Posted on 05/05/2007 11:18:00 AM PDT by John Jorsett
We've been looking in to compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) to reduce energy consumption for lighting. Here's what we've learned so far.
Manufacturers say that a 13-18 watt CFL produces light equivalent to a 60w incandescent bulb, an 18-22w CFL is the equivalent of a 75w bulb, and a 23-28w CFL is the equivalent of a 100w bulb. This is based on the "lumens" rating on the side of the box.
In real life, CFL equivalent replacements do not seem quite as bright as incandescents, so you might end up replacing a 60w equivalent with a 75w equivalent and so forth. (The "swirled" designs seem to give off brighter light than the CFLs with a traditional "bulb" design.) But overall, CFLs reduce energy use for lighting by 60%-70%.
Color temperature makes a big difference. The lower the color temperature, the more the light resembles the "warmth" of incandescent bulbs we are all used to (that may sound backwards, but that's how it works). Not all CFLs list the color temperature. The GE "Soft White" has a pleasing, almost incandescent look, while the similarly named Sylvania "Soft White" has a cooler, harsher "fluorescent" look (although some might prefer it for truer color rendering or easier reading).
We found some Sylvania "Warm White" 13w (60w replacement) CFLs at Lowes that have very pleasing light, and their small size allows them to fit most fixtures. The color temperature is listed as 2700K (as compared to their "Daylight" CFL which is listed at 6500K and seems much "harsher".) The 13w "Warm White" CFLs came in a contractor's box of 12 for $27, which is a pretty good deal. They are rated at 800 lumens with a lifetime of 10,000 hours, as compared to a standard GE "Soft White" 60w incandescent, which is rated at 840 lumens with a life of 1000 hours.
Because of their long life and lower energy consumption, CFLs can result in significant savings over the lifetime of the bulb relative to its cost. Manufacturers are quick to point this out, with claims on the packaging of $36+ in energy savings over the life of a 14w (60w equivalent) up to $61 for a 23w (100w equivalent). Your mileage will probably vary.
Most CFLs do not work with dimmers. Manufacturers say it will shorten the bulb life and it voids the warranty. There are special bulbs that work with dimmers, but they are not widely available. If the package does not say the bulb is compatible with dimmers, it probably isn't. (Look at the fine print on the base of the bulb.) We are still looking for a local source for "dimmable" CFLs, as most of our fixtures have dimmers. CFLs are also not intended for use with most photocells and timers.
One thing that is not talked about much is that CFLs emit more ultraviolet (UV) light than an incandescent bulb, which produces virtually none. Light in a CFL starts out as UV from excited gases, and is made visible by phosphors coating the inside of the tube/bulb. Incandescent light is mostly infrared emitted by heating the filament to super high temperatures (leading some to call them "heat bulbs" instead of "light bulbs"). Most of the UV from a CFL is filtered out in the conversion, but there is still some.
Manufacturers say, however, that there is no health risk and that eight hours of exposure to CFL UV is about the same as one minute in full sunlight. But, photographs, artwork, some fabrics, and some photoreactive chemicals used in furniture finishes are susceptible to degradation from any increased levels of UV over time. So this is something to consider.
The Mercury Problem
Finally, CFL critics are quick to point out that CFL bulbs contain mercury, a highly toxic pollutant. This is true. The typical CFL bulb contains approx. 5mg of mercury. (Manufacturers are working to reduce this. Phillips is said to have developed a bulb that only has 1.5mg of mercury.) If the bulb is broken, special care must be taken to properly clean up and dispose of the remnants to prevent health risks. Further, CFLs must be recycled or properly disposed of to prevent the mercury from entering the environment. Here are the federal government guidelines for CFL disposal and cleanup.
What the critics forget to mention, however, is that coal-fired power plants are a major source of mercury pollution. Further, most of this mercury is emitted into the air, and is thus not contained or containable. Mercury in a CFL is already contained unless it is broken, and if properly recycled is fully containable.
We did some rough calculations to determine the mercury pollution impact of CFL v. incandescent bulbs. We used TVA's Kingston plant as an example. It generated 10,161,530 gross megawatts in 2005, and released 643 pounds of mercury into the environment. If our math is correct, this works out to about 0.000028702 milligrams of mercury pollution per watt of electricity generated.
Based on this, a 100w incandescent bulb operated for 8 hours per day 365 days per year causes 8.4mg of mercury pollution. An equivalent 23w CFL bulb will cause 1.9mg of mercury pollution. Assuming a five year life of the bulb, and assuming the bulb is crushed and dumped in a landfill releasing its 5mg of mercury into the environment, the CFL will cause 14mg of mercury pollution over its lifetime as compared to 42mg of mercury pollution for an equivalent number of incandescent bulbs, a reduction of 28mg or 66%.
66% sounds like a lot. But according to DOE estimates, residential power usage is about 35% of the total, and lighting in the average home accounts for about 9.4% of the energy used. Considering that about 64% of TVA power is generated from coal v. hydro and nuclear, the net reduction of mercury emissions if every TVA customer switched to CFL bulbs would only be 4.6 pounds at the Kingston plant, a 0.7% reduction. System-wide, this would be a reduction of nearly 39 pounds annually.
39 pounds doesn't sound like much mercury (even though it's thousands of lethal doses) but it's something. And multiply that for every power system in the U.S. and it adds up.
Plus, we should take pollution controls wherever we can get them. If you figure a 0.7% reduction in coal-fired household energy use and related emissions across the board, system-wide TVA emissions of NOx (nitrogen oxides that cause ozone and smog) could be reduced by 1337 tons, SO2 (sulfur dioxide that causes acid rain and harms plants and stream ecology) by 3220 tons, and CO2 (a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming) by 735,000 tons (2005 figures). Increased commercial usage of CFL would result in even more reductions.
So CFLs won't save the planet, but they might put off its demise for a month or two.
Back to the CFL mercury problem, a couple of things need to happen right away:
• Consumers need to be educated on proper disposal and cleanup. The packages we purchased do not mention this prominently or at all. One directs you to a website. There should be prominent warnings about health risks and instructions for proper disposal and cleanup on all CFL packaging.
• Local public works officials need to incorporate CFL collection, recycling and/or disposal into their waste management programs.
• Big-box retailers who sell more than 100 CFLs per year (or some other arbitrary figure) should be required to provide on-site recycling centers.
What is unstated is that the mercury per ton of coal is depenedent on coal location and mine source. Like high sulfur and low sulfur coal, the amount of mercury varies according to what the mine source is.
How much EXTRA energy will this “savings” cost me, in increased heating, since my bulbs are no longer warming the joint up?
No; but the liberal thing is to spend good money in a bad venture based on feelings.
OK. Its upfront cost is more than that of an incandescent. I'll grant you that.
Do you like being cheated? Do I have to be cheated like this to want to save a little money?
Cheated is a stretch. First off, nearly all of them come with a warranty. You can get a replacement or a refund. Second, if it went out within the first two weeks like you say, just return the damn thing to the store. Third, just because something broke earlier than predicted doesn't mean you were cheated. Manufacturing does not have a 0 percent error rate. Clearly, if everyone's bulbs only lasted two weeks, there would not be this much support for them in the free marketplace.
Plus, like I say in the other post, I don’t want to wear a hazmat suit or spend $2,000 on clean up.
Well, that claim has been debunked and the fact that the claim has been debunked has been widely noted. For some reason, you prefer propaganda to fact.
It’s bad enough I have a very dangerous bulb to get rid of now. I don’t really appreciate that hassle. They should pay me.
Do you really believe this nonsense? Personally, I don't give a crap if you buy the CFL bulbs or not. You would save yourself money in the long run if you did. There would probably be a negligible benefit to our environment if you did.
So, your undeniable logic is it’s okay to cheat people?
Calm down. Nobody's been cheated. If you were too foolish to return the bulb or take advantage of the supplied warranty, that's your own fault.
You really are a hysterical one. Believing that you've been "cheated", believing that CFL bulbs are designed to last two weeks but advertised to last years, believing that they are "very dangerous", and believing that if one breaks you need to wear a hazmat suit and spend $2k on cleanup. Good grief.
“If I break one, what the heck do I do? Feh.”
A poster on FR a couple weeks ago said if you break one, sprinkle the mercury with Gold Bond Powder. The mercury will bond to the zinc in the powder and can then be easily disposed of or at least “captured” for disposal.
There are places where I would never use a blue light so I will be cautious, thank you.
I like ‘em for another reason:
Since they emit less heat for a given level of light, the CFL’s contibute to longer LAMPSHADE life — because lampshades don’t “dry out” as much or as quickly with CFL’s as happens with lumen-equivalent incandescents.
If you’ve shopped recently for nice lampshades, you’ll know how expensive they can be, and you’ll definitely appreciate yet another cost-saving potential of CFL’s.
Wow, somebody unknown posted something on the Internet and now you believe it negates the hazards of mercury.
With the lower heat output, how does one calculate how big a one they’ll need for their incubator, for the eggs to get enough heat?
How much extra time should the grand kids allow for their cakes in the Easy-Bake oven?
How soon will they be available with a candelabra base; or, will the state pay a rebate for replacing fixtures?
What about ‘vibration resistant’ or ‘rough duty’ versions for use in fan lights, drop cords, clothes driers, and other such applications?
Are they rated yet for use in upside-down/hanging locations?
Now ...the government, at the behest of environmentalists wants to mandate the use of an expensive, inefficient CFL that contains Mercury! ...God help us!!
The mercury battery was banned because too many used batteries were not disposed of properly, but instead ended up in landfills where they eventually erode and contaminate the surrounding soil.
BTW ...Who will police the disposal of the millions of CFLs that will be used in the United States?
Well. with the installation a low cost, EPROM RFID chip, that is imprinted with your CC# at time of purchase, and readers on all trash trucks, dumps, and recycling centers....
Last month, I went rooting thru some plastic storage tubs in the garage for a three-way incandescent. I was astounded to realize that I've got a full three large boxes of every wattage imaginable - new and used; packed due to moves or lamp changes I guess.
I'm good for life.
...Swapped several lamps in the home over to CFL. Here in the desert, any bit less in the way of inside heat production helps on the A/C bills, and the flourescents emit very little heat.
It was a pity those camera batteries were banned. They could last for years in those cameras and represented only a small amount of mercury.
The problem of mercury contamination from these bulbs is being way overblown. If we can’t deal with some light bulbs, it doesn’t say much for our ability to adapt and overcome. What are we going to do about nuclear power plants, which many here are in favor of?
There is substantial energy and money savings available from this technology.
Thanks. Five years makes quite a difference.
Wow, that Energy Star site had all kinds of enrgy saving devices listed. This scam is bigger than we thought! /s
The break even point is about a year if you run the bulb for 3 hours a day. It is a little longer if you buy a hazmat suit to change them..
If you live in California the electric company (S.C. Edison) is paying part of the cost of these bulbs. You can get 4 bulbs for about $3.50 (that’s $3.50 for a pack of for, not each).
Otherwise, I have seen them selling as much as $2.50 each.
You have to look for them. Almost every store that carries this type of bulb with have the Edison subsidized bulbs but the retailers don’t put them in a prominent location.
The average household mercury fever thermometer holds 0.5 grams of the heavy metal
The typical CFL bulb contains approx. 5mg of mercury. (Manufacturers are working to reduce this. Phillips is said to have developed a bulb that only has 1.5mg of mercury.)
Folks, that household thermometer you (used to) have has 100 TIMES the amount of mercury that a CFL does!
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.