I would rather have LED bulbs. Less toxic waste. They need to come down in price though.
Oops.
Unintended consequences.
The Greenies fail again.
Paper or plastic? Paper is evil. Now, plastic is “evil-er’.
“CFL bulbs can trigger migraines, dizziness...”
I don’t believe that. CFLs are just fluorescent bulbs. Ballasts, the frequencies, etc., have been all around us for the last 60 years.
I think this congreeman says it all
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv59PJ30WeM
EVERY office building has used florescent light bulbs for at leats what...50 years? If all these so called health problems involving florescent bulbs were really true, we would have had widespread problems decades ago. Decades.
Florescents have also been widely used in residential kitchens for just as long. I’d wager a significant portion of the people that complain about the CFL mandate have florescent bulbs in their kitchen fixtures. What is the difference between that U shaped florescent bulb in your kitchen light fixture and the ice cream cone looking CFL’s? Nothing. Literally not a single thing. One is just a smaller version of the other.
Yes, I agree that the govt. overstepped its bounds by mandating the use of florescent bulbs, but spreading information about so called dangers that can so easily be proved false just by applying a little common sense is not the way to stop it.
I have known for years, that there is something wrong with CFLs. When I go to a hotel or department store that uses them, my eyes turn red within ten minutes, and then the headache starts.
But, the government knows what is best for us, don’t they?
Written by a scientific illiterate, it should be needless to say.
1. Electronic ballasts are not the reason that compact fluorescents use less energy than incandescents; even ordinary magnetic ballasted fluorescents accomplish that. Electronic ballasts make it possible to reduce the size and power consumption of CFLs compared to mag-ballast fluorescents.
2. 20KHz - 100KHz "known to produce adverse effects on one's health?" Show me a study that didn't originate with envirokooks, please.
I can’t keep these new light bulbs straight. I want my old bulbs back!
This has always been true for some people, but not for most people. If you have an inclination toward epilepsy, or certain other conditions, then flourescent bulbs can trigger it.
I have an English cousin who can’t dine by candlelight because he might go into a fit. And I had a colleague in the office who had to turn off the flourescent lights and plug in incandescent lights instead.
But those are the exceptional cases. We have had compact flourescent lights all over our house for years, and it saves a ton on the electric bill. You just have to get the right make, since some brands are indeed horrible.
Popular as it is here on FR to bash CFLs, this article is BS. The author shows she has no idea what she is talking about when she says “CFL’s operate at high frequency using an electronic switching ballast to chop up the 120 volts — that’s how they are able to use less energy when compared to an old-style incandescent bulb,” which is not even close to describing how they work.
frposty is correct. CFLs are (if you buy the good ones) highly refined and miniaturized versions of the familiar linear fluorescent fixtures we’ve seen in workplaces for decades. In fact, due to the resistance to adoption in the home (some legitimate complaint, some luddite whining), the industry has improved the CFL far beyond what we would accept in a linear fixture.
If you do not like CFLs, you don’t have to buy them. Contrary to popular misinformation, the 2007 EISA legislation does not require the purchase of CFLs. It phases out standard incandescent lamps and requires all lamps sold to meet certain energy targets. Halogen lamps meet the bare minimum of these targets, and function similarly to (and nearly as wastefully as) a regular incandescent lamp.
Perhaps it it inappropriate for the Federal government to enact CAFE standards, EISA standards, etc., but we should not blame the technology for a beef with the Feds. The hyperbole is getting pretty thick. This includes the pre-election grandstanding by the congressman from Texas.
The hyperbole is supported by the left. While it looks like the law of unintended consequences, its really about having the hoi polloi naked and freezing in the dark. Remember how hydropower was good, and now it kills fish and is bad? And how wind power was good, and now it kills birds and is bad? It is the same thing with CFLs. They push new technologies to brand the old ones as evil until it starts to look like the technology might work out. Then, suddenly, the new technology is accepted, and must be rebranded as evil. Just wait until they let out that ARSENIC! is used in the production of LEDs. Suddenly, LEDs will be bad too. It is not the technology that is good or bad. It is just the leftist modus operandi to co-opt natural cycles of innovation to push the agenda of control. Don’t be taken in.
Full Disclosure: I work for lighting manufacturer. Feel free to ask anything you like about the various lighting technologies, and I’ll be glad to help you out.
I did get a kick out of this line from the article: “[After exposure to fluorescent lighting] Their cognitive functions diminish and some have difficulty recalling where they parked their car.”
I knew there was a reason I can never find my car outside of Walmart!
Thanks you for explaining WHY I get headaches every time I am near one of those bulbs & try to read near it.
Many people didn’t believe me.
I don’t get headaches very often- never have.
But now, when trying to read under one of those bulbs—instant headache.
I know people who are going out and buying the old bulbs by the dozens and hoarding them.