CFL vs Incandescent

[Everskyward]

I've seen some CFLs that provide "harsh white light". I don't use those.

It seems the early CFLs had "harsh white light". The later ones I have bought don't, but I usually read the label now. I installed a "harsh white" CFL above the kitchen table and have been waiting for it to burn out for 5 or more years so I can replace it with a warmer one. Yes, I'm lazy and it doesn't bother me that much.

As far as mercury thermometers go, I remember playing with the loose balls of mercury as a kid but I don't remember the exact situation.

 

[Gary F]

I replaced about a dozen indoor floodlights with Philips 23W CFL lamps. They have a pleasing spectrum similar to sunlight which is the biggest advantage here up north during the long dark winters. They fail much earlier than advertised. The mercury in a CFL is in a powder form which is much more likely to be introduced into the air than the heavy liquid metallic mercury found in old style thermometers. I have to deliver the bad CFL bulbs to the hazardous waste collection station which is only open for a few hours on selected Saturdays during the good (flying) weather months which is a real PITA.

 

[weilke]

, and you've never seen the EPA recommendations on how to handle a broken thermometer.

http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/#thermometer

Of course they do !

If you look long enough, you will find that the EPA has a recommendation on how to wipe your a$$. I have family who works for the agency, the soviet buerocracy had nothing on that outfit.

 

[weilke]

I'll be right back. Have to change out the third CFL in my front-yard post light over the course of the last year. Don't know why I even bother putting another one in there .

My dad is an energy saving nut. Our house had CFLs back when everyone else was still using whale-oil lamps to light their houses. In my now 25 year experience, the hour ratings on CFLs are hopelessly optimistic, particularly when it comes to applications that cycle more than once or twice a day. At the same time, the average longevity of good quality incandescents is systematically downplayed by the lighting products industry.

 

[jsstevens]

I replaced many of my indoor bulbs with CFL's when I started getting $700 electric bills. (Right after adding an addition with a MIL suite. Turns out that the A/C folks really messed up the duct work and it took multiple passes to fix it all. Air conditioning the attic is really expensive.)

I've been generally happy with the CFLs except in dimmer applications.

One question I haven't seen discussed on CFL vs. Incandescent bulbs or in Hybrid vs. Gasoline cars is: What is the difference in the carbon footprint of manufacturing and disposal? All the data I've seen is for during their lifetime consumption of energy as if the manufacture and disposal is a wash. I don't know, but I really doubt that they take the same amount of energy to manufacture. Does anybody know of any studies that speak to that? I'm really curious.

John

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

One question I haven't seen discussed on CFL vs. Incandescent bulbs or in Hybrid vs. Gasoline cars is: What is the difference in the carbon footprint of manufacturing and disposal? All the data I've seen is for during their lifetime consumption of energy as if the manufacture and disposal is a wash. I don't know, but I really doubt that they take the same amount of energy to manufacture. Does anybody know of any studies that speak to that? I'm really curious.

John

Lots of "well to wheels" papers out there on cars that would include issues with batteries / disposal / etc. - John Heywood at MIT has a couple that you should be able access on line. And, he is somone I would have some faith in - many of the papers you find are written with somebody with an agenda...

 

[mantakos]

... but I really doubt that they take the same amount of energy to manufacture...

I don't know how much energy it takes to manufacture a bulb of a given type, but if a bulb retails for $5 then we know that the energy it takes to manufacture that bulb necessarily costs less than $5. That doesn't tell you whether the energy costs are $.40 or $4, but it tells you that it can't cost $6.

So when the purchase price of the bulb is a small portion of the total lifetime cost, with the bulk of the lifetime cost being the electricity to power it in use, and the cost savings for a CFL is measured in the tens of dollars, then you know that any difference in energy consumption to manufacture the bulb is necessarily small relative to the energy savings from the bulb's usage after purchase.
-harry

 

[jsstevens]

I don't know how much energy it takes to manufacture a bulb of a given type, but if a bulb retails for $5 then we know that the energy it takes to manufacture that bulb necessarily costs less than $5. That doesn't tell you whether the energy costs are $.40 or $4, but it tells you that it can't cost $6.

So when the purchase price of the bulb is a small portion of the total lifetime cost, with the bulk of the lifetime cost being the electricity to power it in use, and the cost savings for a CFL is measured in the tens of dollars, then you know that any difference in energy consumption to manufacture the bulb is necessarily small relative to the energy savings from the bulb's usage after purchase.
-harry

That's a reasonable upper bound number. Good point.

 

[Bob Noel]

It costs about $1 to recycle a bulb that saves you about $40 in energy costs over its lifetime.
-harry

It'll cost more than that to transport the bulb to the recyling.

In any case, I'll be switching to LED's when I can.

 

[Gary]

CFLs do not create more environmental problems than they save. Switching from an incandescent to a CFL results in less energy spent, less money spent, and fewer pollutants released into the environment.

Agreed. I'm quite amused at the fuss over mercury in CFL's and the potential risk. That risk is way down the scale of things to worry about.

Everybody is focusing on the 4mg of mercury inside a CFL while ignoring that if you use an incandescent instead, the extra power required results in an extra 7mg of mercury released into the atmosphere at a coal plant.

All in all, a good deal. If we wish to discuss personal exposure to mercury, take a look in the mirror. I'm sure most of us have the mercury/silver/tin/copper dental fillings. Each of those contains +/-50% mercury. Figure the average filling is maybe 1000 milligrams, I've got 8, so I'm carrying around 4000 mg of mercury. Again, the risk is pretty small, not on the list of worry items. Would be interesting to see what the exposure is when a filling is replaced, my dentist says that most of a filling vaporizes when it's drilled out.

It costs about $1 to recycle a bulb that saves you about $40 in energy costs over its lifetime.
-harry

Sounds like a winner! Of course CFL's may soon be replaced by LED's and the issue will die.

Gary

 

[weilke]

I don't know how much energy it takes to manufacture a bulb of a given type, but if a bulb retails for $5 then we know that the energy it takes to manufacture that bulb necessarily costs less than $5. That doesn't tell you whether the energy costs are $.40 or $4, but it tells you that it can't cost $6.

So when the purchase price of the bulb is a small portion of the total lifetime cost, with the bulk of the lifetime cost being the electricity to power it in use, and the cost savings for a CFL is measured in the tens of dollars, then you know that any difference in energy consumption to manufacture the bulb is necessarily small relative to the energy savings from the bulb's usage after purchase.
-harry

And that is exactly the methodology used to tell us that a Hummer H3 is a better environmental choice than a Japanese subcompact .

CFLs are produced in china using energy produced with chinese coal in powerplants that have little or no emissions controls. My lighting fixtures are powered using electricity purchased at a politically set retail price. Most of the underlying electricity is purchased from a nearby nuclear plant. By shuffling around the underlying assumptions, I can make the carbon footprint for both whatever I want it to be.

 

[Maxmosbey]

I was kind of anti CFL for a while. Last summer I rebuilt and vintage camper to take out to Burning Man. I bought a 2000 watt generator to run out in the desert. I found out that I was just over the limits of the generator capacity if I was running everything at once. I would have to turn some things off while I ran other things to keep from blowing the circuit breaker on the Generator. Then, just before I left for Burning Man, I replaced all the bulbs with CFLs. It was just enough that I could run anything I wanted without blowing the breaker, and without worrying about it. So since then, I've been slowly replacing everything in the house and garage with CFLs.

 

[mantakos]

... Most of the underlying electricity is purchased from a nearby nuclear plant. By shuffling around the underlying assumptions, I can make the carbon footprint for both whatever I want it to be.

Absolutely. I got into an argument regarding the relevance of the Chevy Volt with a friend who lives in Seattle. To me, that's a very expensive coal-powered vehicle, and I suspect that the extra money poured into the purchase price (effectively a financial sacrifice in the name of environmentalism) could probably yield better savings in other ways. To him, though, living in Washington, his electricity is generated not by coal but by hydro, so his arithmetic was very different from mine.

But these are the exceptions, the vast bulk of the electricity in the US is generated by coal.
-harry

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Absolutely. I got into an argument regarding the relevance of the Chevy Volt with a friend who lives in Seattle. To me, that's a very expensive coal-powered vehicle, and I suspect that the extra money poured into the purchase price (effectively a financial sacrifice in the name of environmentalism) could probably yield better savings in other ways. To him, though, living in Washington, his electricity is generated not by coal but by hydro, so his arithmetic was very different from mine.

But these are the exceptions, the vast bulk of the electricity in the US is generated by coal.
-harry

Doesn't matter what the bulk of the electricity comes from. What matters is the marginal source of electricity.

Hoover dam is maxed out supplying everything else. When he plugs his car in, someone somewhere turns up the wick on a coal plant to supply the extra load.

 

[timwinters]

I may be wrong (won't be the first time) but it's my understanding that incandescents haven't been outlawed in the U.S. but that a new energy efficiency standard was passed (back in '07 I believe) and the commonly available incandescents can't meet the new standard. It's also my understanding the there's a new generation of incandenscents available that meet the new standards.

Also, I believe numerous other countries have outlawed incandescents as have a few individual states led by, you guessed it, California.

 

[Everskyward]

Also, I believe numerous other countries have outlawed incandescents as have a few individual states led by, you guessed it, California.

You can buy incandescent light bulbs in CA. I recently bought some of those large round ones that go in bathroom fixtures above the sink. I think those are incandescent anyway... because they burn out quickly.

 

[Richard]

You can buy incandescent light bulbs in CA. I recently bought some of those large round ones that go in bathroom fixtures above the sink. I think those are incandescent anyway... because they burn out quickly.

PAR 38. If they be burning out quickly, maybe you have too hot a lamp for the recessed can or there is excessive vibration. Is this next to a freeway?

Available also in halogen and LED. Think of the colors!

 

[mikea]

So where does one buy the good ones?

I have Feit and TCP CFL bulbs indoors and outdoors that are going into the 5th year of life. The ones that have died are the GE and Home Depot Phillips and no name garf.

You can get Feit CFLs at Menards and Costco. I like the bright white ones in my kitchen fixtures.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_s...rds=feit+light+bulbs&sprefix=feit+light+bulbs

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_s...cp+light+bulbs&rh=n:1055398,k:tcp+light+bulbs
http://1000bulbs.com/search/?filter[category]=1833&filter[brand]=Tcp

 

[Everskyward]

PAR 38. If they be burning out quickly, maybe you have too hot a lamp for the recessed can or there is excessive vibration. Is this next to a freeway?

Available also in halogen and LED. Think of the colors!

I'm talking about globe light bulbs that are not in a recessed can, like this one.

It's not next to a freeway but it's in California where they have earthquakes.

 

[weilke]

Doesn't matter what the bulk of the electricity comes from. What matters is the marginal source of electricity.

Hoover dam is maxed out supplying everything else. When he plugs his car in, someone somewhere turns up the wick on a coal plant to supply the extra load.

The source of electricity is whatever you want it to be to make a political point.

As you charge your plug-in electric car overnight, most of the electricity will come from baseload sources that make power whether anyone uses it or not, nuclear, coal, hydro.

While electricity is fungible and to some extent exchange traded, realistically most of the power in a particular locale comes from the sources local to the consumer. If I live in Maryland, I can buy as many 'green-watts' using wind-energy from South Dakota as I want, if I flip on the AC, it will still be the nuclear plant down the road that pushes the electrons through the wire.

 

[pilot_dude]

We have 7 can lights in the master bathroom. In the winter we use incandescent and switch out to CFL's in the summer. We alternate to keep the room warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer. It does make a noticeable difference to my surprise.
The only other CFL is in the stairwell heading to the basement which is a pain in the shorts to replace. I guess that light has been installed for about 3 years now.
As another stated, they are great where they are great but marginal where an incandescent has the advantage.

 

[Keith Lane]

You must be living right. Most of the ones I have ever gotten haven't lasted any longer than the incandescent lights I replaced.

This has been my experience as well.

 

[wsuffa]

I have Feit and TCP CFL bulbs indoors and outdoors that are going into the 5th year of life.

Those are the brands I've had the worst luck with.

One practically vaporized the fixture it was in - to the tune of have to replace TWO matched light fixtures. Doorway entrance carriage-style light fixtures protected from the weather. When I say vaporized, I mean it welded itself to the contacts and burned the light socket beyond recognition (tripping the breaker & cracking one of the light fixture pieces of glass in the process).

That ended up being a $300 light bulb.

FEIT-brand has been a 20% DOA before I stopped buying them.

 

[jesse]

I bought like a 6 pack of Phillips CFL once and all but one were DOA.

 

[timwinters]

You can buy incandescent light bulbs in CA. I recently bought some of those large round ones that go in bathroom fixtures above the sink. I think those are incandescent anyway... because they burn out quickly.

Badly explained on my part. They've been outlawed but the ban hasn't gone into affect yet. I think they phase out in 2018 but I'm working from memory and that really sucks these days.

I bought like a 6 pack of Phillips CFL once and all but one were DOA.

Rough seas betwixt China and here that week.

 

[denverpilot]

Everybody is focusing on the 4mg of mercury inside a CFL while ignoring that if you use an incandescent instead, the extra power required results in an extra 7mg of mercury released into the atmosphere at a coal plant.

Cite your source. What kind of incandescent? 40W? 60W? 100W?

You continually make these claims that an incandescent "releases more mercury into the air from coal burning" with no hard data to back it up.

I bet if I leave the incandescent turned off and never use it, it'll release zero mercury into the environment too, but I can drop a case of CFLs and never have turned them on once, and release more.

Need more real data. Not platitudes and guesswork. Meanwhile, government has decided that we must use CFLs and you're defending it without any hard facts to back up the claims.

I'm more than open-minded enough to have my mind changed -- let's see the data.

 

[denverpilot]

I don't know how much energy it takes to manufacture a bulb of a given type, but if a bulb retails for $5 then we know that the energy it takes to manufacture that bulb necessarily costs less than $5. That doesn't tell you whether the energy costs are $.40 or $4, but it tells you that it can't cost $6.

So when the purchase price of the bulb is a small portion of the total lifetime cost, with the bulk of the lifetime cost being the electricity to power it in use, and the cost savings for a CFL is measured in the tens of dollars, then you know that any difference in energy consumption to manufacture the bulb is necessarily small relative to the energy savings from the bulb's usage after purchase.
-harry

This also assumes that there weren't any tax kickbacks to the corporations for stopping manufacture of incandescents and starting to manufacture CFLs. I honestly don't know if there were or not, but it's a common tactic to make "green" things seem more affordable -- give the manufacturer huge kickbacks paid out of everyone's pockets where they don't notice it, (or more likely by running government debt even higher than it is already) and then the "product" sells for cheaper than the "non-green" alternative.

This is what's happening currently in the solar power industry, including direct tax breaks (meaning the rest of us pay more, or the debt goes up) for those putting inefficient solar systems on their houses. The true costs of the systems are being hidden from the consumer, both by billions in kickbacks to the manufacturers, and direct kickbacks to the taxpayers.

The kickbacks to the manufacturers are hidden in clever names that make them sound like they're "job credits for green manufacturing" and the direct tax kickbacks to homeowners are just out-and-out manipulation of the market by government to try to make solar power look cheaper than it really is.

 

[denverpilot]

As you charge your plug-in electric car overnight, most of the electricity will come from baseload sources that make power whether anyone uses it or not, nuclear, coal, hydro.

While electricity is fungible and to some extent exchange traded, realistically most of the power in a particular locale comes from the sources local to the consumer. If I live in Maryland, I can buy as many 'green-watts' using wind-energy from South Dakota as I want, if I flip on the AC, it will still be the nuclear plant down the road that pushes the electrons through the wire.

Since they do have some documentation about it on their website, and you can also read PUC filings from them, Xcel around here is idling back base load plants at night to do maintenance. Not all utilities publicize this stuff.

They make up the difference with Natural Gas "peaker" plants if necessary during off-hours.

They're quite concerned about not being able to idle down base-load plants at night to do maintenance, so they're building a massive four-plant structure in Pueblo that'll feed all the way up the Front Range. 100% "clean" coal.

Thus... the recent PUC authorization for Xcel to charge more for any residence that uses more than 500 KWh a month. They're ALL SET to cover the additional costs of electric plug-in cars, and they scared the PUC into approving it via "our infrastructure [that we've neglected] can't handle the load so we need to charge more".

Xcel's going to make out like fat cats if electric cars take off around here. People will think they're being "green" and four more Coal-fired plants will be cranking away down in PUB... "out of sight, out of mind". Such a deal for Xcel shareholders, though! Electric cars == huge profit for Xcel. Built in, pre-approved by the "regulators". Brilliant.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

In what ways are CFLs worse than what they're replacing?

No matter how many web pages the EPA makes about how to dispose of them, the reality is that they'll be thrown away and end up in landfills by the millions.

For what applications do CFLs not work? I'll offer up "dimmer switches", as I'm yet to find a CFL that works well with one. Other than that?

A good reading lamp or any other spot where you want a nice warm light, for one... Others have been mentioned in this thread.

I've seen some CFLs that provide "harsh white light". I don't use those.

I've never seen a CFL that doesn't give off what I consider to be "harsh white light."

Do they not work with X10 for the same reason that they don't work well with dimmer switches?

The X10 modules draw their power through the light bulb, even when it's "off" - We're talking milliwatt range here, not enough to cause any light. CFL's don't allow that.

Note that incandescents aren't being banned, it's just that efficiency standards have been set that _current_ incandescents can't meet. So look for new "high efficiency" incandescents.

It seems that maybe the standards have been set too high for incandescents to meet... Are there ANY that are out yet?

How are they not all that green? Because they contain less mercury than would be released into the atmosphere at the coal plant to generate the extra electricity needed to power an incandescent instead?

That sounds more like a problem that should be addressed at the power company level, not the every-lamp-in-my-house level, no? In addition, more "green" sources of electricity are coming online, but even if we managed to create electricity without burning anything at all, we'd be stuck with these CFL bulbs.

 

[mantakos]

You continually make these claims that an incandescent "releases more mercury into the air from coal burning" with no hard data to back it up.

You never asked for the hard data.

http://www.gelighting.com/na/home_lighting/ask_us/downloads/MercuryInCFLs.pdf
http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf
http://www.popularmechanics.com/home/reviews/news/4217864

I bet if I leave the incandescent turned off and never use it, it'll release zero mercury into the environment too, but I can drop a case of CFLs and never have turned them on once, and release more.

Yes, and if that's your typical usage pattern, then you're much better off with incandescents.

Need more real data. Not platitudes and guesswork.

You just had to ask nicely.

Meanwhile, government has decided that we must use CFLs and you're defending it without any hard facts to back up the claims.

I had the facts all along, this is the first time you've asked for them.
-harry

 

[mantakos]

No matter how many web pages the EPA makes about how to dispose of them, the reality is that they'll be thrown away and end up in landfills by the millions.

And they still contain less mercury than is released into the atmosphere at the coal plant to generate the extra electricity to power the less efficient incandescent.

A good reading lamp or any other spot where you want a nice warm light, for one... Others have been mentioned in this thread.

I've never found this to be a problem, though that evaluation is subjective, of course. But I have found terrible CFLs, you have to be careful to find ones you like. They're a lot better than they used to be.

I've never seen a CFL that doesn't give off what I consider to be "harsh white light."

Shrug. The ones I buy at my supermarket seem fine to me.

The X10 modules draw their power through the light bulb, even when it's "off" - We're talking milliwatt range here, not enough to cause any light. CFL's don't allow that.

Okay, that makes sense. The "high efficiency" incandescents look like they have regular filaments, they might work.

It seems that maybe the standards have been set too high for incandescents to meet... Are there ANY that are out yet?

I _think_ these meet the new efficiency requirements:
http://www.lighting.philips.com/us_...g&parent=7593748565&id=us_en_products&lang=en

... even if we managed to create electricity without burning anything at all, we'd be stuck with these CFL bulbs.

Okay, but we're talking about a hypothetical that's decades away. If 50 years from now we're generating all the electricity we could ever want, all at prices too cheap to meter, from alien, superhero rodents on treadmills, we can go back to incandescents. Until then, for the foreseeable future, our electricity is generated from coal.
-harry

 

[weilke]

Since they do have some documentation about it on their website, and you can also read PUC filings from them, Xcel around here is idling back base load plants at night to do maintenance. Not all utilities publicize this stuff.

PUC filings are written with a singular purpose, to justify the next rate increase. While I can attribute a certain entertainment value to them, I would not take them at face value.

From all I know about generation, there is very little you can do over the course of a day to modulate the output of a nuke plant, to shut it down for maintenance is a 6 month affair. In a baseload coal plant, shutting down a boiler or generator is not something you do over the course of hours either. Historically, the lack of balance between cheap baseload and expensive intermediate and peak generation has been a problem for the utilities, heck they even pay you to buy electricity sinks like electrical hot water heaters and electrical booster heaters for FHA heating systems.

 

[weilke]

You never asked for the hard data.

http://www.gelighting.com/na/home_lighting/ask_us/downloads/MercuryInCFLs.pdf
http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf
http://www.popularmechanics.com/home/reviews/news/4217864

So advertising fluff-pieces from the makers of CFLs, the goverment promoters of CFLs and their paid shills in academia qualify as 'hard data' ?

 

[mantakos]

So advertising fluff-pieces from the makers of CFLs, the goverment promoters of CFLs and their paid shills in academia qualify as 'hard data' ?

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/24039/october-17-2005/the-word---truthiness
-harry

 

[TMetzinger]

Ethanol is arguably counter-productive, i.e. it doesn't achieve its nominal goal. The same can't be said for CFLs, they achieve their nominal goal quite well, they provide the same amount of light for far less power.

In what ways are CFLs worse than what they're replacing?

For what applications do CFLs not work? I'll offer up "dimmer switches", as I'm yet to find a CFL that works well with one. Other than that?

I've seen some CFLs that provide "harsh white light". I don't use those.

Do they not work with X10 for the same reason that they don't work well with dimmer switches?

Note that incandescents aren't being banned, it's just that efficiency standards have been set that _current_ incandescents can't meet. So look for new "high efficiency" incandescents.
-harry

Dimming is a big deal. Even with the dimmer on FULL I have issues with CFLs flickering or not coming on.

I can't put one in my outdoor light on my porch. I've tried eight different models and they WILL NOT work reliably. I will try an LED there.

And where do I get the red and green CFLs to replace the incandescents on the port and starbord side of my garage door?

 

[mantakos]

... And where do I get the red and green CFLs to replace the incandescents on the port and starbord side of my garage door?

(ii) EXCLUSIONS- The term `general service incandescent lamp' does not include the following incandescent lamps:

(I) Appliance lamp (e.g. refrigerator or oven light)
(II) Black light lamp.
(III) Bug lamp.
(IV) Colored lamp...​

They do make colored CFLs, though...

-harry

 

[Everskyward]

I can't put one in my outdoor light on my porch. I've tried eight different models and they WILL NOT work reliably. I will try an LED there.

I've had CFLs flanking my garage door for years without them burning out. The incandescent bulbs were always burning out. It's the same with the one I put in the garage door opener. I hated to change that one since it involved dragging out a ladder or climbing on the top of my car. I haven't changed it since I put in a CFL years ago. Maybe someone had it right about the high humidity areas because where I live is definitely not high humidity.

 

[weilke]

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/24039/october-17-2005/the-word---truthiness
-harry

So you answer a challenge to your 'hard data' by referring to a piece of comedy ?


With 'hard data', I mean peer reviewed papers published in a scientific journal pertinent to the field. You know, real research stuff with a 'methods' section that I can look at to decide whether they just made **** up and a financial disclosure that gives me an idea whose song they sing.

The comparisons I see so far are disingenous. They compare the entire lifecycle mercury release of incandescents through coal produced electricity with only a fraction of the mercury involved in the lifecycle of a CFL:
- mining for mercury releases mercury
- producing the mercury compounds used in the CFL produces mercury byproducts/waste
- recycling CFLs does not capture 100% of the contained mercury
- who does the recycling (a lot of e-waste goes back to china to be processed in backyard factory by underage slave-workers, I doubt that CFLs are an exception)
- plenty of other chemical sheet in a CFL including the phospors, semiconductors (very energy heavy production) and wiring. What are the implications of the 'e-waste' that represents this portion of the equation ?
.
.
.


If you can refer me to a paper from a at least semi-independent source that looked at all those aspects of the CFL lifecycle, I'll gladly have a look at it.

 

[Jay Honeck]

FEIT-brand has been a 20% DOA before I stopped buying them.

That was our experience in Iowa as well. We replaced ALL the bulbs in three 3-story buildings with FEIT CFLs, and between 10 and 20% of them were either DOA or died within weeks or months.

We finally started carefully tracking them, and returning them to Menards for a full refund when they died prematurely. This was an enormous PIA, of course, but when you're talking hundreds of bulbs, well worth it.

 

[Jay Honeck]

I have noted some interesting things about CFLs since our conversion to them at our two motels:

1. CFLs save a LOT of money on electricity. Before converting our three 3-story buildings in Iowa City, our energy bills ran around $3K per month. After converting, this dropped to around $2500/month.

$500/month ain't chicken feed. (Of course, we also instituted other rather draconian energy-cost-savings procedures, like turning off all refrigerators between guests, so it was not ALL CFL savings -- but still.)

2. CFLs burn out a LOT more often in Iowa than they do in Texas. In Iowa we had dual-phase power, which may be more prone to spikes, which may be why they burned out more often? I really don't know.

All I know is that in Iowa I was CONSTANTLY changing light bulbs. Here in Texas, I haven't changed more than a dozen in 13 months.

I suppose another possibility is that the CFL bulbs sold at Menard's in Iowa suck by comparison to those sold in Texas?

3. Others have mentioned that CFLs don't work well in high-humidity areas. Well, we're on an island in the Gulf of Mexico. They have worked fine here.

4. Others have mentioned that they don't work well outdoors. Except for our parking lot lights, all of our exterior lighting is CFL. No problems.

As for politically, I have NO idea why our government is getting involved with the consumer's choice of light bulbs. IMHO, it's just another example of what happens when a bureaucracy runs out of worthwhile things to do. EPA has largely fulfilled its original mission, so they are simply casting about for something else to fill their time.