# LED light vs fluorescent



## stephengips (Feb 15, 2010)

I'm not sure but I believe only half. Because watts is power and you are billed by Kwh.


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

Assuming that you took your readings on the line side of the ballast and xformer, then as Stephen said, go with the watt meter's reading as watt's is your billable energy.

Are your meters true rms? Seems like a large difference between watts and va's.
What's the ballast's pf?


----------



## kaboler (Dec 1, 2010)

The problem with LED vs. Flourescent is that theyre' trying to sell something for $20 that'll save me 4 or 5 watts, with a poorer quality light (colour, WARMTH etc) and it'll never work out in the end.


----------



## horst.droege (Apr 9, 2011)

jefft110 said:


> Assuming that you took your readings on the line side of the ballast and xformer, then as Stephen said, go with the watt meter's reading as watt's is your billable energy.
> 
> Are your meters true rms? Seems like a large difference between watts and va's.
> What's the ballast's pf?


I took the A reading in the supply line so i measured ballast, tube and starter. Not sure if the meter is a true rms, its a FLUKE, several years old by now. 

I measure the overal PF with a meter, for the fluorescent its 0.46 and for the LED its 1.


----------



## horst.droege (Apr 9, 2011)

stephengips said:


> I'm not sure but I believe only half. Because watts is power and you are billed by Kwh.


Yes the watt is what you billed on but with a PF of 0.46 you get only half what you pay for. Many utilities companies in Asia charging you for a low power factor. There are penalties on it. The bill shows your kVA and kWh. 

And having in a condo block 3000 of these mercury equipped its makes a huge different on the electric bill. Thats why my question came if saving double or saving 5 times.


----------



## Electric_Light (Apr 6, 2010)

Most 4 lamp and 2 lamp instant start electronic ballasts officially allow operation with one fewer lamp. There is no rewiring required unlike many CFL ballasts to fit two lamp to one lamp operation


If you want to save power with no regard for light output for no added cost whatsoever, you wait until next relamp cycle and specify 3 lamps for 4 lamp fixture. 1 lamp in every other 2 lamp fixtures, , or you go get the lamps pulled right now,but that incurs labor charge. You can probably renegotiate next group relamp expense, because 25% less lamps means 25% less lamps to install and dispose. 

Commercial use electronic ballasts are required to have a PF >0.90 but they usually have a PF of 0.98 to 0.99. The active PFC does so well that you can literally do V * A to get wattage. You have to be using a choke series ballast (common in 230v countries) or electronic ballast without PFC to get a PF of 0.46. You mentioned starter, so I'm guessing you have a choke ballast.

Those 48" wannabe LEDs are usually trash. They're expensive and incur a substantial labor charge as you will have to bypass electronic ballast. Some of them will operate with magnetic ballast in place, but you suffer the crappy efficacy of LEDs in addition to ballast power loss.

LED fitters are exploiting the fact that a lot of existing fluorescent installs are way over lit for what we do now. When they were designed, they were designed with generous lumen depreciation of cool white F40 in mind and doing mainly paper tasks, which requires higher illumination level than mainly computer tasks.

Fluorescent system gets around 95 lumens per watt, usually with 5 year warranty on ballast and 3 year warranty on lamps. You pay outrageous amount like $30/lamp to get 35lm/W and 3-12mo warranty with those China made LED crap.


----------



## fy lighting (Jul 4, 2011)

Electric_Light said:


> You pay outrageous amount like $30/lamp to get 35lm/W and 3-12mo warranty with those China made LED crap.


Hi Electric_light,

I bet you US100.0, you can find T8 LED tube which has efficacy of over 95lm/w on 4000K or 5500K in China:laughing:. And the LED tubes come with 3 years warranty


----------



## rexowner (Apr 12, 2008)

kaboler said:


> The problem with LED vs. Flourescent is that theyre' trying to sell something for $20 that'll save me 4 or 5 watts, with a poorer quality light (colour, WARMTH etc) and it'll never work out in the end.


Who is "they"?

The LEDs with which I am familiar have better spectra and efficacy.

WRT what you mention as "the end", LEDs are semiconductor products
which are subject to constant improvement. CFLs are far along the
development curve, and will be eclipsed by LEDs. LEDs will become
less expensive and CFLs won't change in cost. (Only if you want
to be realistic.)


----------



## 10492 (Jan 4, 2010)

Electric_Light said:


> Fluorescent system gets around 95 lumens per watt, usually with 5 year warranty on ballast and 3 year warranty on lamps. You pay outrageous amount like $30/lamp to get 35lm/W and 3-12mo warranty with those China made LED crap.


Consider the source when reading this comment.

It's mostly nonsense.


----------



## Electric_Light (Apr 6, 2010)

fy lighting said:


> Hi Electric_light,
> 
> I bet you US100.0, you can find T8 LED tube which has efficacy of over 95lm/w on 4000K or 5500K in China:laughing:. And the LED tubes come with 3 years warranty


China spec'ing and many LED lighting products spec'ing are different from lighting industry. LED manufacturers rate output usually based on the INTERNAL SEMICONDUCTOR JUNCTION at 25°C and output is taken with a very short pulsed current so as to not raise the temperature. 

Many take the data obtained from LED spec sheet, assemble a bunch of LEDs together and simply carry over the LED manufacturers specs, which won't be achieved when they're operating at Tj = 100C at ambient of 35C. 

If I was to have a buyer purchase the product you say through standard distribution channel without a disclosure and send it to an accredited testing lab in the US and tested to LM-79 and LM-80 standards, would you pay the entire testing expense, then publish that said product is bunk if it fails to meet the claimed performance under the aforementioned testing standards?


----------



## LARMGUY (Aug 22, 2010)

Electric_Light said:


> China spec'ing and many LED lighting products spec'ing are different from lighting industry. LED manufacturers rate output usually based on the INTERNAL SEMICONDUCTOR JUNCTION at 25°C and output is taken with a very short pulsed current so as to not raise the temperature.
> 
> Many take the data obtained from LED spec sheet, assemble a bunch of LEDs together and simply carry over the LED manufacturers specs, which won't be achieved when they're operating at Tj = 100C at ambient of 35C.
> 
> If I was to have a buyer purchase the product you say through standard distribution channel without a disclosure and send it to an accredited testing lab in the US and tested to LM-79 and LM-80 standards, would you pay the entire testing expense, then publish that said product is bunk if it fails to meet the claimed performance under the aforementioned testing standards?


That went well. :laughing:

Seriously,
I am planning a new home build for myself. I lean toward indirect lighting around the perimeter of a room with task lighting provided by table and floor lamps. I dislike can lights because they are too harsh. Our church just installed high intensity LED’s that are really too harsh. I personally dislike them but I’m told they can be dimmed.

What would you recommend for indirect as far as initial cost, length of service, and savings? LED, fluorescent, other?


----------



## Electric_Light (Apr 6, 2010)

LARMGUY said:


> That went well. :laughing:
> 
> Seriously,
> I am planning a new home build for myself. I lean toward indirect lighting around the perimeter



For "cove lighting" , fluorescent provides a very uniform light distribution. Staggered design light strips are available, so as to minimize visible dark spots between two lamps. 



> I dislike can lights because they are too harsh. Our church just installed high intensity LED’s that are really too harsh. I personally dislike them but I’m told they can be dimmed.


Fluorescent lamps can be dimmed too, but not necessarily with standard incandescent dimmer wall switch, with the exception of consumer grade internal ballast CFLs specifically meant to utilize existing dimmers. 

It's not a matter of LED vs fluorescent. It's a matter of having dimming capable driver or ballast and appropriate control system for it. 

For fluorescent, you use dimming ballasts and dimmers intended for them, which may or may not require additional control wires. These things add up materials cost quickly though. $70-100 for each ballast(as opposed to $10-15 for non-dimming). $50-100 for each special dimmer. 




> What would you recommend for indirect as far as initial cost, length of service, and savings? LED, fluorescent, other?


Fluorescent. Superior efficacy over tube shaped LEDs. Lower initial cost. Long enough life. 

LEDs claim very long life,but they're not failure proof. Those tube shaped ones are actually quite failure prone. Hours claimed in spec sheet means nothing when its warranty corresponds to it in a fair way and you're looking at very expensive repair when they fail out of warranty


----------



## Jmohl (Apr 26, 2011)

kaboler said:


> The problem with LED vs. Flourescent is that theyre' trying to sell something for $20 that'll save me 4 or 5 watts, with a poorer quality light (colour, WARMTH etc) and it'll never work out in the end.


 Actually, you as usual are WRONG!!! T8 linear tube uses 32w of power, same size LED tube half or 16W. In a 6tube fixture, that's 96w saved. A t8 fluorescent will need to be replaced appoximately every two years where a led will last 5years plus, yielding further savings in bulb costs, disposal fees, and man hours. The payback on them is 2yrs or less depending on use. As far as color temp, they are available in cool white and daylight with a CRI as high as 85. The lumen output depreciation over the life of the tube is 5% compared to fluorescent and HID which lose much more and are usually only around 50%out by the time replacement happens.


----------



## Electric_Light (Apr 6, 2010)

Jmohl said:


> Actually, you as usual are WRONG!!! *T8 linear tube uses 32w of power, same size LED tube half or 16W. In a 6tube fixture, that's 96w saved.* A t8 fluorescent will need to be replaced appoximately every two years where a led will last 5years plus, yielding further savings in bulb costs, disposal fees, and man hours. The payback on them is 2yrs or less depending on use. As far as color temp, they are available in cool white and daylight with a CRI as high as 85. The lumen output depreciation over the life of the tube is 5% compared to *fluorescent and HID which lose much more and are usually only around 50%out by the time replacement happens.*


Actually, you as usual are WRONG!!!

Actual power usage depends on ballast and how hard the lamps are driven. For 0.88 BF F32T8, this is around 27 to 29W per lamp. More for higher BF, less for lower BF. You're pretending LEDs use 16W/lamp and produce the same output. Wrong. Tube type LEDs have WORSE efficacy than fluorescent. You don't get a proportional reduction in output. The reduction in light is more than reduction in power. 

RE80 fluorescent lose 5-8% over life. Probe start metal halide does indeed lose close to 50% over life. LED life is rated until 70% of original output and this is for the ones rated based on LM-80. 

Tube types using a lot of small LEDs are known to lose as much as 50% within the first 1,000 hours.


----------



## Jmohl (Apr 26, 2011)

As usual, Electric Light comes charging to the defense of 1950's technology because that is, after all, how he makes his money. Those of us who don't get paid extra every time we have to climb a ladder to change a two year old fluorescent tube or MH bulb, readily embrace this new technology that will more than pay for itself. That's cool, Knew when I posted my comment what the comeback was gonna be.... not gonna argue. I just know that based on the research I did and the data out there, that LED is the Now, and it will only get better with time.:thumbsup:


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I am not a person of expert facts and figures about led light or fluorescent lamps and temperatures and so forth, it bores me to tears.

What I do know is I gutted out some alcove lighting in an apartment remodel, around 65 48" single tube t-12 fluorescent lights and replaced the whole shebang with strip led lights. The amp draw before and after- 50 amps dropped down to about 13. I did not purchase the lights, nor the drivers so I cannot comment on the atual cost savings, but the load speaks for itself. And the overall lighting effect was equal . Very happy customer. 
Nora lighting product. It was fast and easy.


----------



## diane21 (Sep 20, 2011)

LED lamps emit no Infrared or Ultraviolet radiation. CFLs (and tubular fluorescent lamps) generate light by exciting the Mercury vapor inside the lamp with electricity, generating Ultraviolet radiation, which stimulates the phosphor coating on the inner surface of the glass bulb, causing it to re-radiate most of the Ultraviolet radiation as visible light. LED lamps generally create "white" light by using blue LEDs and a phosphor coating which re-radiates some of the blue light as longer wavelength light (yellow range of the spectrum), together appearing as white.






led lights


----------



## JEA926 (Oct 27, 2011)

*LED vs. Flourescent*

Here we go,

Fluorescent;

High light output nice even light, but.... must be recycled, mercury is an issue, not much in energy savings, T5 Ballast problems, and they still don't end the maintenance nightmare! 

High quality LED's, UL listed with LM-79 & LM-80 reports; 

Higher light output, 50% or more less power, less heat, long life. 

However, there is a lot of junk out there, LED's don't like heat. If they get too hot they will shift more towards the blue light spectrum, start blinking, lose 50% or more of their light output and worst of all, LED's start burning out. This wipes out the saving etc when they have to be changed out 2 - 3 times, or more over their "life time". 
Further, if someone is selling you these low grade LED lamps you can bet that when the failures start to happen, and they will, the company will not be around to handle the Warranty issues.

What to do?? 
We only use tried and true, mostly American, LED lighting manufacturers that make some really incredible LED lighting products and to date have not had one failure. PAR-38 lamps that produce 1400 Lumen @ 12W, Strip lamps (excellent for hard to maintain cove lighting) @ 98.7 Lumen/Watt etc etc. Garage, Parking lot, High bay retrofits, to name a few. 

The Manufacturers we use mostly make retrofit LED products, our motto is "*Why throw away a perfectly good fixture?*"

So before you jump on the LED band wagon, due diligence is required. Be VERY wary of LED tubes that cost less than $50/ea or any other low cost LED lamp. You really do get what you pay for when it comes to LED lighting.


----------



## mbednarik (Oct 10, 2011)

kaboler said:


> The problem with LED vs. Flourescent is that theyre' trying to sell something for $20 that'll save me 4 or 5 watts, with a poorer quality light (colour, WARMTH etc) and it'll never work out in the end.


I have to disagree with the qualtiy of light. i installed some lithonia led troughers for our local school and they had a lot better light dist. than stand prismatic and color was dead on 4100k match. We switched 3 of 4 in the grounds sup. office so he could show people the difference and he had us switch the last one to led because it was bothering him. But i don't know about the led replacement tubes, these fixtures had 2 led strips behind a lens. The ballast draw on these were .52A at 120v and with my light meter i had higher fc readings than with the 4 lamp t12 fixtures. The amount of delivered lumens didn't make sense to me because the 4 lamp t-12 should have been brighter, the tubes were not that old either.


----------



## JEA926 (Oct 27, 2011)

It is a concern,

However, a high quality LED Linear tube is brighter than T-8's. We have light tests to prove it. Sadly there is a lot of low quality, short lived junk available. The American designed Tubes we install are around $70/ea, with internal LED drivers, no need to find a place in the fixture to install the external drivers most have. 
However, if left on 24/7 they should last 7 plus years and energy savings are around 40%, not to mention the Maintenance savings. It also stops having to mass re-lamp a school since they last so long and the egress tubes now don't have to be replaced along with rest of the tubes that really don't need replacing, which equals even more savings. Light output will drop 30%, but that would happen towards the end of the LED tubes life, first 5 years is about 1 - 2 %/year.

The problem is that many try to use a cheap tube, get burned by it and then won't use LED's for years to come. These low quality tubes just hurt the industry.

We also install an LED Egress system that takes a standard size high school down to under 1,000 Watts. This eliminates having to have this system powered by a Generator, now all it needs is a UPS battery unit. It also eliminates having to use batteries that have to be replaced every 5 years in the Ceiling Inlays, a really neat product!


----------



## Saqibsaeed (Feb 27, 2020)

Because LED bulbs or tubes don't use direct heat to produce light. When we deal with LED bulb brightness, we need to think about Lumens, not watts. As per general standard, 800 lumen LED bulb generate the same amount of light as an old 60 watt incandescent bulb. LEDs are small, solid light bulbs that are powerful, energy-efficient, and long lasting. LED lighting are offered in a variety of base colors, such as red, blue, and amber. Due to the fact that traditional incandescent bulbs use filters to produce colors, they are extremely bad. LEDs can be mixed together to produce large numbers of color options.


----------

