[Justin Aerial]

Here`s an interesting question for all you technical geniuses on here.
Loads of people out there think they`re "green" because they recycle their newspaper and buy low energy bulbs, then they speed on the motorways ! So that set me thinking, if we take low energy bulbs as using 65% of the power of incandescents (it`s not 25%, not in this country anyway) how long would it take a 23W low energy bulb to save the extra power that a speeding driver (doing 90mph rather than 70mph in a Range Rover) has used over 100 miles ?

[mac2708]

And how is this connected with?
Terrestrial/Technical
For discussion of Freeview, Top Up TV and general DTT topics

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by mac2708

And how is this connected with?
Terrestrial/Technical
For discussion of Freeview, Top Up TV and general DTT topics

There are some clever blokes on here, they`ll have fun with this one. Don`t you think it`s an interesting technical question anyway ?

[AndrewLG]

Originally Posted by Justin Aerial

Here`s an interesting question for all you technical geniuses on here.
Loads of people out there think they`re "green" because they recycle their newspaper and buy low energy bulbs, then they speed on the motorways ! So that set me thinking, if we take low energy bulbs as using 65% of the power of incandescents (it`s not 25%, not in this country anyway) how long would it take a 23W low energy bulb to save the extra power that a speeding driver (doing 90mph rather than 70mph in a Range Rover) has used over 100 miles ?

The theory is great but too simplistic.

Q1: Where are light bulbs often located and what happens to hot air?
A1: Near the ceiling and it rises so not ideal (not much convection from there).

Q2: What's the cheaper gas or electricity and which is most commonly used for central heating?

A2: Gas and Gas.

Then there's tmes when you don't need the heat (does happen sometimes in the UK)!
If it's really hot and you have air conditioning, this uses more energy to remove this heat.

And so on!

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by AndrewLG

The theory is great but too simplistic.

Q1: Where are light bulbs often located and what happens to hot air?
A1: Near the ceiling and it rises so not ideal (not much convection from there).

Q2: What's the cheaper gas or electricity and which is most commonly used for central heating?

A2: Gas and Gas.

Then there's tmes when you don't need the heat (does happen sometimes in the UK)!
If it's really hot and you have air conditioning, this uses more energy to remove this heat.

And so on!

I accept what you say, if only to a certain extent, so let`s just go with the calculations, and see what we get !

[spiney2]

..... and the amount of energy dissipated in the server hosting this webpage is .....

either planet earth or the internet ..... one of them has to go!

[TUTV Viewer]

Originally Posted by Justin Aerial

Here`s an interesting question for all you technical geniuses on here.
Loads of people out there think they`re "green" because they recycle their newspaper and buy low energy bulbs, then they speed on the motorways ! So that set me thinking, if we take low energy bulbs as using 65% of the power of incandescents (it`s not 25%, not in this country anyway) how long would it take a 23W low energy bulb to save the extra power that a speeding driver (doing 90mph rather than 70mph in a Range Rover) has used over 100 miles ?

Does the Range Rover have energy efficient bulbs?

[Justin Aerial]

I`ve got to say I think this has been put in the wrong section, it`d have stood a far higher chance of being answered in the Technical forum. OK it isn`t broadcast technical but it is the kind of thing which would get answered in that section, rather like this question (on the speed of objects dropped off high structures) for instance.
Note to over officious moderators, that article actually has a link back to Digital Spy in it.....

[njp]

Originally Posted by Justin Aerial

I`ve got to say I think this has been put in the wrong section, it`d have stood a far higher chance of being answered in the Technical forum. OK it isn`t broadcast technical but it is the kind of thing which would get answered in that section, rather like this question (on the speed of objects dropped off high structures) for instance.
Note to over officious moderators, that article actually has a link back to Digital Spy in it.....

Or perhaps people realised it was a daft question, mostly intended to promote your website's fallacious arguments against efficient lighting, to which you helpfully provided a link?

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by njp

Or perhaps people realised it was a daft question, mostly intended to promote your website's fallacious arguments against efficient lighting, to which you helpfully provided a link?

It isn`t a daft question at all. The argument about the percentage increase in efficiency of a low energy bulb is a bit of a side issue (interesting though it is anyway).
The main point is highlighting (and hopefully even putting a figure on) the hypocrisy [or it could just be ignorance] of people who claim to be green yet burn up the motorways.

[Rorschach]

I neither own a Range Rover nor burn up motorways, am I still allowed to use a low energy bulb?

[njp]

Originally Posted by Justin Aerial

The main point is highlighting (and hopefully even putting a figure on) the hypocrisy [or it could just be ignorance] of people who claim to be green yet burn up the motorways.

Did you have anyone in particular in mind?

[flagpole]

back of the envelope calculation:

lets say travelling at 70mph requires 50hp
power goes with the square of velocity (over the same distance) so 90mph equivalence is 83hp

they sound like reasonable numbers.

a petrol engine is about 25% efficient and 1hp ~750W
so you have cruising at 70mph 150kW
and doing the same journey at 90mph (accounting for it taking less time) 247kW

which is a whole lot of energy like 100kWh per hour driven at 70mph more. a lot of light bulbs.

however, having energy saving light bulbs still saves that energy.

[Rorschach]

Originally Posted by flagpole

...however, having energy saving light bulbs still saves that energy.

Indeed.

4x4 + Low Enegy Bulbs < 4x4 + Standard Bulbs

In the same way people often point out that fat people order diet coke along with their double wopper and chips, and laugh at how pointless this is.

But Burger + Diet Coke < Burger + Regular Coke

It's not as good and no burger and no coke, but it is better.

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by njp

Did you have anyone in particular in mind?

Unsurprisingly I have actually done some research on this, if we`re talking speeding drivers, the worst culprits are those driving German cars. That said, when I did my investigations on this even non German car drivers were more likely to exceed 70mph than not, by a factor of about 3 to 2.
If we`re talking those who are using most energy by exceeding the speed limit then obviously that would be those driving big cars which aren`t particularly aerodynamic, that is to say large 4WDs, and especially petrol powered models. Of the latter who most often speed it`s usually BMW M5s or Range Rovers, that`s just a subjective feeling I haven`t actually researched it, though I`d be surprised if it wasn`t the case.

[njp]

Originally Posted by Justin Aerial

Unsurprisingly I have actually done some research on this, if we`re talking speeding drivers, the worst culprits are those driving German cars.

And where have you established a correlation between their speeding behaviour and the type of lightbulbs they use?

How do you know they don't go out speeding whilst leaving a houseful of incandescent bulbs burning all day long?

[Ghengis Can]

My house is stuffed with LED lights of various flavours, and could easily run every light in the house on 500W I own a 2.5l turbocharged petrol car though, so good and bad I guess I'm pretty shallow though, cos when I press the accelerator, I am not thinking about global warming.

[talentedmonkey]

How many penguins or panda bears will die and how much more ice will melt from the icecaps as a result of this extra use of engergy?

Global warming due to mans pollution is a lie. Its just a way to control us.

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by talentedmonkey

How many penguins or panda bears will die and how much more ice will melt from the icecaps as a result of this extra use of engergy?

Global warming due to mans pollution is a lie. Its just a way to control us.

Global warming is definite, it`s just the link to CO2 that`s not 100% proven as far as I`m concerned. But whatever the rights and wrongs of global warming surely it makes sense to use less of the earth`s resources (in this case oil and gas) anyway, plus the pollution caused by generation of energy, be it at a power station or from a car.

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by njp

And where have you established a correlation between their speeding behaviour and the type of lightbulbs they use?

How do you know they don't go out speeding whilst leaving a houseful of incandescent bulbs burning all day long?

I`m not trying to establish any correlation, I`d simply like to know the answer to the question, if a Range Rover did 90mph rather than 70 mph for 100 miles, how long would it take one "low energy bulb" to recoup that energy (over the amount an incandescent bulb would use)

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by Ghengis Can

My house is stuffed with LED lights of various flavours, and could easily run every light in the house on 500W I own a 2.5l turbocharged petrol car though, so good and bad I guess I'm pretty shallow though, cos when I press the accelerator, I am not thinking about global warming.

Try thinking about other drivers safety then (even if you`re not bothered about your own).......

[Si_Crewe]

I can't help thinking that the amount of energy expended by the squillions of people doing pointless stuff on the internet FAR exceeds the amount of energy wasted by speeding drivers.

[Si_Crewe]

Originally Posted by flagpole

a petrol engine is about 25% efficient and 1hp ~750W
so you have cruising at 70mph 150kW
and doing the same journey at 90mph (accounting for it taking less time) 247kW

That's a bit unfair.

It's kinda like saying that because a power station is 25% efficient your 60w lightbulb actually uses 240w.

Kinda related, I was forced to fire up this pumping spread for a day (not by myself ) in order that an instrument tech' could test a mass flowmeter.
Afterwards, we worked out that during that day it'd burned enough fuel to power a city such as Birmingham for a year!

Gotta love heavy industry.

[Justin Aerial]

Originally Posted by Si_Crewe

I can't help thinking that the amount of energy expended by the squillions of people doing pointless stuff on the internet FAR exceeds the amount of energy wasted by speeding drivers.

We`ll take that as an ironic comment.

[Si_Crewe]

Originally Posted by Justin Aerial

We`ll take that as an ironic comment.

Probably wise.