Well, there are only two ways I could have meant it. Of both lighting technologies being referred to here, one is LED from context. Also, no other technology can match 200W fluorescent etc. with 100 W of input power.
But yeah, I do concede that some puzzle-solving is needed if you’re not familiar with the technology.
It would be the equivalent of 100W LED lighting. Which, when you consider household LEDs typically only emit ~1-2W of light, 100W would be a lot of light.
They probably meant an LED that is equivalent to a 100W incandescent.
What lighting technology? A 120W sodium vapor lamp from a streetlight? A 200W inductively driven fluorescent torus? A 1000W incandescent monster?
Of 100W LED. Amount of light 100W LED would emit.
Also that video has soviet osciloscope jumpscare.
I know what you meant. I literally named three non-LED devices that emit as much light as a 100W LED, or “100W LED equivalents”.
Ah. Ok.
Your question didn’t have enough words. Asking “What other kind of light would a 100 watt LED be equivalent to” would have been less ambiguous.
Well, there are only two ways I could have meant it. Of both lighting technologies being referred to here, one is LED from context. Also, no other technology can match 200W fluorescent etc. with 100 W of input power.
But yeah, I do concede that some puzzle-solving is needed if you’re not familiar with the technology.
I don’t think you understand that your comment made it seem like you were the one who misunderstood and didn’t fully read his comment.
It would be the equivalent of 100W LED lighting. Which, when you consider household LEDs typically only emit ~1-2W of light, 100W would be a lot of light.
They probably meant an LED that is equivalent to a 100W incandescent.
I don’t know what LEDs you have, but mine usually emit 8-12W (ceiling lamps)