I was told years ago that it was better to leave a neon light on over lunchtime than to switch it off since switching on and off reduced the tube's lifetime more than the cost of the electricity. Is this true?
2007-01-19 00:44:06 · 11 answers · asked by Yasmin 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
Switching the neon tube off will increase the amount of time the light can be used for..It will not neccessarily increase the number of hours the bulb can be lit.
Switching these tubes off and on is the key to the problem and in fact, it is switching the tube on which is supposed to use more electricity than than the tube will use in normal use over the period of a day.
The reason for this is the electrons in the tube need to be given a big kick to get them flowing. This is described by the term, striking potential. Like striking a match.. A certain amount of energy must be used to get it lit.
This is why these tubes use electrical BOOSTERS called ballasts to get enough high voltage energy into the system to get it running.
2007-01-19 01:59:35 · answer #1 · answered by simsjk 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi Yasmin,
It is all true, and applies also to filament bulbs.
you get charged about 1p per four hours on a 60W jobby, and lighting does not like to be switched on and off much, as the things have to heat up & cool down repeatedly. Not so bad for neons, but the "starter" is none too happy about it.
Unless you are illuminating a football feild, it will be cheaper in the long run to leave the things on.
Mind, those "long-life" items are goodly for going on & off, but really only of use for small areas.
Candles are happy with snuffing & lighting, but a club that I attend have been banned from using them for, say Christmas decorative purposes. "A fire risk" !
What tosh.
A bright New Year to you.
Cheers,
Bob.
2007-01-19 21:02:21 · answer #2 · answered by Bob the Boat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Firstly, I think you're referring to a flourescent tube, which is something very different to a neon tube. Secondly, it was true of the older type of tube/fitting combination that used plug-in starters. that starting the tube did use a lot of power and that leaving a tube on over a short period such as lunch was more economical in the long run. However, modern tubes and fittings that use a ballast tend to be more energy efficient and are less likely to use such a large amount of power at switch-on.
2007-01-19 06:36:54 · answer #3 · answered by Peter M 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Fluorescent lights are cheaper to run than conventional light bulbs,but why leave it on when not in use,say at night or if leaving the house.
2016-05-24 06:33:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that in all electrical appliances it is cheaper leving them on for a short period of time than turning them on and off.
2007-01-19 07:17:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes if you leave it on for a long tie rather than turning it on and off then the life span of the bulb will last alot longer
2007-01-19 22:53:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i believe so. plus these types of light use a ballist and it has a larger draw as it warms up the ballist.
2007-01-19 00:48:18 · answer #7 · answered by valiantw2001 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes because it uses more energy to turn the ligth on
2007-01-19 09:48:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably if your lunch time is three minutes
2007-01-20 01:37:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Leave it on.
2007-01-19 03:02:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋