Lights Out for Incandescent Lightbulbs

[Daniel270]

http://tinyurl.com/yojs32

Everyone ready to switch from 4 for $1 bulbs to $3 apiece?

[ChadTower]

I've been using all CFL bulbs for years now.  They last much longer, run cooler, run cheaper... I haven't seen one run 5 years yet, though.  They tend to average 2 or so for me.  I think the only incandescent bulb left in my house is in the heating lamp in the turtle tank.

[Daniel270]

I think what's going to hurt, unless done gradually, IS the conversion from one to the other... how many people ultimately will wait til they can't buy the other bulbs anymore before making the switch?

[shardian]

I've been mostly using CFL since I bought my house. Unfortunately, I've had several problems with them. I've had several burn out. They don't work well with my Harbor breeze remote control fan in the living room (bad flickering). And the ones in my bedroom are horribly loud for a lightbulb. Maybe I'm buying the wrong brand or something, but I don't remember which was which.

I also just ran new can lighting in my basement which is controlled by a dimmer. CFL is not an option there.

[ChadTower]

I also just ran new can lighting in my basement which is controlled by a dimmer. CFL is not an option there.

There are "dimmable" rated CFL bulbs.  That article even mentions them specifically.

I did have to modify some light housings to accommodate the wider base of a CFL.  They're usually cheap soft metal, though, so a few minutes with a dremel and they were all good.

[shardian]

There are "dimmable" rated CFL bulbs.  That article even mentions them specifically.

Oh, I've heard of them, but I'm not putting in 10 $20 bulbs.

[ChadTower]

Online they're in the $13 range last I looked.  Still pretty expensive compared to incandescents.

[polaris]

http://tinyurl.com/yojs32

Everyone ready to switch from 4 for $1 bulbs to $3 apiece?

they do have lower running costs of course, and you can get them for a quid each here. that comes to a whole £9 to change all the bulbs in my house. i think im ready to switch

[Level42]

That's mainly the reason why I also still have incandescent (what a ---smurfy--- word if you're not natively English speaking !!!) lighting here, we got dimmers all around. That saves energy as well....

I also think the light is much softer of an old fashioned bulb, the energy savers are simply TL light in a small housing. That means very cool light, don't like it really.

Amazing, I guess this may be one of the first times the US is actually ahead of us, a couple of months ago our government said there was no need for a law to ban incandescent (I copy-pasted that !) lighting as people would switch over themselves. Well with our energy, environment etc. taxes on energy they may be right (for once).

There will be nothing that can really replace the "look and feel" of a real bulb. That's the same with the coindoor lights. You can try everything, the bulb looks the most authentic.

I'm sure the old bulb factories will be running lots and lots of extra's before all these laws will take effect. People will stock up on them for certain applications. Maybe I should start now....then put them on e-bay in 2020 .............

[patrickl]

I was thinking about buying "natural daylight" CFL bulbs and tubes for my new house. They would mimic the same light you get from the sun.

[Xam]

I've been mostly using CFL since I bought my house. Unfortunately, I've had several problems with them. I've had several burn out. They don't work well with my Harbor breeze remote control fan in the living room (bad flickering). And the ones in my bedroom are horribly loud for a lightbulb. Maybe I'm buying the wrong brand or something, but I don't remember which was which.

I also just ran new can lighting in my basement which is controlled by a dimmer. CFL is not an option there.

I tried em in my fan also... later I found the instruction manual said they do not recommend the CFLs. That said, I have had no problems in typical lighting fixtures.

Just be careful when disposing of them...if I am not mistaken, they contain a small amount of mercury.

Xam

[Ken Layton]

Don't believe all the hype about 'compact fluorescents'. They are not all they're cracked up to be. Certain applications still require incandescent bulbs. Ovens and refrigerators still need incandescent bulbs because of the extreme temperatures. Most compact fluorescents say right on the package: not for use with dimmers, not for use in damp areas or bathrooms, not for use in fixtures where the bulb is enclosed (the fluorescent needs ventilation). Ever try to get one of those suckers to light up right away outdoors? My apartment owner had a compact fluorescent installed in the open fixture in the bottom stair landing at my apartment building. Whenever it was 50 degrees or colder outside that sucker took forever to light up plus it was dimmer than the incandescent it replaced. The owner switched it back to a 60 watt incandescent because of numerous tenant complaints of not being able to see the stairs at night.

I've actually had two of these compact fluorescents catch fire in normal operation. Good thing I was home to catch it right away or my place would have burnt down. Oh yeah, don't believe those "hour" life rating of compact fluorescents either. I get nowhere near the advertised life.

In some applications these bulbs make sense, yet in other applications you're throwing money away. I sure as hell don't need the government telling me what bulbs I can and cannot use in my household. I will continue to use standard incandescents in many of my applications.

[mccoy178]

Don't believe all the hype about 'compact fluorescents'. They are not all they're cracked up to be. Certain applications still require incandescent bulbs. Ovens and refrigerators still need incandescent bulbs because of the extreme temperatures. Most compact fluorescents say right on the package: not for use with dimmers, not for use in damp areas or bathrooms, not for use in fixtures where the bulb is enclosed (the fluorescent needs ventilation). Ever try to get one of those suckers to light up right away outdoors? My apartment owner had a compact fluorescent installed in the open fixture in the bottom stair landing at my apartment building. Whenever it was 50 degrees or colder outside that sucker took forever to light up plus it was dimmer than the incandescent it replaced. The owner switched it back to a 60 watt incandescent because of numerous tenant complaints of not being able to see the stairs at night.

I've actually had two of these compact fluorescents catch fire in normal operation. Good thing I was home to catch it right away or my place would have burnt down. Oh yeah, don't believe those "hour" life rating of compact fluorescents either. I get nowhere near the advertised life.

In some applications these bulbs make sense, yet in other applications you're throwing money away. I sure as hell don't need the government telling me what bulbs I can and cannot use in my household. I will continue to use standard incandescents in many of my applications.

You kids get off my lawn!

[ChadTower]

We'll need to reconsider our light fixtures, but the LEDs are getting -very- close.

I agree with this... it shouldn't be long before there are LED packages out there that run off the standard 120v sockets.  They won't be cheap now but they could be in a few years.

[Ed_McCarron]

They last much longer, run cooler, run cheaper...

...add mercury to the waste stream...

[shardian]

I have a CFL in my garage. It takes FOREVER to get past nightlight lumen levels on cold days/nights. Oh, and BTW, I was at Walmart and they had dimmable Flood CFL's for $13.

[ahofle]

They last much longer, run cooler, run cheaper...

...add mercury to the waste stream...

I thought I was the only one who noticed this.  I'll bet less than a percent of CFL users properly dispose of them (like NiCd batteries). 

I also agree that the rated life of CFLs is usually greatly exaggerated (and seems to depend much on the manufacturer).  I have had good luck with these outside though unlike Ken.  When the temp goes in and below the 20s they are definitely dimmer, but more than adequate for lighting the front porch and garage area at about a quarter the energy usage. 
Another thing that seems to vary among manufacturer is the time it takes for them to warm up.  I bought a bunch of CFL globes for the bathroom lighting and they seem to take forever to put out good light (very irritating).

[Daniel270]

Part of the thing that grabbed my attention with this is the fact that I live in an apartment that's pretty strictly incandescent.   Most building owners are cheap ---daisies--- and won't update anything unless it goes into a building code violation, including better fixtures for those new bulbs. 

I'm still complaining about no light whatsoever in my living room.... and no ceiling fans.

[patrickl]

They last much longer, run cooler, run cheaper...

...add mercury to the waste stream...

I was wondering about this on another thread and found that there is a claim that actually less mercury gets released with CFLs:

Coal electricty plants indeed emit a lot of mercury, even though they are being forced to be cleaner too.

Found a random article on the subject:
Shedding some light on the CFL Blubs.

In 2006, coal-fired power plants produced 1,971 billion kilowatt hours (kwh) of electricity, emitting 50.7 million tons of mercury into the air—the equivalent amount of mercury contained in more than 9 billion CFLs (the bulbs emit zero mercury when in use or being handled).

Approximately 0.0234 mg of mercury—plus carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide—releases into the air per 1 kwh of electricity that a coal-fired power plant generates. Over the 7500-hour average range of one CFL, then, a plant will emit 13.16 mg of mercury to sustain a 75-watt incandescent bulb but only 3.51 mg of mercury to sustain a 20-watt CFL (the lightning equivalent of a 75-watt traditional bulb). Even if the mercury contained in a CFL was directly released into the atmosphere, an incandescent would still contribute 4.65 more milligrams of mercury into the environment over its lifetime.

[Ed_McCarron]

In 2006, coal-fired power plants produced 1,971 billion kilowatt hours (kwh) of electricity, emitting 50.7 million tons of mercury into the air—the equivalent amount of mercury contained in more than 9 billion CFLs (the bulbs emit zero mercury when in use or being handled).

Not having the facts to dispute this, but having worked in/around the industry, anything that can be extracted from the waste of those plants is - they can sell it.

Sulfur, mercury, and probably some other 'wastes' are extracted by different processes, and sold as bulk chemical.

The plants whine about the expense of trapping the waste, but then turn around and sell it.  If theres money to be made, they find a way.

Everyone puts their own spin on it to cater to their agenda.  Just like here.

[SavannahLion]

CFL's are a ---smurfing--- joke and so is the ill conceived law. I just installed three halogen track lights and one uses a dimmer. I still haven't seen any consideration for these types of lights. When I light these suckers up, it's like having the ---smurfing--- sun in my house, I still haven't purchased a CFL that even remotely compares to the lumens, much less the 1.5" size of the bulbs. I have absolutely no intention of replacing the expensive track lighting with ---smurfy--- CFL's.

In fact, nearly every CFL I ever purchased, cheap or expensive, grossly overrate their wattage equivalence on the package. Equal to a 100 watt bulb? More like equal to a 10 watt bulb with some. (Traditional Fluorescents are a different matter entirely and I use several of these throughout the house.)

There is a really excellent article that raises some interesting questions about the laws pushing for CFL's and the technical hurdles they have yet to overcome. Even points at some questionable marketing practices of the CFL manufacturers. I found it while researching Pacman boards at work. I'll see if I can't dig it up.

In my house, it's about using the right bulb for the right job. CFL's are hardly adequate for every application.

[lanman31337]

I have CFL's all throughout my house, except for a few locations that have a dimmer.  I have them down in my game room in can lights that are the "compact halogen" type.  They take a good minute to warm up.  Retarded.

[shardian]

Last night, I bought a "equivalent 40 w CFL bulb" to replace a "65w" CFL in our baby's bedroom lamp. The replacment was even brighter and had a HORRIBLY white color warmth. I don't think I could bear that unnatural white light in my downstairs lighting. Its kind of like those Mercedes benz Headlights - you just can't stand the look of them.

[patrickl]

Its kind of like those Mercedes benz Headlights - you just can't stand the look of them.

I had that on my Audi. Those Xenon lamps are really great. Indeed people whined about the color when they were new, but after people got used to them it went away. It's really great from the point of view of the driver. You just get so much more light on the road. It's no longer like driving in a tunnel when you are on an unlit road, but you can see almost as good as by daylight.

[patrickl]

I'm surprised so many people here complain about the slow warm-up of CFL lamps. I haven't had a CFL compact in about 5 years or so with that problem. Do you have really old lamps or do they still sell lamps with that problem in the US?

[Ken Layton]

Every single compact fluorescent light I've bought has had slow warm up problems.

[patrickl]

Bought 10 years ago or recently?

[ahofle]

I'm surprised so many people here complain about the slow warm-up of CFL lamps. I haven't had a CFL compact in about 5 years or so with that problem. Do you have really old lamps or do they still sell lamps with that problem in the US?

The globes I got for the bathroom vanity are the worst in terms of warm up and they are the newest CFLs I have.  I think I got them at Sam's Club sometime this year, but I can' remember the brand.  I like the energy savings, but I ended up taking them out of the guest bathroom because of the annoyance.  I also have some spot light type CFLs for the cans in the basement, which also are terrible in terms of warm up duration.  The normal 13 watt CFLs are way better, but they do also get brighter after a warm up.  Why do these require such a warm up period in the first place?  My normal tube fluorescent lights (even in the cold garage) do not seem to require any warm up period.

[ChadTower]

I don't have a single CFL in my house that takes more than a couple of seconds to warm up and stabilize.  That is probably 20-25 CFLs of various ratings in fixtures that start at 20 years old and many are far older than that.

[ahofle]

Do you have of the enclosed type CFLs like the globes and floodlights?  I wonder if there is something with those (lack of ventilation possibly as mentioned above) that makes them so much worse at starting up than the normal CFLs? 

[ChadTower]

Mine are all the open spiral types - no enclosures other than the fixture itself.  Some of them are pretty cheap, too, bought at dollar stores.

[polaris]

i dont like the coldness of the little buggers but im sure in time warmer ones will become available, you can get warm larger florrie tubes. i dont find they take that long to come to brightness either. if they are used in as room where the light is regularly switched on for short periods i believe a trad bulb would be more energy efficient anyway.

[shardian]

Do you have of the enclosed type CFLs like the globes and floodlights?  I wonder if there is something with those (lack of ventilation possibly as mentioned above) that makes them so much worse at starting up than the normal CFLs? 

Next time you are in the light aisle, take a look inside the lens of a CFL flood light. It is a spiral inside of a reflector and lens. Doesn't that violate the "don't use in enclosed situations" right off the bat?

[crashwg]

I concur with the slow warm up problems among other things mentioned in this thread as to why CFLs are NOT the future of lighting.  We put two CFL "equivalent to 100watt" bulbs in the lamp that lights the entire living room a few months ago.  The moment you turned on the light it looked like maybe 60watts and it was definitely MINUTES later that the light was pretty close to, but definitely not 100watts of output.

Another reason we will continue to use incandescents in that lamp is it constantly is getting knocked over and while the CFLs are maybe 50% less likely to blow upon impact they still do and with the cost of them exponentially higher than incandescents it's a no brainer.

While we're on the subject of why CFL sucks...  Don't they wreak havoc on video recordings, both digital and analog?  I know they used to (at least full sized fluorescents did.)  I remember some camera I used a while back that the video looked like a horror movie with how much flicker the light induced.

I'll definitely be stocking up on incandescents when we get closer to the kill date!

P.S.
This subject reminds me of and episode of Married With Children where Al sells his toilet to a neighbor because all that you can buy these days is low-flow models and his was old and could get the job done better.  Yea, I can see that happening if this goes down as planned.  You'll be seeing light bulbs on ebay for butloads of mulah.

[shardian]

While we're on the subject of why CFL sucks...  Don't they wreak havoc on video recordings, both digital and analog?  I know they used to (at least full sized fluorescents did.)  I remember some camera I used a while back that the video looked like a horror movie with how much flicker the light induced.

Warning: tangent incoming.

I am working on a Library right now in which the architect calls for lay-in tile ceilings, but then there isn't a single drop in light fixture in the building. Everything was wire hung fluorescents hung upside down.

At a recent job meeting I asked the electrical contractor why, and he said that the architect only used indirect fluorescent lighting because standard fluorescent fixtures have the possibility of triggering epileptic seizures. I suppose that when the whole ceiling flickers from the indirect lighting, that is okay then.

And yes, I have noticed that some of my CFL's have pretty bad flickering.

[ChadTower]

While we're on the subject of why CFL sucks...  Don't they wreak havoc on video recordings, both digital and analog?

I record kids' stuff fairly often in my house and haven't noticed it yet.  Maybe newer cameras are better at dealing with it but we don't seem to get the flicker issues.  I wonder if that is an issue with rooms that have multiple CFLs lighting them?  Our rooms are mostly all small enough that one strong one does the whole room.

[patrickl]

When you have flicker you really have an old  lamp. They have switched to electronich switching ages ago and that works at tens of thousands of hz. This also solves the slow startup. Odd that they still sell the crappy models with the slow startup. I recall there were actually magnetic waves coming from. There must be a site with some  info about this.

:edit:
Here is more info:
Answers.com: compact fluorescent lamp

I thougt it was a starter, but of course it's the ballast that's now electronic instead of magnetic
Answers.com: electrical ballast

Electronic ballasts usually change the frequency of the power from the standard mains (e.g, 60Hz in U.S.) frequency to 20,000 Hz or higher, substantially eliminating the stroboscopic effect of flicker (100 or 120 Hz, twice the line frequency) associated with fluorescent lighting (see photosensitive epilepsy).

Instant start
Starts lamps without heating the cathodes at all by using a high voltage (around 600 V). It is the most energy efficient type, but gives the least number of starts from a lamp as emissive oxides are blasted from the cold cathode surfaces each time the lamp is started. This is the best type for installations where lamps are not turned on and off very often.

Rapid start
Applies voltage and heats the cathodes simultaneously. Provides superior lamp life and more cycle life, but uses slightly more energy as the cathodes in each end of the lamp continue to consume heating power as the lamp operates.

Programmed start
More advanced version of rapid start. Applies power to the filaments first, then after a short delay to allow the cathodes to preheat, applies voltage to the lamps to strike an arc. Gives the best life and most starts from lamps. This is the preferred type of ballast for applications with very frequent power cycling such as vision examination rooms and restrooms with a motion detector switch.

[ahofle]

Next time you are in the light aisle, take a look inside the lens of a CFL flood light. It is a spiral inside of a reflector and lens.

Yes of course (it's also annoyingly obvious when you first turn them on).  My understanding is that the ventilation warning is only to prevent the CFL from overheating which shortens its life.  What I was wondering is if the actual lamps inside the enclosed type CFLs were designed to run cooler than standard CFLs and thus require a longer warmup. 

[SavannahLion]

While we're on the subject of why CFL sucks...  Don't they wreak havoc on video recordings, both digital and analog?  I know they used to (at least full sized fluorescents did.)  I remember some camera I used a while back that the video looked like a horror movie with how much flicker the light induced.

Warning: tangent incoming.

I am working on a Library right now in which the architect calls for lay-in tile ceilings, but then there isn't a single drop in light fixture in the building. Everything was wire hung fluorescents hung upside down.

Here's another tangent.

We all know fluorescents produce UV light which is converted to visible light before leaving the tube. When I worked at Home Depot, I noticed a large percentage of fluorescent tubes that lacked the white phosphor coating right at the very ends of the tube. Usually the last 1/2 inch or so. In the same breath, I've spotted some tubes that exhibit noticeable thin or bald patches in the coating (though this is rare). Chances are good you'll get a tube with bald patches. Even with 100% coverage inside the tube and despite what manufacturers tell you, fluorescents are not 100% efficient at converting UV light to visible light. Some of that light escapes. While working at a archival facility, this was precisely the problem that was encountered. To protect the long term life of the artifacts, everything was put into boxes or wrapped in paper to prevent light from reaching the artifact. Other options (though we didn't practice it) was to wrap the fluorescent in a UV barrier. However, these are relatively expensive to implement. UV is permanently damaging to artifacts. It is cumulative and there is no such thing as reversing the effects. The effects are gradual, but in twenty or thirty years, your "antique" cabs are probably going to exhibit noticeable light damage.

Standard incandescents on the other hand, usually do not emit much (if any) UV and, I believe, are the preferred method of lighting when dealing with preservation. I intend to buy a UV meter, like the kind used by xeroderma pigmentosum patients to decide best storage practices.

Odd that they still sell the crappy models with the slow startup. I recall there were actually magnetic waves coming from. There must be a site with some  info about this.

In the U.S. you will always find crappy products that are still marketed. Sounds obvious, but it doesn't seem that way to a lot of people. To put it another way, Joe has a choice to buy CFL X which is cheaper but made like dog ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or CFL Y which is more expensive but uses the latest technology. Given this is a country where Wal*Mart makes BILLIONS despite the economic damage it does, it should be obvious what Joe is going to buy.

[patrickl]

The natural daylight lamps even advertise that they emit UV. They claim they use special glass (crystal?) to allow the UV to get out to make the light as similar as possible to the light from the sun. LOL, guess that's all bogus then.

On the other hand looking at how much UV comes from a CFL, it's not a lot. Everything you wanted to know about Compact Fluorescent Bulbs, including the mercury problem

Manufacturers say, however, that there is no health risk and that eight hours of exposure to CFL UV is about the same as one minute in full sunlight. But, photographs, artwork, some fabrics, and some photoreactive chemicals used in furniture finishes are susceptible to degradation from any increased levels of UV over time. So this is something to consider.

I liked this one too 

So CFLs won't save the planet, but they might put off its demise for a month or two.