I too have switched to almost all cfl bulbs. I didn't notice any change one way or the other actually. But then I live in Texas and we go from running AC one day, to running the heat the next!
For that matter, there are times we run the heat at night and the AC in the afternoon.
Most electric company web sites say your lights are about 30 % of your bill. I don't think so, in my case anyway. That would be almost 100.00 on a 300.00 electric bill.
Did you start running your heater soon after changing the bulbs? Did you compare last years bill for this month, to this years?
Did you get a big screen HDTV?, They use about three time the energy of older TVs'.
The web site below is from California, however it covers the cost of various appliances at .15 and .25 per kwh. My current rate is .13 per kwh.
One good thing about cfl's. Even if they were the same watt useage, they last much longer than incondesent bulbs.
That should save you a little anyway.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
2007-12-30 02:23:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by Colt 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A month to month comparision is not valid. The "savings" listed on the package of the cfl is over the lifetime of the bulb. The particular one I looked at is an 8000 hour bulb. So if you have the bulb on 4 hours a day, then the savings will be $24 over 2000 days or nearly 7 years. Not going to notice that in the ole monthly electric bill. Plus the loss of heat from changing to cfl's will also result in your furnance running more often, which will offset some of the savings and the timing of your bulb change coincides with a decrease in the number of daylight hours, so the number of hours you have your lights on is probably higher.
What I'm really curious about is the impact on the environment due to all the mercury being dumped into landfills once these things have to be replaced. I can remember when you could not eat fish because of high mercury levels. Here we go again! If you really want to get away from incandescent bulbs, then go with LED's. The alleged advantages are the same. The reduced heat output will save on air conditioning costs, although that is offset somewhat if not entirely by increased heating costs, without the mercury.
My final point is, since Washington has passed legislation to ban incandescents, then the available replacements will be both more expensive to buy and do more damage then good. Its not like a politician will take the time to consider the overall impact of a move such as this.
2007-12-30 03:33:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Gary H 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is most likely no fuse in the light itself. Plug something else into the receptacle to check and see if the circuit breaker or fuse is blown. A radio works well for this. If there is power, the circuit is good and the problem is with the light fixture. If the circuit is dead, find the electrical panel. Unless you are in a really old building, the circuits will be protected by breakers rather than fuses. If there is a fuse, the blown one will be identifiable by finding the one with a visibly open conductor (look through the glass in the center). Unscrew it and replace it with a new on of the same amperage. If it is a breaker, on some types the lever moves to the center when tripped. Move it to the off position to reset (usually towards the outside edge of the panel and then turn it to the "on" position. If the light fixture is the problem, it is most likely the ballast. You can get a replacement at the hardware store (get the exact lable information from the old one). Unplug the light or turn off the circuit at the panel. Unhook one wire at a time and reconnect the new ballast
2016-04-02 02:00:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The effect on your electric bill will reflect the percentage of your use that is used for lighting; If you're not home often and don't use much light, your electric bill is mostly from using other appliances - refrigerator, washer, etc. - anyway.
In my home, a large percentage of electrical use was from lighting; I saw a significant reduction in my bill from changing to CFLs. Another benefit is that I haven't had to replace burned out bulbs as often as before!
2007-12-30 05:34:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Paul L 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Perhaps the major portion of your electric bill is other than lights.
We tend to accumulate so many things that drain the electric that
we forget they add to the bill every month.
I read an interesting article about 'energy vampires' - all those little
appliances around the house that suck electricity 24/7.
Like tv (it draws energy even when off), clocks, radios, chargers, pcs, etc.
The author went around the house unplugging everything, then going and looking at the meter. After everything he could think of was unplugged it still kept turning.
Then he started finding those things he didn't think of, like a battery charger in the garage, battery vacuum cleaner , weed eater. Everything with a little glowing light.
He plugged in the essentials, fridge, clocks etc.
He only plugged in the other things when he needed them, like the tv, pc. He reduced his bill by 1/2 that way, and said it wasn't that
difficult.
good luck to you.
2007-12-30 02:18:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Larry W 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The electric company charges you monthly for the wattage used in the house. If you subtract the difference of wattage of your new bulbs from that of the old you will have the result of your savings. Check with your electric company on how much they charge per kw hour then do the math.
2007-12-30 06:53:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by horezontel 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't have any questions, but we've been thinking to think doing this ourselves. Does the bulbs last longer than the old bulbs or have you left them on long enough to know. I know all the hype- about them lasting longer, being energy efficient, and the very fact that they are more expensive than the old bulbs. This is interesting. thanks for posting.
2007-12-30 02:10:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Maxine H 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
is it possible that about the same time you changed your bulbs, the weather changed, thus kicking on your heater at a time when your bill should have usually gone up but stayed the same due to the lower lighting costs?
2007-12-30 02:08:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
While the energy consumption of CFL's is lower, you will not find a savings if you turn them on and off frequently. They actually last longer by burning longer periods of time.
2007-12-30 02:58:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by sensible_man 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Those bulbs are just stupid, there are so many factors to consider. It's great that regular bulbs now have competition but to think that using the new ones will be any better is just plain dumb.
2007-12-30 02:17:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Gustav 5
·
0⤊
3⤋