Outdoor lighting savings

[dedeleco]

Info we all see while driving:
for the red, yellow green intersection lights, the optimum consumption and finance is with good quality LEDs, however much more expensive to purchase but 80000 hours of life, and consuming half of the fluorescent and 1/10 of the incandescent, and especially with 80000 hours of life, a huge saving in maintenance in personnel to change the dead lamps (1000 hours) dangerous for motorists without red light !!!
So to do with every real situation.
But LEDS and even organic LEDS will prevail in less than 10 years!

[Forhorse]

Didn't you answer me about switching to low-energy light bulbs?

We should already know the nature of the source used today, a question that has been asked several times by several speakers and which still has no answer.
If it is incandescent then yes, it will be economical, both in consumption and in life.
If it is high pressure mercury or sodium vapor lamps switching to fluorescent lighting will degrade performance.
As I said from my first answer, the most economical lighting will be the one that provides the most lumens per watt, I do not think anyone contradicts me on this point.

A little research on wikipedia will list all the lighting technologies that currently exist and their own performance. All you have to do is compare and make a choice.

[bernardd]

We should already know the nature of the source used today, a question that has been asked several times by several speakers and which still has no answer.
If it is incandescent then yes, it will be economical, both in consumption and in life.
If it is high pressure mercury or sodium vapor lamps switching to fluorescent lighting will degrade performance.

Well summarized :-)

As I said from my first answer, the most economical lighting will be the one that provides the most lumens per watt, I do not think anyone contradicts me on this point.

Missed !

It is rather the one who lights only if it is necessary and with the necessary power.

LEDs with a presence detector will be much more economical than any other solution, because frequent lighting does not interfere with an LED and rather increases its life by lowering its average temperature.

Presence detectors are becoming the norm in common and sanitary rooms, this revolution has not yet arrived in exterior lighting, but that will not be long in coming.

What if I say this allows for continuous speed control of cars?

[Forhorse]

Missed !

It is rather the one who lights only if it is necessary and with the necessary power.

LEDs with a presence detector will be much more economical than any other solution, because frequent lighting does not interfere with an LED and rather increases its life by lowering its average temperature.

Sure, but it's almost true for any light source.
Between a lamp of technology X which burns all night for nothing, and that of the same technology which lights only when necessary, it is almost always the second most economical solution (other factors come into account depending on the type of source this is true, but overall it is generally true)
You have to compare what is comparable.

[Clay]

Bonsoir.

We should already know the nature of the source used today,.

Indeed, halogen incandescent lamp.

As I said from my first answer, the most economical lighting will be the one that provides the most lumens per watt, I do not think anyone contradicts me on this point.

A little research on wikipedia will list all the lighting technologies that currently exist and their own performance. All you have to do is compare and make a choice.

Opting for LFCs seems to be the most suitable solution.
(Given the limited lighting beam of the LEDs).

[Christophe]

Quite simply, the most efficient solution will be the one with the best lumens / watt ratio.

Here is the best I know of in neon: https://www.econologie.com/shop/ampoule- ... p-204.html

# Very high power of 60W in 4000 ° K equivalent to 300W halogen
#4000 Lumens
# Efficiency: 67 Lumens / W
# Equivalent to a 300W incandescent bulb and a 180W mercury vapor bulb
# Optimized tube layout for better brightness
# Color rendering: 4000 ° K (white)
# Ingénium technology: 15 hours of service life and 000 ON / OFF cycles
# High Color Rendering Index> 82
# Operating temperature: -40 ° C to + 60 ° C
# Decrease in average brightness after 15 h: 000% (20% of the initial brightness remains)

It is also (to my knowledge) the largest in E27 base, beyond must go to external ballast and E40 base but it is not the same rates ... count 100-150 euros the ballast alone ...

How many lighting points?

In the 70's.

Didn't you answer me about switching to low-energy light bulbs?

Here is my answer: 17 kW / 70 = 240 W unit.

The model Megaman ClusterLite of 60W made of 300 W equivalent will therefore perfectly meet your request.

If you want a personalized price offer, contact us by email or fax: https://www.econologie.com/shop/contactez-nous.html

[bernardd]

LEDs with a presence detector will be much more economical than any other solution, because frequent lighting does not interfere with an LED and rather increases its life by lowering its average temperature.

Sure, but it's almost valid for any light source. [/ Quote]

And no, precisely: the incandescences consume too much and the fluorescents do not support the ignitions, which kill them, and in addition they consume much more on ignition.

So LEDs are the best bulbs for the presence detector.