Comments on: Honey, I Shrunk the CFLs: Crazy-Small New Bulb from SYLVANIA http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/ Clean Tech News & Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. & More. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:05:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bernice http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17538 Bernice Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:43:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17538 The Sylvania micro mini CFL is a great idea as standard-sized compact flurescents are too tall for my wall sconces. But they are VERY VERY dim. The 100-watt- equivalent produces less light than the regular 60-watt- equivalent CFL it replaced! I'm going to return the Sylvanias because I'm better off with the much cheaper, lower-watt larger CFL. The Sylvania micro mini CFL is a great idea as standard-sized compact flurescents are too tall for my wall sconces. But they are VERY VERY dim. The 100-watt- equivalent produces less light than the regular 60-watt- equivalent CFL it replaced! I’m going to return the Sylvanias because I’m better off with the much cheaper, lower-watt larger CFL.

]]> By: Bernice http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-411 Bernice Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:43:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-411 The Sylvania micro mini CFL is a great idea as standard-sized compact flurescents are too tall for my wall sconces. But they are VERY VERY dim. The 100-watt- equivalent produces less light than the regular 60-watt- equivalent CFL it replaced! I'm going to return the Sylvanias because I'm better off with the much cheaper, lower-watt larger CFL. The Sylvania micro mini CFL is a great idea as standard-sized compact flurescents are too tall for my wall sconces. But they are VERY VERY dim. The 100-watt- equivalent produces less light than the regular 60-watt- equivalent CFL it replaced! I’m going to return the Sylvanias because I’m better off with the much cheaper, lower-watt larger CFL.

]]> By: willmore http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-410 willmore Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:29:51 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-410 @Robert Harding So, they were 72% of peak brightness right when they were turned on? That's less than 3db difference from full brightness. The human eye would have trouble telling the difference in that amount of brightness change over a 60 second period--unless you had some sort of reference. Say, you had one bulb on and warm and a second bulb turn on next to it. Then you would be able to tell the difference, but anything less than about a factor of 2 is hard to tell *by eye*. This is vastly better than the old folded type which could take several minutes to come up and often started with <5% of full brightness. And, regarding the mercury discussion. The mercury in these bulbs is metalic mercury which has very low bio-availability. If you want to be worried about the toxicity of mercury, worry about the use of organic mercury compounds used in the agrabusiness world. The best benefit of these bulbs is due to their size allowing them to be used in applications where other CFLs will not fit. I just bought a new set of light fixtures for my bathroom and regular CFLs would not fit without sticking out above the assembly. These mini-twist type fit in there. I'm looking forward to the end of low efficiency lighting so that fixtures can be cost reduced because they no longer have to withstand the high temps of incandescent bulbs. @Robert Harding

So, they were 72% of peak brightness right when they were turned on? That’s less than 3db difference from full brightness. The human eye would have trouble telling the difference in that amount of brightness change over a 60 second period–unless you had some sort of reference. Say, you had one bulb on and warm and a second bulb turn on next to it. Then you would be able to tell the difference, but anything less than about a factor of 2 is hard to tell *by eye*.

This is vastly better than the old folded type which could take several minutes to come up and often started with <5% of full brightness.

And, regarding the mercury discussion. The mercury in these bulbs is metalic mercury which has very low bio-availability. If you want to be worried about the toxicity of mercury, worry about the use of organic mercury compounds used in the agrabusiness world.

The best benefit of these bulbs is due to their size allowing them to be used in applications where other CFLs will not fit. I just bought a new set of light fixtures for my bathroom and regular CFLs would not fit without sticking out above the assembly. These mini-twist type fit in there.

I’m looking forward to the end of low efficiency lighting so that fixtures can be cost reduced because they no longer have to withstand the high temps of incandescent bulbs.

]]> By: willmore http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17537 willmore Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:29:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17537 @Robert Harding So, they were 72% of peak brightness right when they were turned on? That's less than 3db difference from full brightness. The human eye would have trouble telling the difference in that amount of brightness change over a 60 second period--unless you had some sort of reference. Say, you had one bulb on and warm and a second bulb turn on next to it. Then you would be able to tell the difference, but anything less than about a factor of 2 is hard to tell *by eye*. This is vastly better than the old folded type which could take several minutes to come up and often started with <5% of full brightness. And, regarding the mercury discussion. The mercury in these bulbs is metalic mercury which has very low bio-availability. If you want to be worried about the toxicity of mercury, worry about the use of organic mercury compounds used in the agrabusiness world. The best benefit of these bulbs is due to their size allowing them to be used in applications where other CFLs will not fit. I just bought a new set of light fixtures for my bathroom and regular CFLs would not fit without sticking out above the assembly. These mini-twist type fit in there. I'm looking forward to the end of low efficiency lighting so that fixtures can be cost reduced because they no longer have to withstand the high temps of incandescent bulbs. @Robert Harding

So, they were 72% of peak brightness right when they were turned on? That’s less than 3db difference from full brightness. The human eye would have trouble telling the difference in that amount of brightness change over a 60 second period–unless you had some sort of reference. Say, you had one bulb on and warm and a second bulb turn on next to it. Then you would be able to tell the difference, but anything less than about a factor of 2 is hard to tell *by eye*.

This is vastly better than the old folded type which could take several minutes to come up and often started with <5% of full brightness.

And, regarding the mercury discussion. The mercury in these bulbs is metalic mercury which has very low bio-availability. If you want to be worried about the toxicity of mercury, worry about the use of organic mercury compounds used in the agrabusiness world.

The best benefit of these bulbs is due to their size allowing them to be used in applications where other CFLs will not fit. I just bought a new set of light fixtures for my bathroom and regular CFLs would not fit without sticking out above the assembly. These mini-twist type fit in there.

I’m looking forward to the end of low efficiency lighting so that fixtures can be cost reduced because they no longer have to withstand the high temps of incandescent bulbs.

]]> By: Robert Harding http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-409 Robert Harding Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:43:58 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-409 Sylvania CFL "Instant-On" ... Give Me A Break Just measured relative brightness versus time (every 10 seconds for 3 minutes from initial turn-on) of a New Sylvania CF23EL/MicroMini using a simple light brightness meter. Test performed at 70 degrees F, lamp mounted upright in table lamp fixture in dark room. Light sensor located 2 feet from lamp. Results: Maximum brightness is achieved at 60 seconds from initial start.. Maximum brightness is 72% brighter than initial start brightness. (Very noticeable with naked-eye) "They don't get bright until warmed up" Also: The (2) new bulbs I tested stabilized in brightness after 3 minutes but had dropped off 8% from the maximum brightness achieved at 60 seconds. "Instant-On" does not equal "Instant Bright" Does anyone have access to Sylvania/Osram's Performance and Life-Test data on these blubs? Sylvania CFL “Instant-On” … Give Me A Break

Just measured relative brightness versus time (every 10 seconds for 3 minutes from initial turn-on) of a New Sylvania CF23EL/MicroMini using a simple light brightness meter. Test performed at 70 degrees F, lamp mounted upright in table lamp fixture in dark room. Light sensor located 2 feet from lamp.

Results: Maximum brightness is achieved at 60 seconds from initial start..

Maximum brightness is 72% brighter than initial start brightness. (Very noticeable with naked-eye) “They don’t get bright until warmed up”

Also: The (2) new bulbs I tested stabilized in brightness after 3 minutes but had dropped off 8% from the maximum brightness achieved at 60 seconds.

“Instant-On” does not equal “Instant Bright”

Does anyone have access to Sylvania/Osram’s Performance and Life-Test data on these blubs?

]]> By: Robert Harding http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17536 Robert Harding Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:43:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17536 Sylvania CFL "Instant-On" ... Give Me A Break Just measured relative brightness versus time (every 10 seconds for 3 minutes from initial turn-on) of a New Sylvania CF23EL/MicroMini using a simple light brightness meter. Test performed at 70 degrees F, lamp mounted upright in table lamp fixture in dark room. Light sensor located 2 feet from lamp. Results: Maximum brightness is achieved at 60 seconds from initial start.. Maximum brightness is 72% brighter than initial start brightness. (Very noticeable with naked-eye) "They don't get bright until warmed up" Also: The (2) new bulbs I tested stabilized in brightness after 3 minutes but had dropped off 8% from the maximum brightness achieved at 60 seconds. "Instant-On" does not equal "Instant Bright" Does anyone have access to Sylvania/Osram's Performance and Life-Test data on these blubs? Sylvania CFL “Instant-On” … Give Me A Break

Just measured relative brightness versus time (every 10 seconds for 3 minutes from initial turn-on) of a New Sylvania CF23EL/MicroMini using a simple light brightness meter. Test performed at 70 degrees F, lamp mounted upright in table lamp fixture in dark room. Light sensor located 2 feet from lamp.

Results: Maximum brightness is achieved at 60 seconds from initial start..

Maximum brightness is 72% brighter than initial start brightness. (Very noticeable with naked-eye) “They don’t get bright until warmed up”

Also: The (2) new bulbs I tested stabilized in brightness after 3 minutes but had dropped off 8% from the maximum brightness achieved at 60 seconds.

“Instant-On” does not equal “Instant Bright”

Does anyone have access to Sylvania/Osram’s Performance and Life-Test data on these blubs?

]]> By: jm http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-408 jm Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:18:08 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-408 Mercury: you get about 450mg when you get a filling at the dentists office. Typical CFL contains about 6mg. The problem with CFL mercury is that most people don't recycle them and the mercury among other nasties pile up in landfills, water, etc. in large numbers that cases a problem. Mercury: you get about 450mg when you get a filling at the dentists office. Typical CFL contains about 6mg. The problem with CFL mercury is that most people don’t recycle them and the mercury among other nasties pile up in landfills, water, etc. in large numbers that cases a problem.

]]> By: jm http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17535 jm Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:18:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17535 Mercury: you get about 450mg when you get a filling at the dentists office. Typical CFL contains about 6mg. The problem with CFL mercury is that most people don't recycle them and the mercury among other nasties pile up in landfills, water, etc. in large numbers that cases a problem. Mercury: you get about 450mg when you get a filling at the dentists office. Typical CFL contains about 6mg. The problem with CFL mercury is that most people don’t recycle them and the mercury among other nasties pile up in landfills, water, etc. in large numbers that cases a problem.

]]> By: jm http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-407 jm Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:11:38 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-407 People. Please stop believing LED will be the wave of the future. The efficiency of LED isn't there yet. The real issue is the fact that the LED chip melts at a faily low temperature. When you start getting LED chips that are over 7-8 watts, they need to be used with a heat sink. This is very difficult to achieve in even a 15w screw in bulb. Normally, you would make a dedicated fixture for each LED chip with power supply and heat sink. But we're talking 40 lpw at best. cfl's do at least 60, most good ones are doing 70 now. Now GE and maybe Sylania are talking about using nanotechnology on incandescent bulbs that GE plans to have about 30 lpw bulbs on the market by 2010, and later 60 lpw bulbs. This will surely render LED to a small neich market. People. Please stop believing LED will be the wave of the future. The efficiency of LED isn’t there yet. The real issue is the fact that the LED chip melts at a faily low temperature. When you start getting LED chips that are over 7-8 watts, they need to be used with a heat sink. This is very difficult to achieve in even a 15w screw in bulb. Normally, you would make a dedicated fixture for each LED chip with power supply and heat sink. But we’re talking 40 lpw at best. cfl’s do at least 60, most good ones are doing 70 now. Now GE and maybe Sylania are talking about using nanotechnology on incandescent bulbs that GE plans to have about 30 lpw bulbs on the market by 2010, and later 60 lpw bulbs. This will surely render LED to a small neich market.

]]> By: jm http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17534 jm Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:11:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/23/honey-i-shrunk-the-cfls-crazy-small-new-bulb-from-sylvania/#comment-17534 People. Please stop believing LED will be the wave of the future. The efficiency of LED isn't there yet. The real issue is the fact that the LED chip melts at a faily low temperature. When you start getting LED chips that are over 7-8 watts, they need to be used with a heat sink. This is very difficult to achieve in even a 15w screw in bulb. Normally, you would make a dedicated fixture for each LED chip with power supply and heat sink. But we're talking 40 lpw at best. cfl's do at least 60, most good ones are doing 70 now. Now GE and maybe Sylania are talking about using nanotechnology on incandescent bulbs that GE plans to have about 30 lpw bulbs on the market by 2010, and later 60 lpw bulbs. This will surely render LED to a small neich market. People. Please stop believing LED will be the wave of the future. The efficiency of LED isn’t there yet. The real issue is the fact that the LED chip melts at a faily low temperature. When you start getting LED chips that are over 7-8 watts, they need to be used with a heat sink. This is very difficult to achieve in even a 15w screw in bulb. Normally, you would make a dedicated fixture for each LED chip with power supply and heat sink. But we’re talking 40 lpw at best. cfl’s do at least 60, most good ones are doing 70 now. Now GE and maybe Sylania are talking about using nanotechnology on incandescent bulbs that GE plans to have about 30 lpw bulbs on the market by 2010, and later 60 lpw bulbs. This will surely render LED to a small neich market.

]]>