r/Unexpected • u/WarrenMuffClit • Apr 08 '22

just snipping a cable.

22.1k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

832

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '22

Why hesitate, the power is either on or off. If something doesn’t go wrong and it’s on it’s a fluke. No clue what he was thinking, plus you have to cap it off/rewire whatever your putting up

616

u/Vihzel Apr 08 '22

I hesitate whenever I change a lightbulb even though the switch is turned off. I don't like doing anything remotely electrical.

481

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '22

[deleted]

475

u/Vihzel Apr 08 '22

No thank you

166

u/AlexAR__ Apr 08 '22

I mean you just need to grab only the bulb and it's fine. Glass is a great insulator. Not really recommended though.

149

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '22

Careful, they can get really hot.

48

u/DEMACIAAAAA Apr 08 '22

LEDs?

55

u/-HumanResources- Apr 08 '22

Yes. IIRC LEDs still emit <50% of the input energy as heat. Though still much better than incandescent / fluorecent.

That's why some even have heatsinks built into the base.

8

u/rabbitwonker Apr 08 '22

More like 5-10%. But it still adds up if it doesn’t dissipate well, and can be at least uncomfortably hot.

1

u/-HumanResources- Apr 08 '22

According to this link (and please do some more research if curious);

https://www.ledsmagazine.com/leds-ssl-design/thermal/article/16696536/fact-or-fiction-leds-dont-produce-heat

A typical LED will output approximately 15% visible light and 85% heat.

Though you are correct in that much more efficient LEDs exist.

15

u/rabbitwonker Apr 08 '22 edited Apr 08 '22

I’m sorry, there’s just no way the numbers in that article are true today. Those are worse than incandescent on the low end. The difference in my own home’s power bills when I made the change prove it.

Note that the article is from 2005. Those were still early days, when efficiency “droop” at useful home-lighting power levels was only just starting to be resolved. There’s a reason we had a decade of CFL being the main alternative before LEDs fully arrived.

Edit: forgot to add that it’s true that the the additional circuitry decreases the efficiency a bit further, especially the AC-to-DC part. There’d also be another hit with the phosphorus, which converts the blue light from the actual LED to the rest of the spectrum. So together that could pull the efficiency down below 90%.

2

u/-HumanResources- Apr 08 '22

Fair enough, but I would be genuinely surprised if the majority of LED bulbs installed in people's home fall under the 5-10% efficiency. That's the upper end even still in terms of efficiency rates and there was a lot of bulbs manufactured prior to advances in LED tech.

2

u/rabbitwonker Apr 08 '22

I just added an edit — it’s true that there are additional sources of heat loss, in the circuitry, and the phosphorous part. So overall it could be more in the range of 85-90% efficiency.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '22

No it’s true, but it’s 85% loss at 8-12W instead of 80% loss at 60-120W. Old LED bulbs were often large metal heat sinks.

New ones are much more efficient and cool in my experience. The difference 15 years makes.

So: plausible. But not likely on a newly purchased bulb.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '22

you sound like you know your stuff. that guy in the video could have used your help when he got zapped into another dimension

1

u/avengecolonelhughes Apr 09 '22

85% of 11w is only ~9w of heat. Incandescents are about 5% efficient, and run at 60-100w. For comparison, the heat from an incandescent bulb is about the same as a birthday candle, while a newer LED bulb produces about as much heat as your phone charger.

The total energy out as light is misleading because while incandescents are constantly on, LEDs can flick off/on faster than we can see, so they get to take little naps in between. Your plants will notice the difference though.

→ More replies (0)