Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CFL bulbs: Shedding Light on Misleading Performance Claims (EPA's claims about CFL's are bogus)
Seminole County Environmental News Examiner ^ | Jan 12, 2012 | Kirk Myers

Posted on 01/14/2012 8:08:34 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE

By Kirk Myers, Seminole County Environmental News Examiner

This article, the second in a series, focuses on the misleading performance claims surrounding the “more energy efficient” compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs now replacing traditional incandescent bulbs. These potentially harmful mercury-filled lamps (see my previous column describing the dangers) are being forced on consumers by the U.S. congress with support from the Green Lobby and light-bulb manufacturers like GE, Sylvania and Phillips. These and other manufacturers stand to make huge profits selling the more expensive CFLs (more on that issue in my next column).

There is a growing body of evidence undermining claims of the EPA, environmental lobby and light bulb manufacturers touting the performance advantages of mercury-laced CFL bulbs.

Exaggerated lifespan

Real-world reports from the home front show that the claimed extended lifespan of CFLs is often greatly exaggerated. There is ample data indicating that the frequent switching on and off of CFLs greatly shortens their life. A study by H. Sterling Burnett, senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and co-author Amanda Berg concludes

“Unfortunately, except under a fairly narrow range of circumstances, CFLs are less efficient than advertised. Manufacturers claim the average life span of a CFL bulb is 10,000 hours. However, in many applications the life and energy savings of a CFL are significantly lower. Applications in which lighting is used only briefly (such as closets, bathrooms, motion detectors and so forth) will cause CFL bulbs to burn out as quickly as regular incandescent bulbs . . . When initially switched on, CFLs may provide as little as 50 percent to 80 percent of their rated light output and can take up to three minutes to reach full brightness.”

According to a story in the Wall Street Journal, Pacific Gas & Electric originally estimated the useful life of CFL bulbs at 9.4 years. But based on real-world results, the company was forced to lower its estimate to 6.3 years, meaning that it had overstated bulb life by 49 percent. “The early burn-out rate, along with several other factors, meant that the actual energy savings were 73 percent less than the 1.7 billion kilowatt hours projected by PG&E,” the Journal reported.

Less bright, more dim with age

As many consumers have noticed, CFL bulbs grow dimmer as they age. In a 2003-2004 study, the U.S. Department of Energy reported that one-fourth of CFLs, after only 40 percent of their rated service life, no longer produced at their rated output.

And according to Wikipedia: “CFLs produce less light later in their lives than when they are new. The light output decay is exponential, with the fastest losses being soon after the lamp is first used. By the end of their lives, CFLs can be expected to produce 70-80% of their original light output.”

After conducting its own tests on bulbs from several manufacturers, The Sunday Telegraph in London “found that under normal conditions, using a single lamp to light a room, an 11W low-energy CFL produced only 58 percent of the illumination of an ‘equivalent’ 60W bulb - even after a 10-minute ‘warm-up.’”

The European Commission, which led the effort to ban incandescent bulbs in Europe, said that claims by manufacturers that CFL’s shine as brightly as old-fashioned bulbs are “not true.”

Posted on its website for consumers was the warning that “exaggerated claims are often made on the packaging about the light output of compact fluorescent lamps.”

Higher heating bills

Go-Green advocates like to complain about the fact that 90 percent of the energy from incandescent lights is given off as heat, with only 10 percent providing illumination. But they ignore one important fact: The extra heat given off during the winter months can actually lower energy bills.

According to a study by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, “The heat of incandescent lights - more than 341 Btu per bulb per hour - can help to warm a room. Therefore, if the cost of electricity is low relative to the cost of home heating fuel, there may be an economic case for changing to incandescent bulbs in colder seasons.”

In other words, on a cold day when you’re running your electric heater, it makes sense to flip on all those incandescent heat sources. Of course, the contribution of incandescent bulbs to lower heating bills is conveniently missing from pro-CFL literature.

Unsuitable for outdoor lighting

What about the use of CFLs for outdoor lighting? Forget it. Most do not operate well in low temperatures, a performance shortfall that makes them virtually useless for home-security lighting, including as lights in motion detectors. By signing the incandescent bulb’s death warrant, congress has effectively rendered useless outdoor lighting systems that keep away intruders and discourage home break-ins.

Myth of mercury reduction

One of the most misleading arguments advanced in defense of CFLs is the assertion that they reduce harmful mercury levels (a dubious proposition given that the bulbs themselves are laced with mercury).

Case in point: In a letter to the Wall Street Journal in December, CFL advocate Nicole Lederer claimed that “coal-fired power plants produce about half of all mercury.”

In his Jan. 5 response, Charles Battig of Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment-Virginia called the statement “scientifically vacuous and misleading.”

Battig cited data from an op-ed ("The Myth of Killer Mercury” by Willie Soon and Paul Driessen) that broke down mercury contributions as follows: �U.S. coal-fired plants, about 41-48 tons per year; forest fires, about 44 tons per year; Chinese power plants, 400 tons per year, while recurring geological events such as volcanoes and geysers emit 9,000-10,000 tons per year.�

“With these missing pieces of information, wrote Battig, the U.S. power plant contribution of mercury is closer to a 0.5% value than the “half of all mercury” claim by Ms. Lederer.”

Battig then offered this advice:

“Would that Ms. Lederer and the Environmental Entrepreneurs expend an equal amount of environmental anguish over placing compact fluorescent lamp bulbs indoors in homes, schools and factories. These mercury-containing, stealth-pollution bulbs bring the mercury threat right into your living room and nursery.”

No good reason for switchover

The fact is there is no good reason for consumers - even energy-conscious go-green enthusiasts - to replace their old incandescent bulbs with the much-overhyped and potentially dangerous CFL lamps. The sole beneficiaries of the forced switchover are light bulb manufacturers who stand to make huge profits selling CFL bulbs whose shelf price has been artificially lowered (but still is higher than incandescent bulbs) through hefty subsidies paid to them by taxpayers.

In light of the facts, the switchover to CFL bulbs has become a real consumer turn-off.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cflbulbs; cfls; corruption; crushepa; envirofascism; epa; epaisajoke; fraud; ge; gefraud; gelies; generalelectric; geobama; govtabuse; incandescentbulbs; incandescents; lightbulbs; mercury; thegelie; thegreenlie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-186 next last
Are we subsidizing GE's (er, Obama's tame super-corporations) CFL lightbulb change-overs?

I know the US-built conventional resistance bulb factories are getting shut down .... But is money going TO the Chinese CFL makers/importers?

1 posted on 01/14/2012 8:08:39 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: steelyourfaith

Ping.


2 posted on 01/14/2012 8:14:34 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
In a 2003-2004 study, the U.S. Department of Energy reported that one-fourth of CFLs, after only 40 percent of their rated service life, no longer produced at their rated output.

Um... it's 2012. Have there been no improvements since 2004?

Don't get me wrong, I think you ought to be able to light your home with $30 LEDs or pine knot torches, if that's what floats your boat. Constitutionally, the fedgov has no say in the matter.

But reports should be up-to-date, and honest.

/johnny

3 posted on 01/14/2012 8:16:36 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

There have. We’re pretty fond of our CFLs, then again many are cases where the light would be left on for an hour or two minimum, sometimes considerably more, and ALSO low heat is a very big plus.

As I reiterate every time so I don’t get ran off the site on a rail...I think both types should stay on shelves so everyone can buy what they prefer.


4 posted on 01/14/2012 8:21:15 PM PST by Fire_on_High (WTB new tagline, PST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps; steelyourfaith; neverdem; narses; SunkenCiv; Nachum; CholeraJoe; SoothingDave

If you ping steely before I ping steely ...but both of us ping steely before steely pings us, do both of us (or neither of us) get credit for an “In before steely” claim on a CAGW thread?


5 posted on 01/14/2012 8:25:02 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

You bet, we are subsidizing GE, GE wanted to close incandescent production for all kinds of reasons .... you can bet making this technology obsolete is going to have all kinds of tax benefits for GE.

By the way, 6.8 for CFLs isn’t close to being right. My own experience shown all the CFLs in my home burnt out after only 3 years except for very low wattage cfls like the 11 watt mentioned in this article.


6 posted on 01/14/2012 8:30:09 PM PST by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps; Robert A. Cook, PE; Dr. Bogus Pachysandra; grey_whiskers; ApplegateRanch; ...
Army Air Corps; Robert A. Cook, PE

Thanx for the pings Army Air Corps & Robert A. Cook, PE !

 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

7 posted on 01/14/2012 8:31:45 PM PST by steelyourfaith (If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

You raise a good question. Personally, I think that such an action causes a rift in the space-time continuum.


8 posted on 01/14/2012 8:35:15 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

So, with the passing of 100 watters, question comes to mind:

What happens with 50-100-150 bulbs? Are they forced to be 50-150? Can there be 40-80-120, or similar, to replace them?

What about 150w bulbs?


9 posted on 01/14/2012 8:35:27 PM PST by C210N (Dems: "We must tax you so that we can buy your votes")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Limbaugh said as much, many moons ago


10 posted on 01/14/2012 8:37:00 PM PST by stickywillie (a corrupt parallel universe exists beside our wonderful Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
According to a story in the Wall Street Journal, Pacific Gas & Electric originally estimated the useful life of CFL bulbs at 9.4 years. But based on real-world results, the company was forced to lower its estimate to 6.3 years, meaning that it had overstated bulb life by 49 percent.

6.3 years? I'd be glad for half that. I don't think I've found a CFL yet that lasted 3 years.
11 posted on 01/14/2012 8:41:18 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Lots of useful info on the uselessness of CFL bulbs on Junk Science: http://junkscience.com/?s=cfl+bulbs


12 posted on 01/14/2012 8:45:38 PM PST by maddog55 (OBAMA: Why stupid people shouldn't vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

The gov. EPA site says that CFL`s should not be used within 12 inches due to UV radiation.


13 posted on 01/14/2012 8:53:53 PM PST by bunkerhill7 (CFL`s gives you a tan? ? Who knew?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maddog55
I'm happy enough with my CFLs. And my LEDs. And my Edison bulbs. And my fluorescent tube lights. Light is good. I use the appropriate lighting system in the appropriate place based on good engineering principles.

I'm not so big on kerosene wick lamps. But the pressurized ones don't bother me like some folks, because I can't hear the noise.

/johnny

14 posted on 01/14/2012 8:55:40 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

The European Commission, which led the effort to ban incandescent bulbs in Europe, said that claims by manufacturers that CFL’s shine as brightly as old-fashioned bulbs are “not true.”

Who are you going to believe. The numbers put on the box by someone wanting to sell you something at 6 times the normal price or your own eyes?


15 posted on 01/14/2012 8:56:32 PM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_rr

CFL’s last me 1-6 months. I only use them on 2 light fixtures that are higher up and harder to change. I can change the other bulbs once a month and still be cheaper than using CFL’s and the light is better.


16 posted on 01/14/2012 8:56:42 PM PST by packrat35 (When will we admit we are know almost a police state?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fire_on_High
incandescent bulbs haven't gone away. They are being built\sold using less wattage producing the same lumens at a greatly increased priced.

We’ve been using CFLs since they came out. my wife hates ‘em. The early ones sucked. Today's aren't to bad, but they don't last as long as advertised. There are very few lights in our house that are on for any length of time.

The LEDs are still too expensive and I really don't like the light they give off.

We'll probably end up with a mix of new incandescent and CFLs.

17 posted on 01/14/2012 8:58:35 PM PST by stylin19a (obama - "FREDO" smart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

I live in the People’s Republic of California. My 89 yr old mother-in-law has macular degeneration and she always turns on all the lights in her house and it’s still not bright enough for her to see. It’s absolutely infuriating that the so called do-gooders have made it against the law for her to have sufficient lighting. She was a nurse in the WACs in WWII and worked as a nurse until she retired at 65. She should be allowed to have whatever the frik she wants/needs for lighting so her quality of life is the best it can be.

Forcing her to use dimmer, poisonous bulbs is absolutely shameful!!!! Shouldn’t we, as a society, be trying to improve people’s lives with sufficient light, water, power rather than strangling the progress that has been made???


18 posted on 01/14/2012 9:00:31 PM PST by TMD (Behind enemy lines.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TMD
She should be allowed to have whatever the frik she wants/needs for lighting so her quality of life is the best it can be.

Yep. FedGov doesn't have any legitimate authority in that area.

/johnny

19 posted on 01/14/2012 9:04:28 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
I have enough 60,75,and 100-watt bulbs to last me the rest of my life and more. I should put them into my will?

I have only one florescent light in my house that I consistently use and and that is the one that lights up my kitchen overghead. I wish I could find something to replace that fixture?

20 posted on 01/14/2012 9:11:28 PM PST by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
More anti CFL BULL$HIT.

“Go-Green advocates like to complain about the fact that 90 percent of the energy from incandescent lights is given off as heat, with only 10 percent providing illumination. But they ignore one important fact: The extra heat given off during the winter months can actually lower energy bills.”

Now this is ridiculous! What about SUMMER, SPRING, & FALL? What about California, the South, Hawaii?

Junk your furnace and plug in a thousand light bulbs instead. Then check your electric bill.

Lower energy bills? This idiotic statement tells you that the whole article is BS, so don't waste your time.

My experience with CFLs has been just the opposite of this articles conclusions. I know that with incandescent light bulbs, I was always replacing them. Now with CFLs I don't ever replace them, but I am colder (sarc).

21 posted on 01/14/2012 9:12:31 PM PST by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
Apparently not. Technology is static yah know. :)

We replaced all our bulbs with Full Spectrum CFL's back in 2007. That would be about 60 bulbs. Three were out of the package defective and were returned to the store for replacement. Since then two have blown.

My husband works with colors so it is necessary that the light from the bulbs be true and bright. So far, so good.

22 posted on 01/14/2012 9:14:50 PM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (*Philosophy lesson 117-22b: Anyone who demands to be respected is undeserving of it.*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

If they worked so great they wouldn’t have to force them on us. The market would do it naturally and without unConstutional force.

I mean who made you by a microwave, a car or a computer?


23 posted on 01/14/2012 9:24:52 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
I do pay a premium for good bulbs, but they do last me for years.

I have to wonder if the folks that complain they only last a month or two are cheap-charlies, or if they have bad electicity.

Because of the military jets taking off on 36 or landing on 17, and fly over the house down to 500ft, Edison bulbs get shaken to death around here.

It was worse, back when the B-58 Hustlers were flying over, back in the day. ;)

/johnny

24 posted on 01/14/2012 9:30:18 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Time to drop this stupid issue. I like ‘em, you don’t. Fine - it’s a free country. Get the gov’t out of the business of telling us which we should use and let the market decide.

Only in Obamanation could we have the problems we have and a gov’t that worries about this kind of BS.


25 posted on 01/14/2012 9:33:20 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Amen.

I bought mine by choice. But FedGov has no authority to regulate lighting.

/johnny

26 posted on 01/14/2012 9:33:30 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

I have had CFL on my porch and garage lights. I run them dusk to dawn and get around 3 years. Just put LED bulbs on the porch (on sale at Lowes for $9.98). We’ll see how long they last, but so far I’m impressed by the instant on and the amount of light they produce.


27 posted on 01/14/2012 9:35:20 PM PST by MarkeyD (Obama is a victim of Affirmative Action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
Amen!

But I'd say restrain the government back into it's Constitutional role.

/johnny

28 posted on 01/14/2012 9:35:46 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fire_on_High

Your stated views are mine as well.


29 posted on 01/14/2012 9:41:04 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

I hate these stupid curley bulbs. I had a lamp with one today in a dark area of the house. I was trying to read an installation manual. The dumb thing got brighter and brighter over about 10 minutes. It really messed with my vision.

I want instant on, instant off. I want my old incandescents. The politicians were bought off by excessively large business (GE, etc.) to jam these stinking, expensive bulbs down our throats.

At some point, some businesses and big government become one and the same and they are really bad for liberty and freedom. GE is one of those now quasi government monstrosities.


30 posted on 01/14/2012 9:41:38 PM PST by FreeAtlanta (Liberty and Justice for ALL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_rr

I had a CFL that lasted more than three years — then it caught fire when the ballast failed.

Funny thing is that I like CFLs. I’m one of those people who wants light in the whole house when I’m home, so I do use low wattage CFLs around the house. ...but I won’t leave one on when I’m not home after two had ballast failures and burned.


31 posted on 01/14/2012 9:43:41 PM PST by MediaMole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fire_on_High

I agree. Both should be available depending on the application. We don’t need big Nanny State and her pimp big fat GE and other excessively large quasi government companies telling us what we can not buy.

At some point, when huge companies and big government combine, you have socialism/communism and a loss of liberty.


32 posted on 01/14/2012 9:44:36 PM PST by FreeAtlanta (Liberty and Justice for ALL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
I know the US-built conventional resistance bulb factories are getting shut down ...

"Incandescent bulbs", if you please. Incandescence is the mechanism by which the light is produced, and this is how I've always heard them characterized. Where did "resistance bulb" come from all of a sudden? Any device which converts electric potential to some form of energy, including CFL bulbs, must present an electrical resistance to the flow of current that powers it.

"How does it work?" "I don't know, it's probably atomic." - The Five Thousand Fingers of Doctor T

33 posted on 01/14/2012 9:49:01 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

And my thinking is that even IF using CFLs did cut the mercury production at power plants, we will have traded that pollution reduction to relying on c. 100 million fellow Americans to conscientiously dispose of their used CFLs from now on.

Do you really want to bet the life/health of your children on the people you see navigating through commuter traffic every day?


34 posted on 01/14/2012 9:54:58 PM PST by Let's Roll (Save the world's best healthcare - REPEAL, DEFUND Obamacare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
At some point, some businesses and big government become one and the same and they are really bad for liberty and freedom. GE is one of those now quasi government monstrosities.

Yeah, do you remember those ads they were running about their medical data base, where a patient was being examined in an auditorium of doctors, some of whom would pipe up with advice? It was pretty amazing in its implications, and it disappeared soon enough, but I assume GE still has its billion dollar contract to produce and implement this database, and that it will suddenly appear to us as a hawk suddenly appears to a muskrat.

35 posted on 01/14/2012 10:01:38 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
I had a CFL that lasted more than three years — then it caught fire when the ballast failed.

Great. One more thing to look forward to with these confounded things. I bought a 50-100-150 watt CFL ($15.00!!!) a while back for my nightstand lamp for reading. It simply doesn't give off enough light for me to read, even at the 150 watt setting. So I'm now supplementing that light with another lamp using a 60 watt incandescent.

I have no idea with this 150-watt CFL/60-watt incandescent combination whether I'm using more or less energy than when I used just one standard 50-100-150 incandescent, but somehow I doubt this was the idea.

When this CFL goes, I'll look for another 50-100-150 incandescent, if they're still around.

Oh, and did I mention, the 50-100-150 watt CFL cost $15.00?!?!?!

36 posted on 01/14/2012 10:08:06 PM PST by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
Unless a person is running about 50 lights at once all night the CFL savings if any at all due to using extra bulbs is NIL on your electric bill. 20- 60 watt incandescents is roughly 1200 watts. A medium size reach in refrigerator takes about 900 watts.

I bought plenty of 60 and 100 watt bulbs to do me my lifetime. If I want florescent lights {which I do have a few} I will use 40 watt 48" tubes with a reliable transformer ballast. I will get far more usage from them in their hours life than any CFL on the market.

37 posted on 01/14/2012 10:08:54 PM PST by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
At some point, some businesses and big government become one and the same and they are really bad for liberty and freedom. GE is one of those now quasi government monstrosities.

GE's largest single retail buyer had more to do with it than anything. That and a Republican who wrote the bill too start with.

A certain Big Box Store was on a shelf reduction store wide space saving kick and wanted too sell less bulbs at a much high price. At the same time that Big Box Store also went on a huge PC "GREEN ENERGY" kick too please a more PC liberal leaning market. As a result that Big Box Store whom other corps jumps through hoops for pushed for these bulbs. That Big BOX Store is majority share owned of course by Liberals.

Ironically soon after the incandescents disappeared from that stores shelves for at least a year or two then suddenly recently after realizing they weren't making the anticipated money and the incandescents could be bought elsewhere the store that pushed for the ban brought them back on their shelves.

38 posted on 01/14/2012 10:22:54 PM PST by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
I had a "brown ballast" in a ceiling fixture that concerned me enough to switch back to incandescent bulbs.I also had to switch the garage lights back for the winter.

Because there's just the two of us at home, we turn our lights on and off frequently. As a result, about half of our CFLs get replaced almost as often as the old bulbs. Not much of a savings.

39 posted on 01/14/2012 10:48:51 PM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: faucetman
“Go-Green advocates like to complain about the fact that 90 percent of the energy from incandescent lights is given off as heat, with only 10 percent providing illumination. But they ignore one important fact: The extra heat given off during the winter months can actually lower energy bills.”

Now this is ridiculous! What about SUMMER, SPRING, & FALL? What about California, the South, Hawaii?

In California and the South, it certainly gets cold enough that the heat from incandescent bulbs is a bonus.

And since the warmer months also correspond to longer daylight hours, the bulbs simply aren't used as much during late spring/summer/early fall. So the heat isn't as much of a factor.

40 posted on 01/14/2012 11:21:16 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Fire_on_High; dila813; JRandomFreeper; All

First, a small factual correction. A 60 watt bulb should read 14, not 11. The 11 is more like a 40 watt bulb which I would not use as the sole light for a room. Regarding mercury, large stores (Home Depot) that sell volumes of CFL should accept burned out ones for recycling.

Fifteen years ago I installed CFLs throughout a 4 story home with 2 rental rooms. There was immediately a $10 a month drop in electric cost. Also, I spent far less time changing bulbs. I would give most of my bulbs a 5 to 10 year life, whereas the old incandescents had to be replace every year or two. Just on the cost of electricity I figure I have saved at least $2,000 in the past 15 years. The value of time not spent shopping for bulbs, replacing bulbs, etc.??? I now have a variety of CFL’s clear white, soft pink, daylight, etc. I consider the short warm up time a small price to pay for what I have gained. That said, I think people should have the choice.


41 posted on 01/14/2012 11:22:16 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: faucetman; All

See my comment #41. I agree that getting rid of extra heat can be a plus in warm climates. In winter I have a 125 watt white heat lamp bulb in an adjustable holder clipped to my headboard. I aim it at myself while reading in bed, get brilliant light and keep the thermostat at 60 degrees. If I were the type to read in a chair, I would have one to use there along with a nice afghan or quilt.


42 posted on 01/14/2012 11:31:15 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

I replaced every single light in my home with cfls at the same time 4 years ago, not a single interior cfl is still working in any of the commonly used light fixtures.

The only ones still working are the ones we hardly ever use.

The 11 watt light was the only one frequently used that didn’t die until about 4 months ago.

Energy savings ... zero


43 posted on 01/14/2012 11:31:58 PM PST by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: TMD; All

My 89 year old father had macular degeneration. My brother and I bought him a blender and I taught him how to make several raw food drinks using apples, carrots, cabbage, beets, greens like spinach and kale, pears, apricots, grapes, berries, summer squash, etc. He started using 3 drinks a day, and in 4 months his handwriting had improved noticeably. Try it, she might like it. I encourage using the blender rather than a juicer, because the fiber is also a valuable addition to the diet.


44 posted on 01/14/2012 11:35:58 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

I’m a bit surprised that the one major draw-back of CFLs (at least, to my thinking) has not been mentioned.

I find fluorescent light horribly unpleasant and depressing. I’m not a big fan of any kind of artificial lighting, but fluorescent lights are the worst. It’s a double whammy during the winter, when there are only a few hours of natural sunlight.


45 posted on 01/14/2012 11:37:56 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta; All

When huge companies (still separately owned) and big government combine, I think that is what is called Fascism. When the means of production are owned and operated by the state that is Communism. Either way you have loss of liberty for the little guy.


46 posted on 01/14/2012 11:41:19 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin
I consider the short warm up time a small price to pay for what I have gained.

I don't.

That said, I think people should have the choice.

That's right.

47 posted on 01/14/2012 11:41:29 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

We tried to be good citizens and wanted to reduce our utility bill. We had an electrician come out and replace our 5 can lights in the kitched since they are on a lot and we wanted the latest and greatest electrical in the kitchen. We used flourescent flood lights at $12 each.....I’ve replaced at least 4 of them in two years. Our incandescants never burnt out.....our bedrooms, bathrooms and table lights are ALWAYS burning out.....what is the point of using these???????????


48 posted on 01/15/2012 12:35:27 AM PST by TMD (Behind enemy lines.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fire_on_High

I agree with all points you have made.

I VASTLY prefer CFL’s to the incandescents, and may make the switch to LED’s when they aren’t ridiculous in price. I have been using the same CFL bulbs for nearly 4 years now, that I bought on sale for $2.50/8-Pack. Back when I used incandescents, I’d have to replace a few every couple of months.

I prefer that the bulbs not be so bright when I first turn them on as I’m not as stunned by the instant change in lighting. I used to have to squint in the mornings when I turned on the lights, now I don’t have to.

The first month I made the switch from incandescents to CFL’s, I saved about $50 per month. I also saved the price of cooling in the summer, as I had to run the AC dramatically lesser time lengths. I hate to roast under an incandescent bulb fixture. Also, I like not having to worry about being burned, and not worrying about the side effects from the heat. I do miss the incandescents in the bathroom, only because they did warm that space. My state has some of the least expensive electricity in the country, and with an older, less efficient furnace (I did the calculation earlier this year), I determined that the cost of electric heat is 3x more expensive than the gas.

That having been said, the biggest thing I DO hate about CFL’s (besides the mercury) is that it disturbs your sleep patterns (IIRC melatonin production) for a few hours after long term exposure. Like I said, I think it’s a passing technology, but as I have no fixtures on a dimmer, I have no reason to ever use an incandescent. I think peope should be able to buy whatever they want. I just won’t be buying any incandescents anytime soon/ever (Though I kept several for barter, and to use for baby chicks if need be, lol).

I figure for the hundreds of dollars I save each year, I can run the furnace oodles extra and still be ahead. I’ve heard some great things about the LED’s though, and may make the switch by whatever year these CFL’s burn out.


49 posted on 01/15/2012 3:25:35 AM PST by JDW11235 (http://www.thirty-thousand.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rawhide; All

‘______to last me the rest of my life________’

Ditto here!

Hate CFL’s.
Hate losing choices.

Around 1977, we upgraded the counter-top stove. With the kind/size we bought, we had to have a specific vent hood. With that hood came a fluorescent light.

After about 2 years of turning the light on and off, we left it ON. We NEVer turn it off. The current one may be the 3rd one we’ve had, but I would take a bet and say it’s only the 2nd one.
Even as I type this, it seems crazy, but it’s totally true.

Just now went and looked at it. It’s 16 inches long, cool to the touch, 15 watts, and comes from Hungary . . .

We had no idea this would be.
We take it for granted - that the light will always be on when we’re in the kitchen!


50 posted on 01/15/2012 3:29:31 AM PST by USARightSide ( SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-186 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson