his incandescent lamb is still in use...) And this is not the end. The next step is the wide use of the led lamps in every house, office e.t.c. By using them the total consumption will be even less.

The aspect to other technologies doesn't reduce the value and the offer of Mr Edison. It's just unavoidable to leave some things behind and redirect ourselves to better solutions... This is the history of science...

Edison was indeed a brilliant man,but the real father of modern electrical systems was Tesla.If Edison had his way, there would be generating plants every few miles,putting out DC.He abhorred AC,and did everything in his power to discredit it.

Anything that runs on AC is due to Tesla,not Edison.Tesla is an unsung hero that is rarely recognized for his genius.

Do some research on Tesla and Edison and Westinghouse, and you will see that Edison and Westinghouse both cheated Tesla out of his just rewards, as did Marconi and others.

Marconi's patent on radio was revoked and awarded to Tesla because Marconi stole the ideas from Tesla's lab notes.

Tesla even built a radio controlled toy boat that steered by remote control.

Hats off to TESLA!

You are right about Mr Tesla. He was, also, a genius and the father AC circuits. (And his scientific work, often, comes along with legends and mystery.)

Unfortunately, Mr Edison had his own persistences, like his persistence to DC circuits. There were, also, his obstinacy to his musical cylinders, even when the (later invented) flat disks were proved to be more practical and popular.

Hi another Guest,

I agree with your exasperated and upset comment. Tesla was a genius inventor and Edison was a genius innovator. It's the same as Biro brothers with the ballpoint pen as inventors and BIC's owner, the French guy who innovated by buying their patent, and sold billions of them to become "rich" through his innovation.

It's phony: I'm Hungarian born as the Biro brothers, and married a French girl to build a family. Coincidence? I don't think so. It's just life. Now, we can laugh and don't be upset! Dreams, preferences, and patriotism don't make anyone rich and/or happy!

Someone has the power to succeed and another fails because no chance to become influencial. This is the difference between Tesla and Edison. This is life and stories of lives, Gil.

Yay...I agree...Tesla is the man. He was cheated by many. I don't want to go into the conspiracy theories, but yes, he did lots and some are still trying to work his things out today.

Ok...I'll say it...If he was American, he would have been made a hero. Flame on if you must.

I am not understanding some the comments here, given that this is supposed to be "the engineer's place for discussion". As engineers and scientists we are supposed to look for better ways to do things. Just because we are exploring new options in lighting- does not mean we are discounting contributions by Thomas Edison and others. Perhaps we should not have switched to radio, since telegraph was already there. It takes fossil fuel to make electricity and in some parts of the world armies go to war for it. Why is it so bad to try and use less today, so there is some more for the 7 Billion plus tomorrow?

I have no problem with CFLs in my bathroom where the humidity is very high each morning after my shower. The are mounted with the base downward. I don't use them in my porch light anymore, as they don't last as long as an incandescent. I think the closing of the front door vibrates them too much. Also in the garage where the electric opener vibrates them, they don't last very long. I use an incandescent there too. I agree that they should not be banned.

Hi another Guest,

First, everyone has an opinion as you have. Second, no one is obligated to accept and valued your opinion. Third, the reality is in the hands of the mass, the 7 billion people around the world, and they get what they want.

What yo want to explain us with your: "supposed to be "the engineer's place for discussion". As engineers and scientists we are supposed to look for better ways to do things."

Really??? You want to tell us that every engineers and scientists do only good things, including processes, operations, services and products? I think we disagree with your sentences. After Confutius: there is no one on the middle, someone is ahead and others are laggards. So, there are losers and there are winners, and also there are good and bad, Gil.

Dad told me you were euthanized. It was moms' idea.

I think it's interesting that incandescent lights are being banned and phased out. As a matter of fact, it's very frustrating. I have regularly used a light bulb to keep things from freezing during the winter. Also, I'm still trying to find a bulb for my little girl's easy bake oven!

Flourescents were developed for applications where the light is to be on for an extended period of time. In this realm they last a long time and are very efficient compared to incandescents. However they draw an enormous amount of current upon start-up. In short-cycle use (on-off-on-off) they actually use MORE energy and their life is shortened. If you only turn the light on to find the window cleaner stick with the old stand-by.

Edison, phewwy

Nikola Tesla invented a gas lighbulb prior to Edisons filiment bulb, because Tesla was a serb and excentric people did not take him serious, expecilly later in his life. No credit goes to Edison, he invented NOTHING, he stole other peoples ideas and bullied them to keep quiet. NIKOLA TESLA is the true hero, and some credit also belongs to George Westinghouse, but nothing to the theif Edison.

Who illuminated the world? It was not Edison it was Nikola Tesla, who also brought electricity to the Worlds Fair. Who provided Electricty to NY from Niagra Falls, TESLA and his polyphase generator. Edison pulled some wires.

It is very disapointing that CR4 would make such a hugh mistake about the light bulb. Tesla and his flurecent buld was first. Tesla invented the radio, remote controle, he was the first to artificially create lightning (the solid state Tesla Coil). His inventions and knowledge are still unsurpassed today. Shame on you CR4

I am not ashamed of my blog, and urge you to prepare a post showing us these achievements of Mssr. Tesla.

I had a point to make, and a conversation to start, and that seems to have worked out fine.

And it has attracted a wide range of responses from folks around the world.

I look forward to reading your educational post about the achievements of Mssr. Tesla.

And I promise I won't make sneering noises or disparaging comments.

But I might ask a thoughtful question or two.

Milo

Hi Milo,

Don't worry! Your blog is excellent and entertaining. Edison was a good man, excellent innovator and we can thank for it. Edison was convincing and gave us many good products for better life. Tesla was a genius inventor but wasn't able to promote his inventions to innovations. It's "regrettable and unfortunate" but is the reality.

Anecdote: When Wozniack went to see at IBM the boss Gestetner and proposing his small box as the future computer for everyone on Earth, he was the inventor and the big boss never became the innovator of PERSONAL COMPUTERS, isn't it? Mike Marculla became the innovator with Job and Wozniack. Good for us!

IBM dominated in the 60s the computer business. Where they are today? Another story about invention and innovation. The second must be captured and exploited. This is what Edison did. This is what was missed by Tesla.

Wish you a good innovative day, Gil.

Hi another Guest,

You make me laugh! Are related to Croatia or to Tesla? You fight after more than 100 years later and you never get reason of history.

I agree with you that Tesla was a genius but he was not able to convince influencial people to innovate his invention. In the other hand, Edison was an excellent CONVINCING and CONVERTING people to his ideas. He did before and he did after his light bulb. It's possible that Edison invented nothing but we have to accept the facts that he changed our life by big ways. In human history we have many inventors died poor (Biro brothers) or became crazy (Sommelwiess), just mentioning Hungarians. Imagine, Sommelweiss idea of cleaning hands with chlorine water before delivering a new-born is still not accepted by people doing the delivery, and still we have dead new-borns or mothers in 2011, 150 years later. We accept but we can refuse something invented. We buy innovative things and ideas but we don't by inventions.

The difference is in the dictionary, nowhere else!!!

Another, we are not crazy like you said. We just have different opinion of YOU, Gil.

NB: You make comments but never mention who you talk to and without signature. Are you really a person?

I agree with you that Tesla was a genius but he was not able to convince influencial people to innovate his invention. In the other hand, Edison was an excellent CONVINCING and CONVERTING people to his ideas.

Political beats Intellectual.

Again.

I think the difference between Tesla and Edison is being mis-stated here. It is not invention vs innovation. Both of them did both of these things. Their difference was in business savy. Edison was above all the more effective marketer and entrepreneurial business man with his innovations and inventions. His first street lighting set-up was purposely placed at the corner of Wall Street so that the bankers would bump right in to it on their way to work. They did not know or have any care whether is was DC or AC. But they knew that it was a new and brilliant innovation (no pun intended), and they financed him to build more things. Today we have General Electric Corp from that beginning. Tesla made even better inventions, i.e. AC power to replace DC, but when he abandoned working with Edison, he did not know how to market them. So where is Westinghouse today?

This thread has digressed greatly from discussion of fluorescent vs incandescent light bulbs, but it is certainly stimulating. I have to confess I did not know that incandescents were being pulled from the market. Where is that coming from?

"Where is that coming from?"

European spies infiltrating the US Government?

I just saw a segment of the nightly news with Brian Williams discussing this very topic. Apparently a law was passed under the Bush administration in 2007 having to do with energy legislation in which a phase out of incandescent light bulbs was included. It is to be in full effect by some date (I think he said 2013?) and only CFL bulbs will be allowed. Startling to see that after just reading this forum. While the light banter on this topic has been amusing, if these CFL devices have the serious limitations mentioned on this forum we have a real problem here.

Hi Jo,

You must read and re-read the definitions of INVENTION and INNOVATION in a good dictionary. Please, learn the distinction between the two words. Thanks for all human beings, Gil.

Guest,

You prompted me to Google "invention vs. innovation" and the phrase got a few hits. Some interesting discussion links are here:

These two actual refer to the same article:

http://wistechnology.com/articles/4184/

http://www.ipfrontline.com/depts/article.aspx?id=16295&deptid=5

A couple others

http://consultaglobal.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/innovators-dilemmas-invention-vs-innovation/

http://innovationzen.com/blog/2006/07/26/invention-vs-innovation/

http://techliberation.com/2007/02/20/invention-vs-innovation/

(I won't summarize... The readers have to do their own clicking...)

Rufus

Edison has never been "Outlawed in Brazil". Incandescents are still (but less) sold.

What is a CFL? Filaments in a bulb using the Edison effect, and a lot of improvements after 164 years. It's still "the lamp".

What?? No more Easy-Bake Ovens???

That's what I'm saying! That's my little girls favorite toy. She's actually getting pretty good at cooking with it believe it or not!

Smoke leaked out of the first CFL that I installed in my kitchen. It was mounted horizontally. The fixture was rated for 200W. There are no mounting orientation instructions on the packaging.

Does anybody know if there is a standards body (UL, CE, TUV, etc.) which is adressing mounting orientation, safety and claimed life for the CFL?

Welcome to CR4. Nice post.

Milo

Thanks Milo

Don't give up yet:

Americans seem to have more fighting spirit than us Europeans!

Lobby congress people etc!

RE "not saving coal plants"...

Agreed - and you are more right than you might realize!

First ---

Why Overall energy savings are less than 1% anyway, also using US Dept of Energy own figures

http://ceolas.net/#li171x

Next ---

( excerpt from http://ceolas.net/#li172x )

President Obama, June 2009, announcing light bulb standards to apply from 2012:
Between 2012 and 2042, the standards will conserve enough electricity to power every home in America for 10 months and eliminate the need for as many as 14 coal-fired power plants...

The very small percentage saving as just seen of course refutes this.
But even with supposed energy savings, this would never hold.
Why?

A few seconds thought shows why this is not so.
Coal power plants supply energy locally.
Adding up lots of local energy saving to national level and saying it "eliminates the need for 14 coal power plants" therefore makes no sense. In fact, the coal power plant has to be saved not just locally, but locally where a power plant fuelled by coal might be in use, or needed, in the first place.

That's not all.
Notice how the yearly savings are also simply stacked up, and said to eliminate the need for those power plants by the year 2042.
This is like saying:
"If we cut down on the number of school hours in a year, we eliminate the need for lots of schools!"
But of course the schools still have to be built and run, albeit not to full capacity.
Electricity demand varies during the day, and spare capacity must be available.

More:
The coal argument is also wrong! (I am not expecting a White House invitation anytime soon)
Coal power is used for the the constant amount needed (base loading power).
In other words, the coal power is always on, regardless of consumption fluctuation, to supply electricity for lighting and other demand.
It needs to be supplemented by quicker reacting "peak" power deliverers, like hydro or gas powered plants, when electricity demand rises, like in the early evening - again including lighting use at such time.
Therefore, even using DOE or EU own "big light savings" energy data, one might at best be talking about the odd gas turbine or wind propeller saved, never any coal power plant.
The argumentation is unbelievable - and it comes from top political administrators.
Who pays those guys?

I agree that the incandescent lamp should not be banned or its use regulated.

There are many applications in which the CFL is not suited. Non suitable applications include: high vibration environments, projector lamps, aircraft, marine, automobile, motorbike, etc. And I sure don't want these high voltage monstrosities used to light up the gas pumps at my gas station.

I happen to believe that the advancing technology of high power LED will soon replace incandescent and CFL in most applications. This will happen on the free market within just a few years if our legislators do not interfere.

There will always be applications for the older lighting technologies (incandescent & CFL) as there are still instances where carbon arc and gas lighting are found. These older lighting forms were phased out almost to extinction without government intervention.

"And I sure don't want these high voltage monstrosities used to light up the gas pumps at my gas station."

I take it you have no clue what voltage and current CFL's typically run at or what the common HID type lights use at gas stations use.

CFL, 50 - 100 volts at a few hundred ma.

400 watt metal halide or HPS, strike voltage of several KV and running voltages of 100 - 200 volts at several amps plus bulb surface temps well above the spontaneous ignition temp of gasoline and diesel fuel.

tcmtech -

After rereading my post, I can see that I was ambiguous. When I stated "light up the gas pumps", I was referring to the lighting that is internal to the pumps for signage and illuminating displays. I did not mean to refer to lighting external to the pumps.

You are right, I had no clue that CFL's were guaranteed to strike at line voltage. I thought that they had resonant circuits with an inductor in their base that could generate up to a 1000v to strike an arc.

I also realize that your statements about the using a 400W HID did not mean to place the lamp in the gas pump, but above the gas pump in a ceiling. Of course CFL's and HID's are safe to use in a gas station when mounted in a ceiling because as we all know, gasoline vapors are heavier than air.

I apologize that my quip, which was off my main topic of unnecessary government intervention, was poorly worded.

Very nice response, Snave.

Thanks for "keeping it professional."

Milo

I'm confused..........is it a question of how many legislators it takes to change a lightbulb or is it whether those same legislators are still using the same candle to drive the hamster wheel?

Good job, Milo! By mentioning CFLs, you completely took the focus off of Edison and his more than 1500 patents. I don't see you trying to remedy that mistake either. Now it's just another Tesla vs Edison debate.

Thanks. We'll try to do better next time. Just tried to show how far our thinking has come... What about you: ASTM or DIN? Clapton or Hendrix? Beatles or Stones? Pepsi or Coke? Sorry for the tears... Milo

"What about you: ASTM or DIN? Clapton or Hendrix? Beatles or Stones? Pepsi or Coke?"

Not sure I understand your question, but here goes: Neither, who?, both, neither (LEDs).

What about you? Obama or Nixon?

Kissinger!

:-)

Milo(sorry for the primitive smiley, i' m on my ipad)

StandardsGuy has a point...

in the sense that most arguments against a ban are about how bad CFLs are,so ban proponents just say "there are/ will be Halogen etc alternatives", getting away from the supposed need of regulations on Mr Edisons bulb in the first place...

We are not talking about a normal product ban for usage safety reasons, like a ban on lead paint - it's simply a ban to reduce electricity consumption

even if other arguments didnt hold, you could simply tax them, like on other products to reduce consumption (though tax of itself is not justified either, in this case, simply being better than bans also for a cash-strapped government)

Thanks. Milo