But a lot of people these days are finding the new compact fluorescent bulbs anything but simple. Consumers who are trying them say they sometimes fail to work, or wear out early. At best, people discover that using the bulbs requires learning a long list of dos and don’ts.The culprit? Cheaply, but poorly made bulbs, particularly from China. So if you're doing the switch to CFLs, read the labels carefully and don't put them in sockets that they're not designed for "including enclosed ceiling lamps, dimmable fixtures and areas where lights are turned on and off frequently."
Take the case of Karen Zuercher and her husband, in San Francisco. Inspired by watching the movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” they decided to swap out nearly every incandescent bulb in their home for energy-saving compact fluorescents. Instead of having a satisfying green moment, however, they wound up coping with a mess.
“Here’s my sad collection of bulbs that didn’t work,” Ms. Zuercher said the other day as she pulled a cardboard box containing defunct bulbs from her laundry shelf.
One of the 16 Feit Electric bulbs the Zuerchers bought at Costco did not work at all, they said, and three others died within hours. The bulbs were supposed to burn for 10,000 hours, meaning they should have lasted for years in normal use. “It’s irritating,” Ms. Zuercher said.
Banner ad
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Hey, those CFLs aren't all they're cracked up to be
Remember when compact fluorescent bulbs were going to save the planet? Well, it just doesn't seem to be working out that way.
Labels:
Environment
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I didn't switch all at once but luckily the first time I bought quite a few bulbs one of those apparations that appear randomly at Lowe's told me to go back and only buy American or European made bulbs. He said that the cheaper bulbs, even with major branding, were so unreliable that purchased in large groups meant any price saving through using less electricity or replacing burnt out ones was lost.
Now if the manufacturers could just get the luminosity standardized between similarly rated bulbs I would be very happy.
I've been using CFL's since the early 1990's, and I've never had this sort of problem. I am still using some of the bulbs I got then. I think I've had 2 fail in the last almost 20 years.
I move a couple of years ago, and replaced all the bulbs in the new house with CFL's bought at home depot. Not a single one has failed yet.
You can't report this stuff by anecdote.
I would say that Ms Zuercher's box full of ineffective and defective Feit bulbs from Costco hardly qualifies as anecdotal. But Feit has generally created much ill will by claiming to honor the warantee and then basically do nothing about it. Costco will not replace the defective bulbs but and will only refer the customer back to Feit.
I too have a box of defective bulbs and not one is anyplace but China and I waited six months for a refund and finally gave up.
There are real health problems with the CFLs. The Daily Mail has an interesting article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1161899/Low-energy-light-bulbs-cause-rashes-swelling-sensitive-skin-warn-experts.html
"Low-energy light bulbs can cause rashes and swelling to sensitive skin, warn experts"
and the Register links to a UK health department warning:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/10/lowenergy_light/
"The Health Protection Agency is warning that low-energy light bulbs could give enough ultraviolet radiation to cause damage to your skin.
The phasing out of traditional light bulbs could cause misery for thousands who have light-sensitive skin disorders, medical experts warned yesterday.
Dr Robert Sarkany said some low-energy bulbs gave vulnerable people painful rashes and swelling.
He backed calls by patient groups for the Government to give medical exemptions for those at risk.
The warning comes as British shops start to clear their shelves of traditional bulbs, which are being replaced by more energy-efficient versions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
A break with tradition: Medical experts say people with light-sensitive skin disorders should be exempt from using low-energy light bulbs
Large retailers have already stopped selling conventional 100-watt bulbs, the most popular size.
They will be banned from September along with frosted 60-watt and 40-watt bulbs, followed by most others before 2012.
Shoppers will then be able to buy only halogen bulbs - which resemble normal bulbs but use 70 per cent of the energy - or compact fluorescent ones, which use just 30 per cent of the energy.
Although low-energy bulbs cut household electricity bills, the move has proved unpopular with shoppers.
Halogens are more expensive - costing around £1.99 each - while critics say the fluorescent type have an unattractive harsh light and take up to a minute to warm up to full strength.
But medical charities say the light from low-energy bulbs triggers migraines, epilepsy and rashes.
Dr Sarkany, a photodermatologist at St John's Institute of Dermatology, St Thomas' Hospital, in London, said he has treated patients for rashes caused by exposure to low-energy lamps.
Some suffer from lupus, a disease of the immune system that can cause skin to become hypersensitive to sunlight.
But Dr Sarkany said lupus sufferers were also reporting an adverse reaction to fluorescent lights.
He added: 'Patients with lupus feel strongly about this. They feel their skin deteriorates with fluorescent lights and have taken this issue to Parliament.'
A spokesman for Skin Care Campaign said: 'The main concern is over the intensity of the ultraviolet light from low-energy bulbs.
'Particularly for people with skin conditions such as lupus, eczema and psoriasis, it causes a lot of problem with burning.
'There are also more unusual conditions where people are completely light-sensitive.
'At the moment, they can use a traditional incandescent light bulb because the ultraviolet light is so dim.
'But low-energy fluorescent lights are a problem.'"
Another dim bulb liberal idea crushed by the reality of market forces yet sustained by the political whims of agenda driven opportunists.
I think the long list of concerns in davod's comment are of very high interest to us all but yet they seem to be conveniently ignored by the single-minded green advocates out there.
The CFLs I bought have been no problem, but no one told me (nor was there a warning label) they required special disposal, nor had the feds passed their mandate when I bought. I'm now slowly stocking up on regular bulbs for when the CFL mandate goes into effect, because it is inevitable that the state and feds will see their chance to tax the bejeebers out of them. Let the bulb Nazis force their way into my home to catch me not complying!
"Consumers are supposed to be able to protect themselves by buying bulbs certified under the government’s Energy Star program. But experts and some environmental groups complain that Energy Star standards are weak, permitting low-quality bulbs with too high a level of mercury, a toxic metal contained in all compact fluorescents."
I was told to put them in a baggie before putting them in the trash- because of the mercury.
Is this supposed to be environmentally friendly?
How many liberals does it take to screw up a light bulb? I mean "screw in a light bulb?".
I'm thinking just one but who can say for sure because they'd have us all sitting in the dark, so it's kind of hard to count.
Years ago I bought a CFL for the desk lamp in my computer office. It lasted a disappointing five months.
Tried them again later with a six pack of low watt bulbs. One burned out (banged out!) in a year. Two are in use. I have three as spares.
Incandescent bulbs are superior radiant heaters compared to CFLs and sometimes that's what I want.
At some time in the future, should we survive as a race, our descendants will look back at this time and point to environmentalists as the greatest threat to the environment.
According to the Five Year Plan you are not sitting in the dark. And you are reading about the latest record breaking potato harvest.
Post a Comment