CFL's...Learned Something

[Virgil Cain]

I was unaware of this new 2-prong bulb base and find it far superior to the Edison design. I am certain we've all had a bulb get stuck in a socket that was a bear to remove or even broke. I've had a CFL get stuck when I tried to unscrew it and I was sweating bullets it would break in my hand. None of this is a problem with the GU design.

The rest of you Luddites can stick with your 19th century lighting. I'm moving toward the future!

I support you moving into the future! I may even go there myself. But why must people who think they have a better way *force* others to follow them?

 

[ddawg16]

I have an inherent right to use electricity that I *buy*. What I choose to do with it is pretty much my business.

I support you moving into the future! I may even go there myself. But why must people who think they have a better way *force* others to follow them?

Guys....this is MY thread and it was started with the intent to pass on some good information about CFL's and the GU base....not as a political discussion about your selfish habits....

BTW...no one is forcing you to do anything....you don't 'have' to install CFL's.....you can use as much electricity as you want....just don't ***** when the price goes up because you use more....

 

[W_A_Watson_II]

i have an inherent right to use electricity that i *buy*. What i choose to do with it is pretty much my business.

Amen!​

 

[munkey]

I have an inherent right to use electricity that I *buy*. What I choose to do with it is pretty much my business.

Unless the generation and consumption of that electricity has negative consequences for the rest of us, which, unfortunately, it does.

 

[mrb]

Unless the generation and consumption of that electricity has negative consequences for the rest of us, which, unfortunately, it does.

Your use of the internet has negative consequences for the rest of us (through consumption of electricity and water), so if you want to set an example.......

Do you have any idea how much electricity and water google uses? Want to save the planet? Turn off google.

CFLs are not clean (why do you think no one makes them in the usa?). The extra wattage used by an incandescent lamp is a small price to pay compared to the environmental and economic costs of CFL production and use.

 

[Virgil Cain]

Unless the generation and consumption of that electricity has negative consequences for the rest of us, which, unfortunately, it does.

Sorry that I have contributed to moving this off topic. All I'll say in closing is that the case for MMGW is far from proved.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.......

GU24 sockets do have some nice features, though you do have to wonder if they will obtain critical mass in the number of deployed sockets so that price and availability will be comparable to Edison based CFL and LED lights. I've never seen a number for installed Edison sockets in the U.S., but given that we've got a population of roughly 300 million and there must be at least 3 sockets for every person (and that's probably conservative) that would yield a installed base of over 1 billion sockets that aren't going away soon.

Code in CA requires GU24 sockets for the simple reason that you can't install a high wattage incandescent lamp in one because they don't exist. This is obviously currently not the case for Edison sockets since both CFL/LED and Incandescent lamps are made with this base. However, keep in mind that this is in the process of changing. Rightly or wrongly, incandescent lamps are going away by legal mandate, so it is likely that at a date not too far in the future when high wattage incandescent lamps are no longer available there will be a lobbying effort to change Title 24 to permit Edison socketed fixtures. I have no idea whether this will be granted, but there will be a good argument for making such a change. If that happens, it may well take the wind out of the sails of the GU24 based fixtures. A billion or so installed sockets generates a lot of inertia.

I'm all for high efficiency (though I prefer choice over mandate). Aside from cost there still are aspects of CFL/LED lighting that I'm not thrilled with. The emitted spectrum is closer to a line spectrum (with lines at various red, blue and green wave lengths), rather than the continuous black body type spectrum you get with an incandescent. Quantum dot technology may largely rectify this, though they're having trouble keeping efficiency high with the mixture of different sizes of quantum dots needed to turn an LED into something with a more continuous spectrum like an incandescent. I get headaches if I stay under florescent lighting all day. I used to think it was caused by the 120Hz flashing caused by passive type ballast, but since now almost every florescent light you're likely to run into has an electronic ballast that doesn't have this issue I wonder if it's not related to the emitted spectrum. Also, a lot of CLF and LED lamp manufactures still haven't gotten their act together on building in enough transient surge protection which seems to cause a fair number of dead lamps. I personally have had two CLFs go out coincident with lighting in the area (though far from a direct hit).

 

[Nighttrain]

I was at my electric supply house the other day getting quotes for the CFL. He said that soon all the "Energy Star" rated fixtures will have to have the new sockets, I am assuming its the GU24 you guys are mentioning.

ddawg, I agree HD and Lowes is not offering any of these items. I imagine it would be hard to push the new fixtures since the old base has been the one around for 100+ years.

 

[Orangestang]

What I don't like about cfls is that they need to warm up to reach full brightness, now if I'm going into a room to run in and out to get something I'm not gonna wait for the light to warm up. It ticks me off. All my bedrooms have ceiling fans and take 2 bulbs inside the cover 1 bulb is the old style and 1 is a cfl at least then I have some full light. I also have cfl's in my can lights on the outside of my house and garage they last about 1 1/2 yrs compared to 6 months with the old style.

 

[VWandDodge]

Sorry that I have contributed to moving this off topic. All I'll say in closing is that the case for MMGW is far from proved.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.......

GU24 sockets do have some nice features, though you do have to wonder if they will obtain critical mass in the number of deployed sockets so that price and availability will be comparable to Edison based CFL and LED lights. I've never seen a number for installed Edison sockets in the U.S., but given that we've got a population of roughly 300 million and there must be at least 3 sockets for every person (and that's probably conservative) that would yield a installed base of over 1 billion sockets that aren't going away soon.

Code in CA requires GU24 sockets for the simple reason that you can't install a high wattage incandescent lamp in one because they don't exist. This is obviously currently not the case for Edison sockets since both CFL/LED and Incandescent lamps are made with this base. However, keep in mind that this is in the process of changing. Rightly or wrongly, incandescent lamps are going away by legal mandate, so it is likely that at a date not too far in the future when high wattage incandescent lamps are no longer available there will be a lobbying effort to change Title 24 to permit Edison socketed fixtures. I have no idea whether this will be granted, but there will be a good argument for making such a change. If that happens, it may well take the wind out of the sails of the GU24 based fixtures. A billion or so installed sockets generates a lot of inertia.

I'm all for high efficiency (though I prefer choice over mandate). Aside from cost there still are aspects of CFL/LED lighting that I'm not thrilled with. The emitted spectrum is closer to a line spectrum (with lines at various red, blue and green wave lengths), rather than the continuous black body type spectrum you get with an incandescent. Quantum dot technology may largely rectify this, though they're having trouble keeping efficiency high with the mixture of different sizes of quantum dots needed to turn an LED into something with a more continuous spectrum like an incandescent. I get headaches if I stay under florescent lighting all day. I used to think it was caused by the 120Hz flashing caused by passive type ballast, but since now almost every florescent light you're likely to run into has an electronic ballast that doesn't have this issue I wonder if it's not related to the emitted spectrum. Also, a lot of CLF and LED lamp manufactures still haven't gotten their act together on building in enough transient surge protection which seems to cause a fair number of dead lamps. I personally have had two CLFs go out coincident with lighting in the area (though far from a direct hit).

I disagree. In less than 20 years, the number of land-line telephones in households dropped (1990-2010) as consumers adopted and shifted to cellular telephones. Pay telephones are all but extinct. Continuing education via the power companies, word of mouth, and other avenues will most likely work in the same manner with the updated light receptacle. Even without the mandate to phase out incandescent bulbs consumers had already begun this shift.

The most likely scenario will be manufacturers decided to abandon the Edison style socket in favor of the GU24 due to production costs. A shift will then take place whereupon the GU24 style will be the norm in production. Any consumers with Edison sockets will merely install an adapter.

One thing I've learned in my life is to never say "never".

 

[W_A_Watson_II]

I disagree. In less than 20 years, the number of land-line telephones in households dropped (1990-2010) as consumers adopted and shifted to cellular telephones. Pay telephones are all but extinct. Continuing education via the power companies, word of mouth, and other avenues will most likely work in the same manner with the updated light receptacle. Even without the mandate to phase out incandescent bulbs consumers had already begun this shift.

Whole hartdly Agree!​

 

[Virgil Cain]

I disagree. In less than 20 years, the number of land-line telephones in households dropped (1990-2010) as consumers adopted and shifted to cellular telephones. Pay telephones are all but extinct. Continuing education via the power companies, word of mouth, and other avenues will most likely work in the same manner with the updated light receptacle. Even without the mandate to phase out incandescent bulbs consumers had already begun this shift.

The most likely scenario will be manufacturers decided to abandon the Edison style socket in favor of the GU24 due to production costs. A shift will then take place whereupon the GU24 style will be the norm in production. Any consumers with Edison sockets will merely install an adapter.

One thing I've learned in my life is to never say "never".

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying never.

However, I think the analogy with landlines versus cellphones fails on a couple of points. Cellphones offer a clear advantage over landlines (namely that they are portable). This gives customers a strong incentive to switch from landlines. Also, consider the way that the switchover took place. In general there was a time when people had both landlines and cellphones. When cellphone plans got more generous with monthly minutes or went to unlimited minutes and customers became comfortable with the level of service, they simply had their landlines disconnected, an act with little to no associated cost. Exactly the opposite in fact. Once people became comfortable with their cellphones they saved money by disconnecting their landlines.

GU24 versus Edison bases on the other hand don't offer as stark of an advantage. Certainly GU24 bases do have several advantages, but for the average user, a Edison base will work just fine for CLF/LED applications. About the only advantage that a customer is clearly going to understand is qualifying for Title 24, however if Edison bases are allowed under title 24 after high powered incandescent lamps become unavailable then that advantage will be neutralized.

Likewise, for customers to switch the fixtures in their homes from Edison to GU24 bases will be neither painless nor cost free. Practically and in most jurisdictions legally most will have to pay a licensed electrician to swap fixtures out to new GU24 fixtures. Given the number of fixtures in most homes this will be fairly costly. Given the little practical advantage the average customer will see, I just can't see droves of them going this route.

What's most likely to happen is that floor and table lamps (i.e. non-permanent fixtures) will over time be replaced with new GU24 equivalents as the old fixtures wear out. This will take some time though. At some point, maybe the customer will have a mix of Edison and GU24 fixtures that is sufficiently aggravating to buy different lamps for and he might eventually hire an electrician to replace his permanent fixtures with GU24 equivalents. I could see upper class and upper middle class people doing this without too much consternation, but for the vast majority of people even the aggravation of having to buy two different styles of lamps will not overcome the cost of hiring an electrician.

Of course, newly constructed home may be completely outfitted with GU24 fixtures, but once again, if Edison bases are allowed under Title 24 at some point, I suspect that less expensive homes will be outfitted with Edison fixtures if they remain substantially cheaper, unless code requires GU24 fixtures (and it's a little hard to see the justification for that once high power incandescents are removed from the market).

I think at best you're going to see these two base standards co-exit for a long time, and I don't expect GU24 bases to have anything like a majority of the market for decades at the earliest, perhaps not in my lifetime. And I suspect that if you could go forward 100 years into the future you'd still find some people buying the latest technology lamps with Edison bases.

 

[VWandDodge]

^^ I appreciate how well you state your opinion without throwing insults. All I will say is that the Edison socket will be phased out of production well before 100 year are up. I would hazard that it will be within the next 30 years. Festoon style bulbs are disappearing from cars and other applications in favor of LEDs. ddawg has stated his opinion against LEDs many times; however, I see that as the future of interior lighting and quickly gaining ground in the next decade over CFLs.

 

[ddawg16]

Virgile, Watson and VW....thank you for being civil with the discussions.....

Edison sockets.....yea...there has to be billions of them installed in homes across the US...so of course the offering at the big box stores is going to be Edison bases....

My ***** with HD and Lowes is that even with title 24....nothing on the shelves....they have this handy little chart...."If your doing new construction, use these cans (with Edison sockets), and if your doing a retrofit, then use these recessed cans (with Edison sockets)".

LED's.....I just don't know....I love them for low voltage applications...but they suffer from the same problem CFL's have...the need a lot of support electronics to work. Have you made a 120Ac to 3Vdc converter lately? Good for 10w or better? That is the weakness.

I'm also going to counter the 'forced' arguments.....no one forces you to do anything....there is nothing that says you can't use all incandescents in your house or burn them 24 hours....knock yourself out. They are 'phasing' out certain incandescents....but I believe you can buy all the 150w and 3 way bulbs you want.

And as correctly noted above...more of the push is coming from the power providers....lighting averages about 30% of the electricity use in a home....it is one of easiest areas to reduce usage.

The primary purpose of this thread was to educate.....I didn't know about the GU24's and I figured most others did not either....

I like CFL's.....I will be using a combination of CFL's with GU24 sockets and some low voltage LED accent lighting in my house addition.

 

[Virgil Cain]

^^ I appreciate how well you state your opinion without throwing insults. All I will say is that the Edison socket will be phased out of production well before 100 year are up. I would hazard that it will be within the next 30 years. Festoon style bulbs are disappearing from cars and other applications in favor of LEDs. ddawg has stated his opinion against LEDs many times; however, I see that as the future of interior lighting and quickly gaining ground in the next decade over CFLs.

Possibly. The only advantage I see that's going to be compelling long term to my mind is safety. It's simply just about impossible to stick your finger in a GU24 socket and shock yourself, which of course is fairly easy with an Edison socket (although these types of shocks are almost never fatal, since the current typically flows through the offending digit, not through the chest cavity). And perhaps that will be the silver bullet. It's possible that code requirements will move towards GU24 for safety issues alone.

However, I'll still be surprised if you can't buy lamps in Edison base in a 100 years. I personally know of older homes that have original fixtures that are at least 75 years old and still working.

 

[VWandDodge]

Possibly. The only advantage I see that's going to be compelling long term to my mind is safety. It's simply just about impossible to stick your finger in a GU24 socket and shock yourself, which of course is fairly easy with an Edison socket (although these types of shocks are almost never fatal, since the current typically flows through the offending digit, not through the chest cavity). And perhaps that will be the silver bullet. It's possible that code requirements will move towards GU24 for safety issues alone.

That, more than anything will most likely be the case. An example is how to safely remove the stem of a broken bulb from an Edison socket (which, for those who don't know, the answer is: a potato). I've been informed by an electrician that the building code where I live has been modified to require all new home construction (starting 2011) must have a fire sprinkler system installed.

However, I'll still be surprised if you can't buy lamps in Edison base in a 100 years. I personally know of older homes that have original fixtures that are at least 75 years old and still working.

Sure, they have the original fixtures at 75+ years old; however, why would an obsolete design still be manufactured (on a large scale) in 100 years? I'm not saying they never will be. I'm saying they'll fall into the special interest category and have to be sought out rather than readily available at every store. In 100 years, it will be easier for someone to retrofit an Edison style socket to a more modern design to use more efficient lighting.

 

[W_A_Watson_II]

... why would an obsolete design still be manufactured ...

Have you sen the replacement for the Space Shuttle? It's a Capsule, like Mercury, Gemini & Apollo!

Oh and what about "Slotted" screws?

 

[rocklobster]

Funny that this is bulb and base is mentioned as last night I made a car trouble light from one of these weird fixtures that was given to me by a friend. The fiend had acquired the fixture from donations for a charity garage sale.

I simply wired a cord to the end, ziptied the pigtail to the light base and added a short bungee cord and voila my garage has stepped into the future!

I was just going to use this until the bulb burnt out then toss it because I thought that I would never find anything like it again...

 

[787B]

Edison to GU24 is currently $3 at Home Despot. If GU24 takes off, I'm sure it will drop to two bits each or less. After all, it is simpler than a single-pole switch and they sell for a quarter each.

Ran across this "CFL Facts and Myths" page with info on the GU24. I haven't read it completely so I can't vouch for it's facts:
http://www.cflfacts.com/#7

 

[Chloe]

sounds so interesting, I'll gonna do some researches too.