No thanks.
I tried a few about 5 years ago. 2 big drawbacks . . .
*They were too dim. Mother’s eyesight is not the best. We need 200w lights for her to see clearly.
* The screw-in base with the transformer in it cought on fire on one of them.
The proponents of these bulbs say they convert more energy to light than heat as opposed to incandescent, but I wonder if that includes all the heat put out by the transformer in the base of these things?
It’s hard for me to believe there is really a positive energy balance in the equation if a person were really to take the total production and life cycle costs into account of C,F,B compared to incandescent.
It’s in the larger lighting situations (the long tubes we are familiar with) where the fluorescents show their efficiency. But that is because they don’t require the transformers to be replaced every time a bulb is.
My biggest objection to these bulbs, though, is they put out radio-interference which made it hard for me to hear my favorite AM radio talk shows!
Maybe it’s a conspiracy!