why don’t they use the 100 watt equivalent cfls (26 watt) which cost like $3? Yes, cfls make terrible light, but no one is going to spend $50 on a LED replacement for a 100W bulb. They’ll be buying the $3 CFL.
It’s being presented as either you spend $50 a piece on LED replacements or you hoard 100W incands.
CFLs contain mercury and will be declared illegal shortly.
Well then, it's a no-brainer, isn't it?
Why should I have to buy a $3 CFL when I can get a 6 pack of incandescents for the same price. I tried the CFL a couple of times and they didn’t even last longer.
You aren’t supposed to use them in enclosed lighting
It’s being presented as either you spend $50 a piece on LED replacements or you hoard 100W incands.
I have used both.
1.) The CFLs have not lasted longer than incandescent bulbs; they' have actually lasted less. Now we learn that if the CFLs are stored on their sides, they lose their life and do not last as long as incandescent bulbs.
2.) The CFLs contain mercury and are supposed to be disposed of as a hazardous material. I'm sure 99% of the population is not going to go to a recycling center to throw away bulbs that don't last longer than incandescent bulbs. There are even reports that the bulbs are giving of carcinogens because of the mercury; and that the bulbs can explode and shower the area with flaming gas and mercury debris.
3.) They don't make 3-way bulbs in CFL.
4.) Unlike the inflated claims of CFLs, LEDs really do last longer on top of using less energy. $50 is not so much for a bulb that will likely last many years. The price will come down as they become the bulb of choice.