[DBrow]

And let someone else deal with the landfill later. I get it.

In an earlier post I suggested that if I switched entirely to Gorebulbs I’d need to pay more for heating, since the incandescents throw lots of heat. But, many people posting to the thread have found a net reduction in energy cost across a year, suggesting perhaps, just maybe, the inefficiency of the Edison bulb is not as bad as has been stated by members of Congress. Of course I don’t know everyone’s local climate.

In a cold season or cold climate the incandescent lamp’s inefficiency should not matter since in any system inefficiency shows up as heat, which you pay for to warm your room.

It’s about 56 here outside, but it’s 68 where I am now, in part because of the incandescent desk lamp.

[rb22982]

It’s about 56 here outside, but it’s 68 where I am now, in part because of the incandescent desk lamp.

I use CFLs and it's 40 outside and 64 in here.

And let someone else deal with the landfill later. I get it.

As I posted earlier, unless you are on nuclear, wind or solar energy, it's still less mercury used. I also have no doubt there could be an easy way to collect these as CFLs become more and more popular. Plus, with a normal house only throwing out bulbs once every 5 years (instead of 1 now), the amount of landfill will actual drop.

[DaveTesla]

The cfl inverters have a power factor of about >60% and
(due to harmonic distortion of line current) an
efficiency of less than 75%. making a 20 watt ccfl bulb consume about 40 watts.
The pwm chips and semi’s use trichlor in wafer processing and are doped with gallium, thallium and arsenic.

Combined with the mercury in the bulbs (necessary for starting) they are an environmental mess.
Their electronics run extremely hot and cannot be placed
in many enclosed areas or used in cold places such as outdoors in the winter.

Generally they require more energy to manufacture than they save.

They are dumped here on the market by communist China.

No free lunch here.