[Evildave]

To work out the runtime, there are some fairly easy shortcuts.

This is a lot easier if you have a 'Kill A Watt' (or similar) device that will tell you how much juice something that you plug in uses.

Volts X Amps = Watts. Approximately. Close enough for guesstimating. Just divide the watts by 12 for your hand-wave.

9watts = 12volts x Namps
9/12 = N

Battery capacity is measured in amp-hours. Literally an amp drawn for an hour. If you draw lots of amps, the run time is usually shorter. If you sip milliamps, the runtime can be longer.

So, if a 9 watt compact fluorescent bulb is plugged into a UPS with a typical 12 volt, 14amp-hour battery... and eats 0.75 amps. Maybe a bit more, since the inverter is not 100% efficient.

3/4amps = 14amp/hours
4/3amps = hours/14amp
14*4/3 = 18:40
(14/0.75 = 18:40)

So it COULD run about 18 hours. On a 14 amp-hour battery.

HOWEVER, you should not drain a deep cycle lead-acid battery past 50% (deep cycle it). Lead acid batteries that stay mostly charged, most of the time have a long life. Ones that are frequently sucked dry have a VERY short life. (BTW, this also means you should buy a 'bigger' UPS than you strictly 'need' for that 15 minute runtime, if you want a long battery service life for your UPS.)

So I would only run a lamp on that battery for 9 hours, which is longer than an average night, anyway, especially since I'll go to bed.

Another little note about a UPS that you're 'not using'. You have to drag it out and plug it in every month or two or the battery will go flat, and very soon be dead, dead, dead.

[LiveBrianD]

rgreen4, on 13 July 2011 - 05:03 PM, said:

LiveBrianD, on 13 July 2011 - 11:01 AM, said:

According to the specs, at half load the UPS should run for 15 minutes. How long should I expect with a little cfl?

What is a little cfl?

As to the ethernet port, that is a good question, one that I cannot answer. I can only guess they were looking for a unique connector. They had been using the serial port, but wanted to get away from that. I can only conjecture that they did not want to use a standard B end USB port.

Compact Flourescent Lamp

What would happen if you connected the UPS's ethernet port to a router?

And what's wrong with a standard USB port? Or, more commonly, a miniUSB port?

[Evildave]

Actually, all three of mine has an ethernet-like 'data port', but it terminates hardwired to a USB plug. So you're probably describing an APC box. What would happen if you plugged it into am ethernet switch? Absolutely nothing.

A brand-new CyberPower UPS appeared to have a serial port on the back, but also had a 'proper' USB B port, too.

Every manufacturer does something different.

Oh, and CFL in the news: Why worry about the budget default? We got bigger bulbs to smash!
http://thehill.com/b...-bulb-standards

[rgreen4]

LiveBrianD, on 13 July 2011 - 06:16 PM, said:

1. Compact Flourescent Lamp

2. What would happen if you connected the UPS's ethernet port to a router?

3. And what's wrong with a standard USB port? Or, more commonly, a miniUSB port?

1. CFL = Compact Flourescent Lamp - Duh. I was trying to think in the context of computer terms.

2. Probably Nothing good

3. You would have to ask the designers. But it is common across almost all the brands.

[coastie65]

Those CFLs contain Mercury and are extremely dangerous. They should be banned rather than promoted. Once they start ending up in landfills and get broken, all bets are off as to what happens to the ground water and such, and they will eventually end up in land fills ( the landfills here are lined to prevent leeching into the ground ). Sure, they don't produce the heat that incadescent bulbs do, but they also don't provide proper light for reading either. My mother's eyesight isn't all that good these days, and she can not read by those bulbs ( even the 100w ones ).

[waldojim]

coastie65, on 14 July 2011 - 05:27 AM, said:

Those CFLs contain Mercury and are extremely dangerous. They should be banned rather than promoted. Once they start ending up in landfills and get broken, all bets are off as to what happens to the ground water and such, and they will eventually end up in land fills ( the landfills here are lined to prevent leeching into the ground ). Sure, they don't produce the heat that incadescent bulbs do, but they also don't provide proper light for reading either. My mother's eyesight isn't all that good these days, and she can not read by those bulbs ( even the 100w ones ).

And sadly, they don't seem to last 1/3 of the claimed lifespan. I had completely converted my home in Ohio to CFL, and found myself replacing those bulbs more often than the standard bulbs. I would like to see CCFL (Cold Cathode Florescent Lights) hit the shelves as mainstream. Then I might consider switching permanently.

[LiveBrianD]

coastie65, on 14 July 2011 - 05:27 AM, said:

Those CFLs contain Mercury and are extremely dangerous. They should be banned rather than promoted. Once they start ending up in landfills and get broken, all bets are off as to what happens to the ground water and such, and they will eventually end up in land fills ( the landfills here are lined to prevent leeching into the ground ). Sure, they don't produce the heat that incadescent bulbs do, but they also don't provide proper light for reading either. My mother's eyesight isn't all that good these days, and she can not read by those bulbs ( even the 100w ones ).

I think they contain around 1/125th of the mercury used in an old mercury thermometer.

See this: http://www.energysta...eet_Mercury.pdf

[coastie65]

Nice report. Unfortuanately numbers can be juggled to fit what ever agenda that is being pushed. It is done every day as a matter of routine. It is called POLLS. All you need to do is look at who is behind the polls and more importantly, the questions asked. They are designed to get get the results they want. Same with so called "TEST" results. You can look at all the pretter garohs and such, but that is mostly all they are. pretty graphics with not much validity.

[Evildave]

Yes, and if your 'agenda' is to demonize a product, numbers, scientific studies, data, facts, etc. can be completely ignored and pure wild, insane innuendo will suffice.

http://www.snopes.co.../toxins/cfl.asp

It's just when you blow up the insignificant problems, everything is awful. Wind power eats birds. Solar power is 'unsightly'. Burning stuff pollutes. Therefore, only clean, safe nuclear power should be used!

Yes, CFLs have a very tiny amount of gaseous mercury. So one bulb with a few milligrams of mercury... per how many tons of garbage with MUCH WORSE household chemicals and far more toxic metals and compounds?

Sure, mercury is 'bad'. How many years did we burn gasoline with LEAD in it to reduce knocking in clunky, over-sized large displacement engines in American cars? LEAD is really awful, and accumulates in your system too. Not very much of it will retard development in children. Might make them grow up to be a tea bagger!

You just DO NOT want to know what they are allowed to pour into asphalt to 'get rid of'. Water that has run off your asphalt roof, or drained from your asphalt street is POISONED. Just so you know.

Cadmium! All those nickel-cadmium batteries in drills and other devices. Horrifically dangerous stuff. Nickel isn't nice, either. All kinds of even worse stuff exists in common garbage, not to mention PCBs and all kinds of long carbon chain nastiness. Even if you had ZERO mercury in a landfill (absolutely impossible - it's in practically everything), its contents would still poison ground water in awful ways. You ever wonder what those 'rust stains' on the driveways of houses built on and around landfills are? Look up: LEACHATE. Or maybe you'd rather not know about that, either.

Not that you shouldn't dispose of a CFL as E-WASTE, like any other electronic device. Best Buy will take 'em. The local trash company here will collect e-waste, paints, chemicals, etc., if you call them the day before, too.

[waldojim]

I think we should just move on to bio-luminescent plant life already. Who would complain about a tree lighting up the living room? Apart from not being able to turn it off...

[Evildave]

Ahh, but then after you genetically engineer it, it will cross-pollinate with everything else. Then, as big AG business has demonstrated, when the glowing mutant dandelions grow in your lawn, the owner of the genetic patent will have the lawyers kick in your door and demand payment, or they'll take your home, as the big AG businesses do to hapless farmers whose crops became cross-pollinated with 'roundup resistant' genes, and were insane enough to unwittingly sow the seeds on the next crop, as farmers had done for thousands of years before big corporations got congress to pass laws allowing them to patent genes, and then destroy the few remaining family farms.

[waldojim]

Evildave, on 14 July 2011 - 11:31 PM, said:

Ahh, but then after you genetically engineer it, it will cross-pollinate with everything else. Then, as big AG business has demonstrated, when the glowing mutant dandelions grow in your lawn, the owner of the genetic patent will have the lawyers kick in your door and demand payment, or they'll take your home, as the big AG businesses do to hapless farmers whose crops became cross-pollinated with 'roundup resistant' genes, and were insane enough to unwittingly sow the seeds on the next crop, as farmers had done for thousands of years before big corporations got congress to pass laws allowing them to patent genes, and then destroy the few remaining family farms.

more often than not, genetically engineered plant life is sterile.

[coastie65]

Okay. We've been through the environmental aspects of CFLs now it's time to put it perspective with the topic. In the case of CFLs, efficiency doesn't translate into what is economically feasible. They are overly expensive, and less efficient to incadescent bulbs when it comes to providing the proper amount of lighting. To have someone say this is what you'll use and there will be no other choice is ludicrous. and hopefully at some point be defeated in a court of law. Nothing wrong with Nuclear power. It is clean and relatively cheap. As for disposal of the spent fuel rods, the idiots need to take a look at France and what they do with them. Last I heard, they don't bury the stuff somewhere, but dispose of them in an environmentally sound way ( think they be incinerated or some such thing ). Most people I know, do take steps to conserve energy. It isn't about being PC, but about economics. By being efficient, you save money. If someone wants to crank up their Strato Freeze A/C and keep their abode at 60F, that is their business, and they will have to pay the bill.

AS for wind turbines and Solar, it is stil in its infancy and not ready for mass adoption. Far from it and it will need a lot more time before it is. I find that the people pushing this stuff are the acid trippers and pot heads from the 60's. They were in LaLa land then and still are. Yes, I remember those days well and I equate the folks preaching this crap today with those from that time that spent their waking hours with their heads in the clouds ( and they still are from all indications ). yes, I do not like hippies nor what they may have evolved to these days. I had at least two uniforms trashed back then ( I am a Vietnam Vet ). I'm not saying we shouldn't be environmentally concious, because we should. I like the outdoors and enjoy being out in it as do a lot of people and I am all for conserving resources, but there is such thing as being sensible, and common sense doesn't seem to apply to these folks.

Far too much psuedo science is being used to support their position and unfortunately, the people buy that crap. They are unable or unwilling to look for stuff on their own, they go on buying all the crap being sold by the snake oil salesmen. Being energy efficient doesn't mean you have to buy all the crap being sold. It is about just being sensible in how you live. Nothing more or nothing less. You don't need the Al gores and others of the world to tell you how you should live, as they don't necessarily practice what they preach ( forget about planting trees ( which is fine in my book ) and buying carbon offsets ( baloney ) ).

Yep, engineered plant life is usually sterile.

[nonseq]

coastie65, on 15 July 2011 - 09:51 AM, said:

Okay. We've been through the environmental aspects of CFLs now it's time to put it perspective with the topic. In the case of CFLs, efficiency doesn't translate into what is economically feasible. They are overly expensive, and less efficient to incadescent bulbs when it comes to providing the proper amount of lighting. To have someone say this is what you'll use and there will be no other choice is ludicrous. and hopefully at some point be defeated in a court of law. Nothing wrong with Nuclear power. It is clean and relatively cheap. As for disposal of the spent fuel rods, the idiots need to take a look at France and what they do with them. Last I heard, they don't bury the stuff somewhere, but dispose of them in an environmentally sound way ( think they be incinerated or some such thing ). Most people I know, do take steps to conserve energy. It isn't about being PC, but about economics. By being efficient, you save money. If someone wants to crank up their Strato Freeze A/C and keep their abode at 60F, that is their business, and they will have to pay the bill.

AS for wind turbines and Solar, it is stil in its infancy and not ready for mass adoption. Far from it and it will need a lot more time before it is. I find that the people pushing this stuff are the acid trippers and pot heads from the 60's. They were in LaLa land then and still are. Yes, I remember those days well and I equate the folks preaching this crap today with those from that time that spent their waking hours with their heads in the clouds ( and they still are from all indications ). yes, I do not like hippies nor what they may have evolved to these days. I had at least two uniforms trashed back then ( I am a Vietnam Vet ). I'm not saying we shouldn't be environmentally concious, because we should. I like the outdoors and enjoy being out in it as do a lot of people and I am all for conserving resources, but there is such thing as being sensible, and common sense doesn't seem to apply to these folks.

Far too much psuedo science is being used to support their position and unfortunately, the people buy that crap. They are unable or unwilling to look for stuff on their own, they go on buying all the crap being sold by the snake oil salesmen. Being energy efficient doesn't mean you have to buy all the crap being sold. It is about just being sensible in how you live. Nothing more or nothing less. You don't need the Al gores and others of the world to tell you how you should live, as they don't necessarily practice what they preach ( forget about planting trees ( which is fine in my book ) and buying carbon offsets ( baloney ) ).

Yep, engineered plant life is usually sterile.

Coastie have you ever visited realclimate.org I know and have respect for many of the scientists involved and would appreciate your reaction.

[coastie65]

nonseq, on 15 July 2011 - 10:53 AM, said:

coastie65, on 15 July 2011 - 09:51 AM, said:

Okay. We've been through the environmental aspects of CFLs now it's time to put it perspective with the topic. In the case of CFLs, efficiency doesn't translate into what is economically feasible. They are overly expensive, and less efficient to incadescent bulbs when it comes to providing the proper amount of lighting. To have someone say this is what you'll use and there will be no other choice is ludicrous. and hopefully at some point be defeated in a court of law. Nothing wrong with Nuclear power. It is clean and relatively cheap. As for disposal of the spent fuel rods, the idiots need to take a look at France and what they do with them. Last I heard, they don't bury the stuff somewhere, but dispose of them in an environmentally sound way ( think they be incinerated or some such thing ). Most people I know, do take steps to conserve energy. It isn't about being PC, but about economics. By being efficient, you save money. If someone wants to crank up their Strato Freeze A/C and keep their abode at 60F, that is their business, and they will have to pay the bill.

AS for wind turbines and Solar, it is stil in its infancy and not ready for mass adoption. Far from it and it will need a lot more time before it is. I find that the people pushing this stuff are the acid trippers and pot heads from the 60's. They were in LaLa land then and still are. Yes, I remember those days well and I equate the folks preaching this crap today with those from that time that spent their waking hours with their heads in the clouds ( and they still are from all indications ). yes, I do not like hippies nor what they may have evolved to these days. I had at least two uniforms trashed back then ( I am a Vietnam Vet ). I'm not saying we shouldn't be environmentally concious, because we should. I like the outdoors and enjoy being out in it as do a lot of people and I am all for conserving resources, but there is such thing as being sensible, and common sense doesn't seem to apply to these folks.

Far too much psuedo science is being used to support their position and unfortunately, the people buy that crap. They are unable or unwilling to look for stuff on their own, they go on buying all the crap being sold by the snake oil salesmen. Being energy efficient doesn't mean you have to buy all the crap being sold. It is about just being sensible in how you live. Nothing more or nothing less. You don't need the Al gores and others of the world to tell you how you should live, as they don't necessarily practice what they preach ( forget about planting trees ( which is fine in my book ) and buying carbon offsets ( baloney ) ).

Yep, engineered plant life is usually sterile.

Coastie have you ever visited realclimate.org I know and have respect for many of the scientists involved and would appreciate your reaction.

I have only read some of it, but it is interesting. It also appears to be unbiased with no particular agenda, which is good. This might make for some interesting reading for those would want to take the time to do so ( it is rather long ).
http://www.aip.org/h...mate/cycles.htm Essentially, global warming isn't a new phenominon as some would have you believe.

[waldojim]

coastie65, on 15 July 2011 - 09:51 AM, said:

[rant]
CFL isn't as clean as you think it is.
Hippies smell.
[/rant]
[random line at bottom]
Yep, engineered plant life is usually sterile.
[/random line]

And yes I got a laugh out of that. Don't take the above too seriously.

[LiveBrianD]

CFLs provide just as good light as incandescents do. I admit that solar panels can be a bit expensive though. I was making a little bird bath thing from a shallow tray (to put near my feeders), and I was trying to put a motor with a little fan blade in it to keep the water circulating (it deters mosquitoes, I previously put out water for the birds and it stunk like hell after a week and a half without being replaced; my fault). BUT... solar panels cost $15 each at radio shack, and I need multiple ones to power a little motor. Forget that. I ended up using a 5V 1A adapter I had lying around for it. (I had a 6V 200mA one, but I fried it with that fan in less than a day!)

[waldojim]

LiveBrianD, on 15 July 2011 - 12:59 PM, said:

CFLs provide just as good light as incandescents do. I admit that solar panels can be a bit expensive though. I was making a little bird bath thing from a shallow tray (to put near my feeders), and I was trying to put a motor with a little fan blade in it to keep the water circulating (it deters mosquitoes, I previously put out water for the birds and it stunk like hell after a week and a half without being replaced; my fault). BUT... solar panels cost $15 each at radio shack, and I need multiple ones to power a little motor. Forget that. I ended up using a 5V 1A adapter I had lying around for it. (I had a 6V 200mA one, but I fried it with that fan in less than a day!)

No they do not produce light that is just as good. CFL lights all have awkward hues to them that drive me up the wall. I managed to get some 'warm' toned lights once, and they lasted about 6 months each. They were the closest things to incandescent lighting. LED lights are even worse. The bluish tints kills me.

As for Solar panels - remember this. The average panel suffers three problems. 1. Cost. 2. lack of efficiency (about 10% - 15% on average) and 3. Lifespan. The best panels have about a 10 year life to them. You never recover the expense of installing them.

[coastie65]

waldojim, on 15 July 2011 - 12:39 PM, said:

coastie65, on 15 July 2011 - 09:51 AM, said:

[rant]
CFL isn't as clean as you think it is.
Hippies smell.
[/rant]
[random line at bottom]
Yep, engineered plant life is usually sterile.
[/random line]

And yes I got a laugh out of that. Don't take the above too seriously.

I think I was severly misquoted here.

[smax013]

waldojim, on 15 July 2011 - 01:13 PM, said:

No they do not produce light that is just as good. CFL lights all have awkward hues to them that drive me up the wall. I managed to get some 'warm' toned lights once, and they lasted about 6 months each. They were the closest things to incandescent lighting. LED lights are even worse. The bluish tints kills me.

This is one of the primary negatives of CFLs (and fluorescent lights in general)...light "color". I would say that if you get the equivalent level light, then they can light up the area just as well. But, CFLs do tend to have more of a "white" light compared to the more "yellow" light of typical incandescent bulbs. Thus, they can be a bit more "harsh"/"cool" light and that bothers some people.

The other negative of CFLs can be how long it takes them to achieve a full level of light. Some take a little time to "warm up" and reach their full light level. I have four recessed lights in my family room. The front/left two (depends on which screen I am looking at...the projector or the TV) I have incandescent bulbs in (one is current burnt out) and the rear/right two have CFL based blubs. The CFLs take about a minute or two to fully "power" up, which is why I have left the others as incandescent bulbs.

On the plus side, they last FOREVER. I use CFLs for my three front outside lights. I tend to leave them on all the time (even in the day time) because I am lazy (yes, that kind of defeats the energy efficient effect of using a CFL) and they will still last more than half the year.