Christmas Lights & Electricity Usage?

[bluemicrobyte]

So here is the question: Does a regular string of christmas lights use more electricity when the string is "always lit" or when theres a red tipped bulb in there making the string blink on and off?


No, I do not know the answer to this question. I would think that because it's flashing it uses half the electricity since the string is only on half the time. However, someone else thinks that it uses MORE electricity this way because it takes more electricity to turn on the string of lights repeatedly than it does to leave them on. What do you all think?

[Aquarian]

More electricity!

[bluemicrobyte]

More electricity!

o...k....... that was a very well thought out and educational post that did not answer my question in the least bit nor did it comment on the thread topic in any way.....

[Aquarian]

Ok...Yeah,when it's flashing....Sorry bout that...Abit hyperactive today I am...

Well,yeah,the flashing still uses electricity to make itself flash,unless there's a mouse there working a dynamo...

[bluemicrobyte]

I see...... so theoretically flashing lights not only drive people crazy but they also use more electricity to do so?

[L2_1989]

What about LEDs? I don't know if they blink or not.

[chibi]

humm lets see google didn't help at all, but I remember when I was younger My mom told me not to turn the lights on and off because it costs a lot of money so maybe it is the same for blinking christmas lights?

[Neo]

Lights use so little power though anyways (xmas lights i mean, unless you've got like 10,000 or something =P) don't think it matters.

But blinking lights prolly use the same amount of power... Just becuase the lights arent 'lit' doesn't mean there isnt power going through them... or something.

-Neo

[Fenguin]

Christmas lights, like other incandescent lights, glow because the filament inside them becomes hot and emits light energy. In the small space of time between successive blinks, the filament will cool down a bit due to ambient air temperature and thus will need to be warmed up again (wasting electrical energy as heat) before it can glow. Thus, although there is no electricity consumption between blinks (the circuit is cut off by the special "red bulb" you mentioned) there is more electricity required to heat up the bulbs and so power consumption should be pretty similar.

Of course, if the space of time between blinks is short enough, then it will be irrelevant (the bulb cannot cool much in that period) and so blinking lights will consume less power.

Edit: So if you want to save power then blinking lights is the way to go as it never consumes more power than always-on lights and usually consumes less.

[bluemicrobyte]

The fenguin has spoken!.....

so wait, your saying I can save power by making the lights blink even though a blinking light uses more electricity?

[TimP]

I don't believe LEDs work by heating anything, so assuming you had LED Christmas lights, that wouldn't necessarily apply, although IANALE (I am not a lighting/LED expert).

[hammocksleeper]

Christmas lights, like other incandescent lights, glow because the filament inside them becomes hot and emits light energy. In the small space of time between successive blinks, the filament will cool down a bit due to ambient air temperature and thus will need to be warmed up again (wasting electrical energy as heat) before it can glow. Thus, although there is no electricity consumption between blinks (the circuit is cut off by the special "red bulb" you mentioned) there is more electricity required to heat up the bulbs and so power consumption should be pretty similar.

Of course, if the space of time between blinks is short enough, then it will be irrelevant (the bulb cannot cool much in that period) and so blinking lights will consume less power.

Edit: So if you want to save power then blinking lights is the way to go as it never consumes more power than always-on lights and usually consumes less.

I disagree. I've often read that an incandescent bulb takes the same amount of power to turn on as it does to keep it on for around five minutes. And here's what I found in some random physics textbook: "It is often said that, since light bulbs use much more power just after being turned on, one should leave the lights on when leaving the room for less than 5 or 10 minutes. There is some basis for this argument: a 100-W bulb has a resistance of about 144 ohms at its operating temperature but a resistance of only 16 ohms when it is cold, and it therefore does use more power just after being turned on."

The reason that the filament glows is because it's hot, so if it's not glowing (i.e. between blinks) then we know it's cold and will need to be heated up again, in other words, draw more power due to the change in resistance. Power of course is measured in watts and kilowatt-hours is how you are billed for electricity. So based on this information, it appears to me that a blinking string of lights consumes significantly more electricity than a string that is always on.

[Fenguin]

I disagree. I've often read that an incandescent bulb takes the same amount of power to turn on as it does to keep it on for around five minutes. And here's what I found in some random physics textbook: "It is often said that, since light bulbs use much more power just after being turned on, one should leave the lights on when leaving the room for less than 5 or 10 minutes. There is some basis for this argument: a 100-W bulb has a resistance of about 144 ohms at its operating temperature but a resistance of only 16 ohms when it is cold, and it therefore does use more power just after being turned on."

The reason that the filament glows is because it's hot, so if it's not glowing (i.e. between blinks) then we know it's cold and will need to be heated up again, in other words, draw more power due to the change in resistance. Power of course is measured in watts and kilowatt-hours is how you are billed for electricity. So based on this information, it appears to me that a blinking string of lights consumes significantly more electricity than a string that is always on.
Ah yes, you are correct. It did not come to my mind that when the light is off it is by definition cold; I had assumed that the light wouldn't undergo much change in temperature between blinks.

[BSTRhino]

Go hammocksleeper! You deliver the irrefutable evidence you irrefutable evidence deliverer!