If you'd have your house heating and lighting all by electricity then your total bill will not go down by switching from incandescent lights to LEDs. Unless of course you have street lights on your meter as well.
So if you have gas/oil heat but electric lights then switching to LEDs will only increase your heating bill .
I hope CREE will be at 100 when people will realize that as it will be really fast run downhill - in some sense the wider LEDs are adopted the higher CREE will fly the harder landing it will be.
Don't get me wrong - there are places where LEDs are fine (e.g. street lights, headlights in cars etc.) but the hype about LED lights saving energy for regular household is played on gullible minds of poorly educated Americans.
I'm not short CREE yet, I'm watching it.
If we follow your logic on the loss of heat due to converting to LED bulbs then on the flip side, in the warm months your Air Conditioner will reap a great benefit by not having to work nearly as hard to cool your house.
Well, you should watch it! Electricity is the most expensive heat source in common use. Most people have access to natural gas or to oil. Natural gas is very cheap right now. I am paying $7/MBTU. I also pay 12Cents for a KWH. one KWH is 3413 BTU. This means I would have to use 293 KWH costing $35.16 to get equivalent heat to a $7 amount of Natural gas. Heating oil would be higher and places that require the use of heating oil also have electricity costs that are far above thde 12 cents/kwh that I pay. "Don't get me wrong"? You are most definitely wrong.
How the argument "gas is cheaper" goes against "all electric house will not benefit from switching to LED during the heating season" ? I think you just agreed with me even if you called me wrong..
I replace all my bulbs years ago with CFLs years ago and noticed an immediate 40% drop in my power bill. Problem is I don't like the light from the CFL's, At that time, they were expensive, but have come down in price. But, I still don't like the light, and they are ugly. The new LEDS aren't exactly pretty, but they produce better light. Your comment that switching to LEDS will not cut your power bill hasn't been thought out. You pay for the total number of watts you use, which with incandescents is considerable. Ten years from now the entire lighting market will be mostly LEDS, not just in America, but world wide. And, I'm not poorly educated, nor gullible.
Well, maybe you're not gullible and well educated.
I have strong impression that "green" and "eco-friendly" people just don't know how to count.
They like to count only one side where the savings are and forget to count the other part - the perfect example would be "all-electric cars will result in less carbon dioxide" when people only look on exhaust pipe of the car but not the one of electric coal plant.
How did change your heating bill after you switched to CFL ? I am surprised a bit about 40% - I always thought that the biggest consumers of electricity in the house are appliances (fridge, stove, washer/dryer) not the light bulbs. The computer I type this message consumes about 350W not counting energy used by monitor - more than all light bulbs in the same room.
I noticed that after switching from old and inefficient oil heater to ultra efficient gas one I had to bring electric heaters to the basement because now it's too cold there - I save in one place but I spend more in another.
If 60watts is being replaced by 14watts how does that not save, even with the cost of lamp replacement over fifteen years. You state an LED has its place in automobile headlights but not in residential homes, explain logic please. thanks.
You raise an excellent point. I of course say that because I too have been amused at the enviroloons who buy an all electric car only to fail to realize that over 90% of the electricity is generated by coal or nat gas fossil fuels. How about those toxic battery disposal issues? Since when is CO2 a poisonous gas? Oh, well, .. But about the 40% savings on the electric bill. The first question is : 40% off what? I know a guy who said he saved 50% off his water bill by hard scaping his front yard. The hard scaping cost him $7 grand and his water bill was $100 bucks a month. Now the average electric bill is about $75 bucks a month. Call it $100 for ease of computing and lighting is about 10% of that. If the total bill is $100, lighting accounts fo $10 and a 40% savings is $4 bucks. Looking at the numbers that way, it puts things in a , eh,,,,,,,,,, New LIght.
60W incandescent light bulb produces the same amount of lumens ("light") as 14W LED light bulb so you have the same amount of light on your house. The rest of 60W light bulb is produced as heat - you touch the bulb and it's hot, right ?
Well, when this light bulb is inside your house then the heat is spent inside your house. If you use 14W LED light you would have to produce 46W of heat somewhere to get to the same comfort level. Just imagine regular bulb as LED+small electric heater. If you had all electric house you would not notice the difference in your electric bill by turning off all small electric heaters because your big one would have to produce more heat. Just because you have separate bills for gas and power it doesn't save you energy - you still need to consume the same amount of energy to warm and light your house, you just shuffling it between the bills.
Also think that if you split regular bulb as LED+little electric heater , that little electric heater is 100% efficient, unlike your big gas heater.
It does make sense to use LED in traffic lights or street lights or cars because there heat from regular light bulbs is dissipated outside = wasted.
Now we can argue here that in the summer you don't heat your house as much and if you live in California-Florida you're probably spending more trying to cool your house than to heat it. That's a finer details - the main point here is that the statement about saving energy for everybody by simple switching to LED bulbs is "overly simplifying the picture" and it's done on purpose. Hence I called it hype.