I previously published a somewhat negative article about compact florescent light bulbs (CFLs). Brantl left a comment on the article saying:
So, based on your non-scientific research, you’re dissing CFLs. Try again when you’ve got real data. And by the way, get a light meter.
Bulb Life
At the time, I was disappointed that a CFL bulb I purchased burned out sooner than incandescent bulbs in the same light fixture despite the fact they are marketed as lasting longer than conventional bulbs. I thought perhaps it might just be a fluke related to generic brands of CFLs. However, I have now had three CFLs burn out while old incandescents are still working. These fast-failing CFL bulbs include name-brands like Sylvania.
Good Light
My other main complaint was that low wattage CFL bulbs do not provide the same light as traditional incandescent light bulbs despite being marketed as equivalents. Commenter brantl suggested that I need to get a light meter prior to making a complaint. However, the inferior lighting power is revealed simply by reading the fine print on the CFL packaging. The Sylvania micro-mini CFL 60 watt replacement (13 watts) packaging states in tiny print:
For almost as much light (825 lumens vs 850 lumens)
Obviously, almost as much light is not the same thing as the same light.
The Future of Light Bulbs
I’m all for conserving energy and saving money, but so far CFLs have not delivered good results in my home. Perhaps in the future, improved CFLs or next-generation LEDs will provide excellent results. In the meantime, I am going back to incandescents in high-use areas.
Have you had negative experiences with CFLs? …or do you recommend CFLs?
See Also:
2 Comments
I’ve got generally bad things to say about CFL’s. First they just don’t have the same comforting warm glow, the warm glow that says “home” rather than “public bathroom.”
Second, they may be less susceptible to damage from vibration (think garage lights, etc) but they are more fragile in general. I’ve dropped a few incandescent bulbs while changing them, and haven’t had to get out the dustpan and broom all that often. Compared to CFL’s, you’ll be cleaning up broken glass every time one gets dropped.
Which brings me to my final point, CFL’s contain mercury, and in fact, the box even says that discarded CFL bulbs should be handled appropriately, and where I live (Montgomery County, MD) they are even considered Hazardous Material, and are not to be disposed of in your regular trash. And don’t even think of getting out the vacuum cleaner for broken CFL’s, nor should you use a broom. Both methods can stir up dust which contains mercury. Some boxes inform you that should one break, you should wipe the area up with a damp cloth.
That being said, how many people do you think are properly disposing of CFL bulbs? I’m willing to bet not a whole lot. Meaning as the use of CFL’s becomes more common, we’ll have a whole lot more mercury collecting in landfills. Also, most people probably don’t clean up broken CFL’s properly, leading to elevated levels of mercury in your own home. You know, the place where you spend most of your time. Studies show that long term exposure to mercury is a very bad thing.
My verdict on CFL’s: Very bad news.
Thanks, Havoc for providing your thoughts.
My county has a special bin for them at the transfer station, but I bet you are right that most people don’t dispose of them properly. After the poor performance of a few CFLs, I’ve been buying incandescent replacements. I totally agree with you about the quality of the light.
Post a Comment