On May 22, 12:13*pm, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"Smitty Two" wrote in message

news
In article ,
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote:

The poster said the EE stated efficiency was the determining factor.
Therefore, he says the 49 watt output is what counts because it is more
efficient. *He states that lumens is not useful. * I say BS.

Which poster said that?

I may have interpreted that incorrectly *It was between your friend's
statement and krw's reply that lumens are not as useful as efficiency.
My point is, though, efficiency is not as meaningful as actual light output,
no matter the measurement method.

Sorry, but the fellow who told me that is a life-long EE, and one of the
world's leading laser experts. While watts as used in connection with
incandescent lamps has always referred to consumption, the light output
can also apparently be measured in watts. I choose to believe my friend,
whom I've known and respected for 10 years, on this score.

Absolutely. *Watts-out/watts-in gives efficiency directly. *W/lumen gives a
relative number but not as useful.

WHAT A BUNCH OF PANSIES...PEOPLE JUST WANT GOOD LIGHTING.
THOUGH LED LIGHTING IS EFFICIENT AND BRIGHT FOR THE MONEY IN MY
EXPERIENCE MOST PEOPLE DONT CARE IF THEY ARE GETTING MORE LUMINOUS
BANG FOR THEIR BUCK JUST AS LONG AS THEY GET THE BRIGHTNESS THEY NEED
IN A SPECIFIC LOCATION...IN OTHER WORDS, HAD THEY NOT INVENTED CFLS
AND LED LIGHTING, THEY WOULD BE JUST FINE USING 100 WATT BULBS
EVERYWHERE THEY NEEDED THE BRIGHTEST LEVEL OF LIGHTING.

THIS IS NOT A SCIENCE OR ENGINEERING GROUP TO DELVE INTO THE DETAILS
OF HOW & WHY THEY ARE BETTER..THE AVERAGE HOME OWNER OR UTILITY
CUSTOMER COULD CARE LESS IF LIGHTNING BUGS WHERE INSIDE THE WORKS, AS
LONG AS IT LIGHTS UP THEIR HOME JUST AS THEY WANT IT.

TGITM
PAT ECUM