Compact Fluorescent Bulbs: NOT a Bright Idea!

Government nevers asks consumers or ratepayers.

 

Artists are getting frustrated at the poor color rendering ability of the light given off by the new "energy efficient" lights:

It seems many consumers are rebeling against the poor quality of CFL light:

One consumer had this to say:

 

Many of the consumer testers who actually have been testing out the new "energy efficent" bulbs and doing comparisons have been left very dissatisfied with the available options:

 

Here is another harsh criticism of the poor quality light form CFL's:

 

This is from a Swiss government public health website:

"No danger to health"? Isn't this what they told us about about so many other products before studies confirmed they carried health hazards in some situations?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051027090539.htm
http://www.who.int/phe/news/Mercury-flyer.pdf

I find it especially revealing about the outright lack of credibility from the government that they have banned mercury thermometers but not their beloved "high-efficiency" CFL bulbs.

Mercury exposure is cumulative, and I can't imagine it is healthy for little toddlers who accidentily knock over a lamp and get their hands all over the broken shards. Infants and toddlers also like to stick things in their mouth...

Several studies suggested the health hazards of X-ray radiation from the old cathode ray tube computer screens. The reason this was never an issue was that these old style computer screens were already becoming obsolete just as the dangers were becoming recognised.

 

Here is an excellent report on the disadvantages, dangers, and deception of "energy saving" CFL bulbs:
http://lightbulbchoice.com/articles/cfl_fires.pdf

More confirmation that the UV given off by CFL's can be problematic:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ight-bulbs-leave-red-faced--UV-radiation.html

Because of this UV output, CFL bulbs can cause furniture to fade over time, and it is recommended not to use CFL's near hanging pictures or paintings for the same reason.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/the_cfl_fraud.html

One published recommendation policy stated:

So what are all these parents going to do after incandescent bulbs become banned? Are they going to have to buy an expensive LED bulb that doesn't put out enough light?

 

Selective quoting much??

Ever touched an incandescent bulb that has been on for a time? You would get a darn sight more than reddening of the skin - you can get nasty burns

 

Not really. If someone accidentally touches an incandescent bulb, they will usually immediately pull away from it as soon as they feel the heat. It is hot, but not as hot as a stove. If it is a 100 watt bulb it might result in a slight very minor burn. I doubt you would feel anything the next day. Typically the bulb is inside a shade, so even if it falls over, it is unlikely to make contact with the skin. Even a toddler who reaches out to touch the bulb would immediately pull away when he felt how hot it was.

The fact is that CFL's can potentially result in burns or irritation when they are in normal use, on a night stand next to a bed, or as a reading lamp, for example. Some individuals are more sensitive than others (I am one of the sensitive ones).

I wonder whether the new ESL bulbs have this same type of problem or not, or how much UV they give off (I am guessing less).
http://psproefrock.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/review-of-the-vu1-esl-light-bulb/
CFL's essentially use mercury vapor to first make UV light that then excites the phosphor coating. So obviously there is potential for UV to leak out. In contrast, ESL bulbs use accelerated electrons in a vacuum to excite the phosphor coating.

These ESL bulbs have some advantages over CFL. Unlike CFL's, the ESL bulbs do not contain mercury. The ESL bulbs can all be put on a dimmer (although it causes their light to flicker a little). When one makes the comparison, the ESL bulbs are not really so much more expensive than dimmable CFL bulbs (which cost more than regular CFL's). Putting a regular CFL into a dimmer will cause it to burn out much faster, not to mention flickering. The ESL bulbs can also be put into enclosed fixtures (such as recessed ceiling lighting), whereas this results in decreased life span for CFL's and can be dangerous (potential fire danger from overheating). And ESL bulbs, being full spectrum, also supposedly have better quality light than CFL's.

 

Really? Then why are they listed as causes of second degree burns (deeper than superficial skin)?
http://www.wounds1.com/care/condition20.cfm/8

They are listed as a burn hazard for children
http://www.healthychild.net/SafetyFirst.php?article_id=334

http://voices.yahoo.com/practice-light-bulb-safety-around-kids-11367978.html

http://www.beginnersguide.com/common-ailments/burn-care/categorizing-burns.php

I rest my case - actually I am resting on a complete fail but we won't go there too much

 

Really? Then why are they listed as causes of second degree burns (deeper than superficial skin)?
http://www.wounds1.com/care/condition20.cfm/8

They are listed as a burn hazard for children
http://www.healthychild.net/SafetyFirst.php?article_id=334

http://voices.yahoo.com/practice-light-bulb-safety-around-kids-11367978.html

http://www.beginnersguide.com/common-ailments/burn-care/categorizing-burns.php

I rest my case - actually I am resting on a complete fail but we won't go there too much

 

Rather ironic with the current phase of regulations. If anyone wants a bright light bulb that does not put out the awful light of a CFL (or if they have skin sensitivity) they currently have to buy a halogen bulb, because 70 and 100 watt regular incandescents have been banned, and LED's are only available up to 60 watt equivalents right now. The light bulb phase out will result in children receiving much more severe burns than they otherwise would for the next few years.

Halogen retrofit screw-in bulbs are not any more dangerous to touch, it is only if the outside bulb breaks and the very hot inner capsule is exposed that there is increased danger.



Unfortunately even halogen bulbs will not be an allowed option once the full regulations come into effect.

I'm not sure. Regular incandescent light bulbs are not really that dangerous. I can quickly put my fingers on a glowing 70 Watt bulb without getting burned, so I imagine there would only be a hazard if the exposed bulb (without a lampshade over it) fell onto a toddler and broke.

In any case, I would much rather my child get a little burn from a regular light bulb than swallow fragments from a broken CFL.

 

Deciding which type of bulb to use is a very complex issue, with numerous unique advantages and disadvantages that should be weighed. Different bulbs will be better for different situations. The decission should be left to the consumer, not forced by the government.
The only role the government should have is educating consumers.

It would be one thing if the government just went into the workplace to tell what type of lighting employers had to provide for their employees, but it is much more intrussive when these regulations reach into people's actual homes, the place that is supposed to be a private sanctuary from the outside world. Many people, including myself, just could never relax under the harsh lighting from fluorescent tubes or CFL's.

It is absolutely outrageous that the government decided to ban a whole technology of something so intertwined with our lives as lighting. The they did not even bother to just tax it, they had to completely ban it! Neither CFL's nor the available LED bulbs can actually replace the high quality light from an incandescent bulb. It just isn't the same.

And there was no real public debate. The mandate came seemingly out of nowhere. The public was not informed until after the law was already passed. The US House tried to repeal it, but to repeal a law they need a two thirds majority, and they were not able to do it.
http://www.politicalforum.com/envir...-will-soon-ban-regular-light-bulbs-fails.html

 

I just read that it costs 1 - 2 US dollars to recycle each CFL bulb (because of the mercury). So in many areas with free recycling programs, the question is who is paying for them? Are we being taxed more, or is the utility company charging higher electric rates to pay for these recycling programs?

People think these energy efficient bulbs are saving them money, but ironically in another way they are leading to higher rates for each kilowatt.

And how much fuel does it take to drive the old CFL bulbs to be specially recycled? How much electricity do the special recycling centers consume?



Here are graphs showing a comparison of the spectrums of different types of light sources (natural sunlight, white LED's, incandescent, and CFL). As you can, no two are the same:

 

just a brief note...China manufactures all cfl bulbs. Imagine the impact of that.
You also need a a materials handling list. You cannot just dump them, if they fall and break, you need to clear out the room where it broke and any surrounding rooms within so many feet of the breakage.
China uses waste mercury in the production of cfl bulbs.
Any questions? How about the law that mandates that all incandesent bulbs are to be replaced with cfl by 2015?

 

We no longer have ordinary incandescent light bulbs here - guess what - no economic failure

There is LESS mercury per bulb than you are currently pumping out of your coal fired power stations

and finally - check the "law" for yourself
http://shine.yahoo.com/green/truth-light-bulb-law-200200491.html

 

Yes you do. Halogen bulbs (which are still a form of incandescent but put out a whiter color of light, and are 6 times more expensive than the old bulbs) are temporarily being sold instead of the regular bulbs. But the current law will also ban these halogen bulbs in a few years.

That is probably why consumers have not been complaining more. They heard that incandescent bulbs are being banned but still see these halogen bulbs in stores and think the law is not so bad. What they don't realise is that only part of the law has taken effect so far.

This may not be true. You are probably getting confused by deceptive claims made by certain government agencies and the big light bulb manufacturers, and the environmentalist blogs that keep propagating these half-truths.

Again, the claims that producing power for regular incandescent bulbs will result in more mercury emissions is unfounded:

As far as I know, no study has included the mercury released from the manufacturing source in whether CFL's actually reduce mercury emissions. And we all know how polluting Chinese factories are, and what disregard they have for people's health (remember the poison toothpaste and poison milk scandals?)

 

Some consumers just absolutely cannot live with the new CFLs being pushed upon us:
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20110127/ARTICLES/110129569

 

I was browsing the comment section of another site and found this interesting rant:


" I'm not buying into the CFL thing either

Or rather I've bought a lot of CFLs in varying price ranges and color temps and been disappointed every time. I'im still buying them if I see a new brand, source or promotion. I keep trying them because I really want them to work.

But they don't last very long - scarcely a year of not full time use. They also don't survive power outages very well - a frequent occurence in my rural area. I can lose every single CFL lamp that happens to be switched on during a single event (and that's a lot of bulbs in my 10 buildings), but we never lose any of the remaining reg. incandescent in the same outages.

The CFL light is awful to my eyes. I have tried all kinds of color temps and filtering globes. Nothing pleases my eyes as well as the full-spectrum incandescents.

And the slow-start thing is very vexing: I had thought to put the ugly-light-but-energy-saving bulbs in all the fixtures in my 9 farm buildings. I made a complete change over in the summer of 2009. Yes, they were slow-starting on cool fall mornings and evenings, (modest bummer) but in below-freezing winter temps it's unacceptable to standard around in the dark while the bulbs take 60 secs, or more, to even begin to glow, weakly. If I'm going out to the barn when it's that cold, I want to get on with it not stand around shivering in the dark waiting for the light to turn on.

I've tried LEDs (once) and they gave off awful light, too. Luckily the store where I bought them took them back for full credit.

I'm still hoping for improvement in CFLs or better LEDs. I have a stockpile of my favorite full-spectrum incandescents, JIC.

We are transitioning to a 100% PV system on the farm right now, which will assuage some of my guilt for not using the wretched CFLs."

by Araguato on Mon Feb 13, 2012 at 03:12:29 PM PST
(left in comment section of http://www.dailykos....tbulbs#comments)

 

All incandescent lighting combined, private and commercial, accounted for less than half of one percent of all electrical energy consumption in the US (according to a study by the National Resources Defense Council, an environmentalist group).

The U.S. Energy Information Administration gives a somewhat different picture. According to it, the residential sector accounted for 37.1 percent of total electricity, which would mean that residential lighting accounts for roughly 5 percent of total electricity (but of course, some of this lighting is not incandescent).

Another of the downsides of CFLs is that the UV they emit attracts bugs, so it may not be the best to use on an outside porch.

I have a family member that uses CFL bulbs in his garage, and leaves the garage door open while he is working in there. Needless to say, he gets lots and lots of bugs in there, swarming around the light bulbs. I mentioned this to him, and he agreed to do an experiment and switch out the lights with incandescent bulbs and LEDs. All the bugs went away.

 

I have a family member that uses CFL bulbs in his garage, and leaves the garage door open while he is working in there. Needless to say, he gets lots and lots of bugs in there, swarming around the light bulbs. I mentioned this to him, and he agreed to do an experiment and switch out the lights with incandescent bulbs and LEDs. All the bugs went away. He later screwed back in some of his CFLs (still wanted to "save energy" ) and now all the bugs in the garage just cloud around these spiral CFLs, not any of the LED bulbs.

 

Who the freak does not know about yellow lights for bugs???

 

I have searched this thread and have found no reference to an economic collapse if CFL's are used. So instead of contributing, you attempt to derail this thread by inserting something that hasn't even been brought up.
The point to this thread is to discuss or debate the purposes behind CFL bulbs and the inherent dangers of having them in your house. Got it?

 

A yellow CFL bug light is not necessarily the same thing as a yellow incandescent bug light. Many of the "yellow" CFL bug lights do not even give off yellow light: they give off a combination of red and green light that basically looks yellow to the human eye. Obviously the only reason these CFLs are yellow is a marketing ploy, so consumers will automatically assume these spiral bulbs can replace their yellow coated incandescent bulbs. While CFL bulbs give off less heat, they also give off UV radiation, the ammount of which can vary depending on which bulb. And a bulb which gives off lower levels of UV can give off higher levels over time as tiny fractures in the phosphor occur over time. While some CFL bug lights have a special thick coating on the outside of the spiral to help absorb the UV, not all of them do. So while the lower level of heat can be less attractive to bugs, the UV is more attractive. But remember, a common CFL spiral bulb still wastes 80% of its energy on heat, so it is not as if it is not giving off any heat to attract insects.

Here is the explanation from GE:

I think there is just a high level of consumer ignorance. CFLs are just not substitutes for incandescent bulbs in all situations, and this also applies to bug lights.

And simply putting a yellow filter over a regular white CFL would be worse than an incandescent bulb, because regular CFLs have much higher levels of blue and violet light than incandescent, and much of this would still get through the yellow filter.

Also something else to remember, most of these CFLs say on the packaging that they should not be used in motion detectors, timers, or light sensors (that turn the bulb on after dusk). Doing so could greatly decrease the life of the bulb, or cause it to burn out.

But really, there are no wonderful options right now for bug lights. Incandescent bulbs give off more heat, and a small ammount of blue light can get through the yellow filter. CFL bulbs are likely to give off UV and attract bugs. The typical LEDs being sold right now work by making blue light, some of which is absorbed by a yellow phosphor. This blue light can potentially attract bugs, but not as much as the UV from CFLs/fluorescents. Special yellow LED bug lights are being sold, and I think they would be the best option, but I have no idea how effective they are in not attracting bugs.
http://www.energycircle.com/blog/2011/08/17/correction-led-lights-do-attract-bugs

A true bug light that would not attract bugs would actually use a yellow LED chip. But because of the mass production of white-phosphor LEDs, my guess is that all of these yellow LED bug lights being sold actually use blue LED chips with just extra phosphor to try to absorb all of the blue light. In my experience though, a "warm white 2700K" LED bulb did not really attract any bugs at all, but then again the light from that bulb is already a kind of strange orangish color to begin with, not so different from a yellow bug light if you ask me.

Sorry for the long post, but you did bring up the subject of bug lights, and I wanted to adequately answer the issue.

 

Okay, not that anyone probably cares, but I found out about a potential disadvantage of the new energy saving halogen bulbs compared to the old incandescents. Whereas putting the old incandescent bulbs on a dimmer increased the lifespan of the bulb, putting these new halogen bulbs on a dimmer can potentially reduce the lifespans of the bulb. This is worth bringing up because most of the information online and on the packaging of these bulbs claims that they are dimmable. This could be misleading, to say the least.

One factor is the running at reduced power; halogen bulbs don't like being put on dimmers, since the halogen cycle which redeposits tungsten onto the filament only works at high temperatures; otherwise, they will blacken and burn out very quickly (somewhat slower at reduced power, but life may initially drop sharply before the lower temperature has a bigger effect).

Will dimming switches work with a halogen light bulb?
Yes, conventional incandescent dimmers will work to dim halogen lamps. However, the effectiveness of the halogen cycle to keep the lamp walls clean and give longer life may well be affected. This cycle depends upon correct lamp operating temperatures, which of course will be changed when the lamp is dimmed. Therefore, using a dimmer may not extend the life of your halogen lamp as much as a dimmer typically extends the life of a standard incandescent lamp.
The halogen lamp is designed to prevent the tungsten from depositing on the inside of the bulb wall and darkening it. Because the halogen action stops working when the bulb wall temperature falls below 260 degrees Centigrade, which may happen when the dimmer lowers the voltage, the halogen lamp blackens and its life is not prolonged as much as an incandescent lamp on a dimmer. Eventually a severely dimmed halogen lamp can become blackened and fail.
The wall blackening can be partially reversed if the halogen lamp is operated at full power, non-dimmed, periodically to allow the halogen cycle to remove some of the deposited tungsten.

However, halogen bulbs are still more dimmable than CFLs or LEDs. Putting a normal CFL on a dimmer switch will drastically reduce its lifespan, much more so than halogens. Another problem is that even for most CFLs or LEDs that claim to be dimmable, their operation is still negatively affected by dimming. The CFLs will lose much of their efficiency at lower powers, and even some of the "dimmable" versions will still result in some flicker if the dimmer is turned down to low. Many of the "dimmable" LEDs actually only dim down to 20% of their brightness. Any lower than that and the light starts to go out, or sometimes there is some flicker, or in some cases it even causes an annoying hum. There do exist, however, LED lighting that are indeed fully dimmable, and putting an LED on a dimmer will not affect its lifespan. For comparison, dimming a halogen bulb, while potentially taking away from its lifespan, will not in the slightest immediately affect the operation of the bulb.

All this goes to show that there all sorts of new considerations that have to be made when switching to any of these new energy efficient bulbs. They all have their own special disadvantages in several situations. Most consumers can't be troubled to educate themselves about all the complexities, and just assume these new bulbs work just the same as the old. Then they are surprised when their new more expensive bulbs burn out after only 6 months.

 

[video=youtube;3gjvOOlHmsU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gjvOOlHmsU[/video]