What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
Who Gets To Use Unsold Cruise Cabins at Huge Discounts view!
howlifeworks.com - How to access once-in-a-lifetime trips at significantly less than full price
332 Comments
- wtbuser, on 10/11/2007, -55/+210Too bad only GE makes them and you need a hazardous materials receptacle to dispose of them.
- Detritus, on 10/11/2007, -9/+112I agree, Compcact Fluorescents suck... That's why I went with LED bulbs:
http://www.google.com/search?q=LED+Bulb
These aren't just a green replacement for incadescents (a mere 50% of the juice watt for watt) they are also a white replacement! I love the way real white light looks... You think fluorescents are yellow, you'll think the same thing about incadescent once you've seen what white LEDs put out. - Scheissen, on 10/11/2007, -14/+109The author of this article is a typical moron and gets caught up in the media and what's being pushed on the consumer. Compact fluorescents are not the best alternative. If the author of this article wants to ban incandescent bulbs then throw in a smarter alternative like LEDs.
- Attrition, on 10/11/2007, -19/+88@ACrazyGerman
BS, we have the compact bulbs all over our house and they turn on instantly, make no noise, and don't just stop working randomly (We did replace 2-3 in the past couple years, but we were going through more incandescents than that).
I don't think the world is going to end unless we switch to those bulbs, but they are a bit cheaper to run. My only complaint would be missing the warmer yellow tones of the incandescents. - fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -10/+59I think going from banning incandescents to being harvested for energy is a bit of a leap...
- rm999, on 10/11/2007, -7/+45The EPA's take on mercury in CFLs (http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf):
"Is it true that CFLs contain mercury? Why and how much? CFLs contain a very small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing – an average of 5 milligrams (roughly equivalent to the tip of a ball-point pen). Mercury is an essential, irreplaceable element in CFLs and is what allows the bulb to be an efficient light source. By comparison, older home thermometers contain 500 milligrams of mercury and many manual thermostats contain up to 3000 milligrams. It would take between 100 and 600 CFLs to equal those amounts. There is currently no substitute for mercury in CFLs; however, manufacturers have taken significant steps to reduce mercury used in their fluorescent lighting products over the past decade."
Basically, recycle your CFL bulbs. It's a minor inconvenience every 5-10 years for the huge benefit to the environment (and your pocketbook). LED lights aren't really feasible yet, but when they are I am sure they will replace CFLs. - swordedge, on 10/11/2007, -5/+39You don't really think they will actually close those plants do you? I think that if you did save that much electricity, someone will see to it that there is something else to take the juice. (electric cars for example)
- colonelpanic, on 10/11/2007, -16/+49I'm all for it. However there is one road block. Dimmers. Compact fluorescent bulbs can not be used on dimmer switches. However all on/off/ switched light fixtures in homes should be switched to compact fluorescent. I've replaced both full size flood lights that light my room with compact flourescent bulbs, and they provide adequate lighting. The amount of mercury is so minimal its ridiculous. I doubt it's any more than a standard flourescent fixture, which have been around for years without any complaints.
@wtbuser
I've bought compact fluorescent bulbs from Ikea, with the Ikea tag stamped on them. They were not made by GE. Sylvania also makes a line of these bulbs. - sigloiv, on 10/11/2007, -6/+33I agree with a few people here when I say that LED bulbs are the definite way to go. They can be way brighter, they put out completely white light, they use less energy than anything else, and they take forever to burn out.
Also, I want to agree with a few others when I say that an absolute ban on incandescent bulbs is not something that should every happen in our countries. I think it's interesting how whenever there's any sort threat to certain liberties here in the United States, Diggers post stories about it, and almost everyone agrees that said threat to said right should be extinguished. All of a sudden someone posts an article about the banning of standard lightbulbs and a ton of people agree. Yeah, it's not the best option for the environment, or even for my pocketbook, but if I want to buy incandescent bulbs and use them, that's my right. - Salgat, on 10/11/2007, -4/+27Although I don't support a complete ban, I do like the idea of more fluorescent lights. Trust me, if schools full of children across the nation can get away with fluorescents, then homes can. As far as the amount of mercury in the bulbs, you'd have to smash tens of bulbs in the same spot to get any harmful effects out of it(when lawsuits are a possibility, your gonna overdo safety regulations).
- Fordi, on 10/11/2007, -9/+32Really? The one in my desk lamp is made by Sylvania.
The mercury content is a bad thing, but a quick stop to wherever you buy them (Home Depot, in my case), and you can have the shop get rid of 'em. - teadrinker, on 10/11/2007, -24/+46@achalemoipas
When we start relying on the government to tell us what to do, we will all eat rationed rice and lentils, while building pyramids for our great leaders. - rollem, on 10/11/2007, -9/+26Where did you hear this story? There is about 4mg of Hg in each bulb, a very small amount. Furthermore, since most of our energy comes from coal plants, which emit Hg, the spread of Hg into the atmosphere is retarded by CFL use. Google "mercury CFL" for the EPA fact sheet.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -14/+30I don't think the government should ban incandescents (they still have their uses), but instead should tax them, and subsidize other types of bulbs (CFL, LED, etc).
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17I don't understand why in every one of these stories, there's a bunch of guys chiming in that we should buy LED bulbs instead of Compact Fluorescents, because they're oh so much better. Really guys? Where can I buy an LED bulb that's comparable brightness to a 75 watt incandescent or 18 watt fluorescent? Nowhere. After scouring the web a few weeks ago, I came upon the brightest LED bulb that a consumer can buy individually (not in lots of 200). I paid $75 for it (just to satisfy my own curiosity), it uses 9 watts, and is nowhere near as bright as a 9 watt compact fluorescent. I'd say it's about half as bright. LED may, at some point far in the future, be bright enough and cheap enough to be a viable alternative, but for right now, they're only good for flash lights, brake lights, and dim accent flood lights. The LED bulbs that screw into standard light sockets are less bright and less efficient than compact fluorescents.
- Tyrsson, on 10/11/2007, -9/+24My experience with compact fluorescent bulbs has been extremely disappointing. At one point I had replaced most of the bulbs in my house with fluorescents, every fixture that would take them in fact. It was relatively expensive, but I expected to make up for the cost in reduced electric bills and longer bulb life.
I lost the investment on both counts. Not only did it not make any appreciable difference to my electric bills, the bulbs didn't last nearly as long as advertised. In fact, many of the bulbs burned out far more quickly than traditional incandescent bulbs. Moreover, the quality of light was remarkably inconsistent. While most of the fluorescent bulbs were, indeed, brighter when first installed, they quickly dimmed to the point where they were no brighter than incandescents and in a relatively short time, many of them developed a just-barely-perceptible flicker that was, at the very least, distracting.
I hope there is a suitable replacement for incandescent bulbs someday. I remain unconvinced, however, that compact fluorescents are the panacea their proponents advertise. - Netwatcher, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20@bsmeteronhigh
A Compact Florescent Bulb has 4mg's of mercury, OSHA standards for a Mercury hazzard 425 grams, or over 100,000 times that much.
Cut the FUD. - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17It's not about the government telling you what lightbulb to buy, its about the government telling companies what lightbulbs they can sell - if a certain kind of bulb was known to cause fires, banning its sale wouldn't be an issue, would it? Its a stretch to extend this rule to products that don't cause immediate physical harm, but thats government for you.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Scheissen..so, everything is ALL or NOTHING for you ? I guess you never bought a color TV becuase you were waiting for LCDs and plasma. You kept your black and white becuase "something better will come along to replace htem.
The FACT is, the LEDs are NOT a feasible alternative yet. That is simple a fact. Too expensive. And htey will not be reasonably prices for another couple years.
To conitnue using far less efficient incandescent bulbs simply because the BEST alternative is not feasilbe yet is just plain asinine. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17+75 diggs for the first comment, which states two bald-faced lies as facts? GE, Sylvania, Phillips, Lights of America, EcoBulb, Safeway, and many, many more are the brands of Compact Fluorescents you can choose from.
You do not need a hazardous waste receptacle to dispose of them. Do you throw your watch batteries in a hazardous waste receptacle? A watch battery has about five times more mercury in it than a typical CFL. I dropped and broke a CFL a few months ago, wiped up the mess with a paper towel and threw it away. I didn't get sick, or die, or go crazy.
Your flat panel monitors and TVs, your thermostats, all your batteries, your thermometers, and many other items in your home contain trace amounts of mercury. - everfalling, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CFL_bulb_mercury_use_environment.svg
pick your poison. it's either a small risk of direct contact of mercury in your home due to a broken bulb plus a much reduced amount of mercury through the lesser production of electricity through coal burning plants, or overall more mercury in the environment through coal burning plants required to power regular florescent bulbs.
personally i'd rather see LED bulbs - charliespopcan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15I'm not implying anything, but this is quite a read from a site:
ILB (Incandescent Light Bulbs)
CFL (Compact Fluorescent Lamps)
Negative Aspects
I won’t hesitate to say that the positive aspects of the CFLs are quite intriguing, unfortunately people put on blinders and only focus on the positive aspects and completely ignore practical and important uses of ILBs that the CFL just cannot replace.
Directional Lighting
ILBs use a tiny tungsten filament which emits the light. Since there is a relatively small amount of surface area that emits the light, it is much easier to focus the light on a target of choice. A CFL on the other hand has a massive surface area which causes the light to emit in a much more diffused manner which is a headache for anyone who wants a clean focused beam of light.
Dynamic Temperature Lighting
CFL are highly dependant on having a stable temperature. They are designed to work at room temperatures and just do not work well – if at all – in extreme temperatures, both hot and cold. This is especially important in Canada – which has cooler temperatures throughout the winter. If you use the bulbs outside they will either flicker heavily when you turn them on, or they will just not turn on at all. In higher temperature areas the ballast is susceptible to overheating and killing the entire lamp.
Utility Lighting
These bulbs can not be used as utility lights in places such as fridges and stoves. In a stove the ballast would be highly vulnerable to the high temperature. So unless the stove includes some type of ballast built in, replacing a traditional bulb with a CFL just cannot happen.
With a fridge, the bulb would either not turn on or take too long to warm up to be of any use without holding the fridge door open until it was bright enough to see. This would cause the fridge to run in overtime, offsetting any power saving you may have by using the more efficient bulb.
Other household machines such as dryers, microwaves and freezers all have similar problems.
Outdoor Lighting
This problem is a bit odder, but it is a problem that ILBs just do not have – insects making homes inside your light fixture and bulbs. While ILBs certainly attract insects; the insects cannot live too close to the bulb as the heat will cook them alive. Since CFLs are cooler, the bugs can live alongside the bulb and or right down the center of it. This will start to affect the output of the light itself, not to mention a dirty cleanup job when the time comes to replace the bulb. Not a hassle I want to deal with when changing a light bulb.
Incubation
We all know of how you can use a light bulb to incubate an egg. Well you can also use them for your plants, turtles, fish, snakes and assorted lizards or whatever else may need simulated sunlight. Obviously creating a CFL that emits heat would be completely pointless as we already have a product that does that quite well and efficiently!
DC Lighting
CFLs need AC power to work, thus any battery powered lighting device cannot use a CFL. This is because the flow of electricity causes the mercury to be attracted to one end of the light, offsetting the brightness of the bulb to that side. With AC, the flow of electrons is alternated one direction to the other which allows the bulb to avoid this problem. There are ways to fix this problem, but unfortunately they lower CFLs energy efficiency and thus make it impractical.
Disposal
While overall CFLs introduce less mercury into the environment, the fact that it requires special disposal is a hassle for the average home user – a hassle most will avoid. In the end the mercury will end up in the environment and no amount of switching from coal to nuclear power will offset this. While right now CFLs would be a blessing, 25-50 years down the road as we slowly switch to cleaner forms of power generation, the mercury content will start to become a negative aspect of CFLs.
Different sizes of traditional bulbs. Some are far too small for a CFL replacement.
Size
The sizes of these light bulbs are upwards of 25% longer which cause problems with lamps which require a bulb the same size as a traditional one. The only way to solve this problem is to put a less bright CFL which also has a smaller profile into the outlet.
Colour
While you have a more broad range of colours including a more pure white colour, most of us are still use to the soft yellow glow of the traditional bulb. CFLs simply do not give off the same colour of light as well as a lack of range in the colour spectrum. Unfortunately because of the way they are designed they will never have the same feel of a traditional bulb no matter how hard the companies try to match them. Sure certain people can get use to the new bulb, but others seem to have a hard time getting use to the colour changes and spectrum changes. It affects them in a negative way, similar to people becoming depressed after a long period of time without sunlight.
Price
Unfortunately since the CFL has quite a few parts to it, the cost of the bulb itself is much higher when compared to a traditional ILB. It has been calculated that over the course of a CFLs lifetime it actually ends up paying for itself in the form of savings in your electrical bill. Unfortunately this is not what people think of when buying a light bulb; they buy the standard bulb simply because the initial cost is much lower. - nodonoug, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15@colonelpanic
If CF won't dim, use LED bulbs. They dim wonderfully (and you don't need a hazardous materials receptacle to get rid of them). - cosinezero, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15You truly should get out more... that story has long since been debunked.
- vaxguru, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
- EochaidRiata, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14The government sets the minimum efficiency of furnace you are allowed to use.
http://www.aceee.org/consumerguide/topfurn.htm
"The efficiency of new furnaces is measured by the annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE), a measure of seasonal performance. The federal minimum-efficiency standards for furnaces took effect in 1992, requiring that new furnace units have an AFUE of at least 78%."
--------------------
The government sets the minimum efficiency of central air conditioner you are allowed to buy.
http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/ac_factsheet.pdf
"Air conditioners manufactured after January 23, 2006 must meet a higher minimum standard, achieving a Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) of 13 or higher."
--------------------
In fact there are minimum standrards that must be met by refrigerators, freezers, room air-conditioners, dishwashers, clothes washers, clothes dryers, electric ranges, microwaves, ovens and water heaters as well: http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/docs/5.10.3.xls
I don't remember anyone gnashing teeth over the minimum efficiency requirements for those items. - SwordOfShannara, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14Why do we need legislation to make this happen? If the new bulbs actually are better and cheaper in the long run then the marketing department has an easy job to do. I don't see any commercials trying to sell these bulbs. Why aren't they doing this the normal way?
- Firehed, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13You're backing your argument on Digg with an article at Fox News? Wow, we have failed.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not claiming that there's no mercury in the CF bulbs. But it's the last argument against CF bulbs that would be of concern to me, considering how little is in there. The only bulb sockets I use that don't have CF bulbs in them are three-way, dimmers, and outdoors (very few of those in the house). The color is a non-issue - most of the CF bulbs out there emit the same gross yellow color of incandescent bulbs, though you can (as I do) get daylight bulbs. Lower light output is only a perception if you get the daylight bulbs - since the light doesn't look fake, it doesn't look as bright - again, a non-issue for most of the CF bulbs out there.
When all is said and done, I'm not going to convince anyone, and I don't greatly care. Incandescents have their uses, as do compact fluorescents. If I can cut down on the power bill (and increase the bulb life) by substituting a CF for an incandescent bulb, I will. If it's one of those locations where that's not suitable, then I'll use what works. I don't greatly give a damn what kind of light bulb you use, especially since the government will have almost certainly pass some sort of ineffective law further diminishing our choice of product that fails to address the situations where CF bulbs aren't effective. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9@iainc: I have one of these LED bulbs:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/08/150-led-bulb-uses-9w-costs-65/
This is the brightest LED bulb you can buy individually that will fit in a normal light socket. I paid $75 dollars for it and it isn't even as bright as a 9 watt CFL from Safeway. The light is soft and yellow, but dimmer than most refrigerator bulbs. Don't waste your time. Switch to CFLs now, and in five years when they start to burn out, LED bulbs should be bright enough and cheap enough to actually be practical.
When you're looking at LED bulbs, be sure to look at the number of lumens. The vast majority of LED bulbs you can buy are between 30 and 60 lumens. Normal light bulbs put out around 800 lumens. The one I linked to puts out about 300 lumens. It's going to take a long time for LEDs to advance enough to put out enough light to be a viable alternative. But at least they've got the color temperature right, I was under the impression that white LEDs were actually bluish, but the one I have is not. - binaryspiral, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Who's going to pay to re-educate all those laid off strippers?
Damn internet! - JerryCant, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Good point.
Just make the traditional bulb cost the same as the regular CFL, taxing legacy products to subsidize innovative products. People will soon follow the money and go for CFL to cut down their monthly bills, yet you can still use a traditional bulb in case you are using a dimmer for your living room, the bulb in your fridge dies or whatever, i don't see how a ban is necessary. - scooterDave, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13The amount of mercury is the CFL bulbs is considerably less than the mercury released in the environment by a power plant running an incandescent bulb. Needing hazardous materials receptacle to dispose of them is silly. A typical watch battery contains more mercury.
Up here, the City of Calgary has said to just throw the bulb out in your weekly garbage. I suspect most, if not all, cities will follow suit. - Berkana, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Banning is a bad idea. You can't use CFL's in ovens. They should at least permit conventional bulbs for certain applications. such as oven and fridge lighting, where the temperature and humidity are not very good for CFL's.
- Snarfy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9"There is no proof or convincing evidence at all that human activity has any effect on the global climate."
Uh, are you serious? Here ya go, a guide for the perplexed:
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462
Without a doubt there is evidence humans are affecting the environment. - nerdjesus1, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11@bsmeteronhigh - I had a fluorescent bulb break once and it wasn't a problem at all. The mess is a bit more difficult than an incandescent bulb, but no problem. The chemicals in fluorescents are too minimal to do anything to humans, really.
As for the dimmer complaint by others - LED bulbs take care of that. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Seriously, what's the big deal about it taking an extra second to light up after you flip the switch?
- Detritus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11"I think taxing undesirable products is much more efficient than banning in many circumstances."
Okay.... I'll give ya the benefit of the doubt on this since you stated it as an opinion. So what leads you to believe this?
The only case I can think of in which this is attempted is "Sin" taxes and other garbage we put on tabacco. People are still smoking, maybe a few less but people still smoke. If we were trying to address minor emissions then a similar program might be appropriate here, but since we need to make drastic reductions to our emissions immediatly this doesn't seem prudent to me.
Can you think of any other such "undesirable product" taxes that I might be missing that better address our needs? - discostu0987, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10@Brewskie don't you find it odd that all these stories about high levels of mecury due to a CFL are from fox?
- ToKnow, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Thomas Edison was an awesome man, but it's time to move on. Whether LED or Fluorescents, he would probably be proud of us for using more efficient bulbs rather than wasting resources and killing our environment.
- everfalling, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9So, who's going to pay for all of the laid-off horse-drawn carriage repairmen to be retrained into other professions? damn automobile!
- EdgarVerona, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8@TyrannySucks:
I understand and agree with your sentiment, but I think there is a line where it's good to have an entity that looks out for the greater interest of the community, especially in a Capitalist system where individuals are taught that greed should be the motivating force in their lives. It sounds to me like you believe the government should have no regulating capability, but I think that regulation to an extent is quite useful.
Should the government tell me if I can, for example, do drugs? No. Should the government tell me how many children I can have, or what I can say in public? Definately not.
But I think there are times when Government's regulatory capability is useful. For instance, I take comfort in the fact that if someone tried to kill me (for example), the Government (ideally... corrupt systems of enforcement is another subject alltogether) would step in to remove him from society so that he (again, ideally) doesn't do it again. I also enjoy the fact that the Government can tell meat-packing companies that they cannot disguise rotten meat and sell it to the public without penalties.
The light bulb issue is right there on the borderline between these two situations for me. It's not as obvious of an inalienable right as free speech is... but on the other hand, there are other ways to resolve the problem (unlike the meat example above... if someone wants to buy meat, they need some sort of guarantee that it shouldn't be tainted).
I do think the results would be extremely beneficial if such a ban took place, but we could also do other things like (as was mentioned above) increasing the use of Nuclear or other nonpolluting power.
I should put up a brief disclaimer here. I use compact flourescents almost exclusively in my house, and I have personally felt the financial benefit of it (Not sure if this is the case everywhere, but when I went to Lowe's to buy them they had them on sale for 1.25$ due to some kind of subsidy. It may have been just for California, I'm not certain). At the moment, I don't think I'd force anyone to use them... but I choose to personally. - justinjstark, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8LEDs are better environmentally but Compact Fluorescents are a step in the right direction. For those of you worried about the mercury, read this:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/05/compact_fluorescent_lights_are.php#more
"As dangerous as mercury in CFLs is, if you're serious about reducing mercury waste in the environment, they're still better than incandescent lights." - rollem, on 10/11/2007, -9/+16I strongly agree. If the average CFl costs $5 and the average incadescent costs $1, add a $2 tax and use those funds to subsidize CFLs. It would cost no money, people who need incadescents could still get them, but the use of CFLs would go way up. I think taxing undesirable products is much more efficient than banning in many circumstances.
- Brutusfly, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Every time a story like this on CFLs hits digg...the same FUD floats to the surface.
Even with a bit of mercury in them, the benefits out weigh the negatives. (They take E-waste curbside where I live too!)
A small percentage of the many CFLs I've tried have excellent color indistinguishable from incandescent.
If you break a bulb, your children are not in great danger. Feed them some aspartame or corn syrup and calm down!
And, in my opinion, banning incandescents is a ridiculous over-reaction. A sin-tax on them might not be a bad idea, if the money could be funneled into clean-energy plants. Good luck getting that past the fossil fuel lobby. - missswiss, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Banning regular lightbulbs would completely suck for anybody who are extremely sensitive to UV rays.
I have Lupus and am forced to wear high spf sunscreen at all times, which is very expensive. Why shouldn't we have the choice to use regular lightbulbs if we are allergic to the other ones?
http://www.itzarion.com/lupus-sun-uv.html - Hananda, on 10/11/2007, -12/+19A good, old fashioned population crash would go a long way to solving environmental impact issues, no socialism required.
- scooterDave, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8God help Brandy Bridge's when she discoveres an oil dripping from her car onto the driveway. Will she also call the EPA haz-mat clean up team? She's the reason we have so many silly warning labels. http://www.hometownmotocross.com/pages/wacky_warning_labels.htm
- EdgarVerona, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Whoa, hold on a minute.
Al Gore's hypocracy has nothing to do with whether the issue is truth or not... but it sounds to me like that's the foundation of your argument.
The fact is that there's a wealth of evidence that lends itself to the global warming conclusion. Whether it "convinces" you depends on your ability to reason I suppose. - ricksite, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7CFLs don't release mercury when they are on. They contain a tiny amount of mercury. If recycling centers are setup, it won't be a problem. This page has a lot of good info on CFLs and mercury:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/energystar/english/consumers/questions-answers.cfm?attr=4#mercury - atbnet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Where are you buying $20 CFLs?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 333 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 