Is the hype surrounding the use of the Compact Fluorescent (CFLs) light bulbs to save energy and money really true? Paul Wheaton’s CFL article points out some compelling arguments suggesting that CFLs might not be all that energy efficient after all compared to incandescent light bulbs. A CFL light bulb will actually have a shorter life span than a incandescent light bulb if you household is in the habit of conserving energy and frequently turn lights off when not in use. CFLs don’t perform well when turned off and on many times.
[CFLs seem much cheaper because they are subsidized by our tax dollars and higher eletric utility rates]
CFL Light Bulbs in a Nutshell
I’m not going to reproduce Paul’s CFL article word for word. Please click the link at the top of this post and read his article for a more detailed explanations. I would like to point out the main arguments against CFLs.
- CFLs longevity is exaggerated
- CFLs are not as bright as they claim to be and put out less light as they become older
- CFLs perform poorly for the first two minutes
- CFLs perform poorly in the cold
- CFLs contain toxins, mostly mercury, and should not be thrown away in your household garbage
Help by Funding Paul Wheaton’s Video Project on CFLs
Paul Wheaton has put out a video on kickstarter.com to ask for some funding so he can finish his video project on CFL light bulbs used for under 30 seconds. Check out the video below or click on the link to go directly to this kickstarter.com page for this project.
farmer laboratory: light bulbs at 30 seconds
PDF 
No related posts.
