The myth of the CFL - Page 2

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/04/25/lunn-bulbs.html

or GOOGLE incandescent light bulbs canada for a long list of info

The honerable minister quotes an Austrailian study, while forgetting that the climate in Canada is not very Austrailian like.

Incandecent lamps optimistically produce 20% visible light, 80% heat. So, in a cold climate, during winter-time, they should be considered 100% efficient. During the summer, we get daylight.... lots and lots of daylight, so summertime lighting is a non-issue. In BC, electricity is about 70% the cost of fossel-fuel (per GJ), and is 99% generated by hydro-electric.

re cold climate ... considering that lighting makes up perhaps 2% of total household energy use, and heating over 80%. The politics of an incandecent light-bulb ban boils down to a hollow gesture. An inconvenient truth, but this political act smacks of tokenism. 

Perhaps in the future, we can look forward to much more concrete, better researched & sincere political leadership on all green issues. For example Canada exports millions of tons of dirty coal annualy to Japan, Korea & China... perhaps we need to ban that before banning incandecent bulbs. Canada has a lot of dirty coal for sale... (will trade for CFLs)
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0001704
Appologies for the side-track.

The question remains unanswered : What is the overall carbon footprint of a 60W incandecent (100% efficient during 80% of it's usage span) vs that of a 13W CFL. The answer should account for all materials, manufacturing, shipping, lifetime energy usage, displosal.

M

As usual, enviromafia makes a typical [bait] and switch with CFL camaign. Yes, some CFLs are good, but not the consumer spiral bulbs with embedded ballasts in every base. The original poster of this thread is quuite right.

When the other CFL bulb in my house died after only few month of service, I opened it up. In case if no one noticed, typical electronic circuit inside EVERY consumer CFL bulb contains 20+ electronic components, including 4 rectifier diodes, two active transistor/thyristors, and an ELECTROLYTIC CAPACITOR. It makes therefore 40+ solder joints. It turns out that the bulb (made by "Conserve-Energy") uses the best industrial capacitor made by Panasonic, series EB:
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=P5912-ND
This particular size, 22uFx200V, has the life time of 5000 hours. It is only 208 days.

If the bulb is frequently turned on and off, the life will be much smaller, due to typical impulse transients.
So, it shows that the green-promoted bulbs cannot last long at all, by design. And the typical output is 1000-1200 lumens.

However, if you look at old commercial technology, old CFL tubes, the story is quite different. Say, a Philips-made 48" T42 lamp consumes 42W, has an output of 3600 lumens, and life time of 24,000 hours. Combined with an old-style magnetic balast, it lasts nearly forever. So, customer beware of the green [bait and switch.
 

Edited by AlTekhasski - 11/27/09 at 9:38am

The term is "bait and switch", which doesn't apply here, there is no "enviromafia", and CFLs last 5-10 years even in heavy use, up to 10 times longer than incandescents.

The heading of the myth of the CFL is really quite incorrect - because on person does not understand or it does not fir their situation does not make a myth of anything.

Mountain's Canadian problem is one thing - I don't know if CFL's are being totally stopped there or not. In the US they are NOT! 

The heat from an incandescent bulb released is near the ceiling and only part of the heat is considered for credit in the heating of a house. Different studies seem to allow for different percentages of the heat to be given credit as useful heat in the home. At best it is a lousy way to heat the home.

Politics rarely make sense - few politicians do either - including Mr. Unprecented. I suppose if they had any real intelligence they would have taken up some other line of work.

AlTekhassi - If by bite & switch you mean you tried eating a CFL I can understand why you are upset!

I don't really care what the parts are inside whatever I am using - if it works then fine. The 5000 hours do indeed make about 208 days! I am not sure what that has to do with anything. Lamps are rated considering a few hours per day of usage and the same terminology is used for all types.

If you don't like CFL's then I would suggest you don't use them. Light output varies greatly depending on the rating of the lamp you buy - nothing fixed around the 1000 to 1200 lumens you mention.

Current tech for standard tube lamps is T5 size and typically are quite long lived. You can buy for a far longer life than 24,000 hours if you want to spend the money.

There is certainly a lot of chatter on the net that is totally incorrect and off base. I would point out that the 'information' in your post is part of that.

I typically plan on spending 75% of my time sorting through absolute junk posts from one extreme or the other to get to a few good bits of information.

That the heck? Which information in my post is totally incorrect (other than misspelling in the idiom) and is off base?

That, _SAY_, one of Philips 48" linear CFLs lasts 24,000?

Regarding the compact spiral CFLs, the 5,000 hours in one internal component means that the entire bulb cannot last 12,000 hours as is printed on its packaging, it is a lie. In addition, the other 20 components having 40+ solder joints (hand-soldered probably somewhere in Chinese prison) are not improving the ballast's reliability either, especially at 120 Celsius. Therefore you should care what the parts are. I gave you a very good bit of information, which explains why the consumer-grade CFL bulbs burn like hell in normal household environment.

Regarding life of other similar "green" bulb, LED, they must suffer from the same component problem. Few month ago I got a letter from Costco about a recall of a LED lamp on the ground that its life time was overrated, see also
http://frrl.wordpress.com/2009/02/02/product-reviewlights-of-america-led-light-bulb/

In summary, greenies made a bait with long-lasting (and expensive) CFLs, and switch it to junk (cost-reduced) consumer-grade self-ballast CFLs that have half of light output and 1/5 of life time. That's how the CFL myth was born.
Edited by AlTekhasski - 11/26/09 at 9:13pm

So - you are rabid about CFL lamps - apparently you have mistaken me for someone who cares about an individual opinion.

The Chinese prison stuff is laughable! You are the one with rapidly burning out bulbs - not others. Your 'very good bit of information'  which has been taken out of context from some article is meaningless.

Buying state of the art lamps from Costco is a good one! Isn't Costco one of the Chinese junk specialty stores?

The wordpress link is a rant about Lights of America and LED's. The author says

"My house is nearly exclusively (CFL) General Electric Reveal bulbs ( http://www.gelighting.com/na/home_lighting/products/reveal_main.htm ) and Halogen.  No substitutes, please."  

Your reference article is actually a boost for the CFL lamp.

I am afraid your myth is in your own mind.
 
 

The problem, AlTek, is that you're assuming your experiences are universally true.  That's simply not the case.  I've had CFLs in every socket in my house for about 4 years now and haven't had a single one burn out, for example.  Many other peoples' experiences are the same.  Maybe you've been buying poor quality CFLs, but your experiences are far from universal.

Dana, I am assuming nothing. I just described my own experience. I buy my bulbs from American retail chains, HomeDepot, Lowes, Costco. The bulbs do not have any special rating for "quality", therefore I have no easy way to discriminate between brands and types.

My experience maybe not universal, but it is not unique. There are other experiences as well; you do not read even your own blog:

http://www.ecohuddle.com/forum/thread/1930/the-myth-of-the-cfl/0#post_11118

 

Try Google:

http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&q=cfl+bulbs+short+life

From this search:

 

http://community.stretcher.com/forums/t/11046.aspx

 

http://www.amazon.com/DIMMABLE-Compact-Fluorescent-Light-ULAmerica/product-reviews/B000NQ1RR6/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_1?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar

 

http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3433

 

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21733203-Life-span-of-CFL-bulbs

 

http://forum.doityourself.com/lighting-light-fixtures-ceiling-exhaust-fans/407621-im-never-buying-cfl-bulbs-again.html

 

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070909083534AAupNXk

 

 

http://www.bestlightbulbs.com/default.asp

“Many cheap light bulbs burn-out within short time after installation or do not light at all. To avoid such issues we test all light bulbs before shipping. Also BestLightBulbs.com is the first to provide unlimited 12 months warranty for our compact fluorescent light bulbs”

 

 

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/why-efficient-light-bulbs-fail-to-thrive/

“The third big one is product longevity. Consumers have an expectation that compact fluorescents will last a very long time — significantly longer than the incandescents that they’re replacing. This is technically achievable. Compact fluorescents can last a very long time. Unfortunately, I think we’ve compromised greatly on quality with many compact fluorescents and these things are not lasting quite as long as consumers have been led to believe. This is an issue.”

It is denial to maintain that there is no issue with short life of compact CFL bulbs.

AlTekhasski - Everyone is entitled to their own opinion! You have yours, have made a point of it and nothing is going to change your mind.

The value of links and information in a post depends on quality of the information. You can find far more garbage information on the net than good - often what is good information is misunderstood and/or misused. 

One of the real problems with the net is that like the TV, whatever people see on it becomes true and factual information. I often complain about green bloggers refering to another green site to provide backup for a story. Who is to say the first site had it right! Whether for the net or print there is no substitute in journalism for research or the 4 W's and the H (who, what, when, where & how).

Posting a series of links is not reasearch or knowledge. As I pointed out your previous post had a link (the only link) praising GE Reveal CFL lamps.

If you buy Ching-Ling bulbs (or for that matter Good Old Boy Bob's) from Costco on special that one is thing - If you buy a name brand (GE, Sylvania, Philips for example) that is another. Don't just buy the cheapest!  

Denial is another cute word - like closure! Cute word of the times that means nothing but the user is proud that they know it - they don't even have to understand it - just use it and be cool.

The incandescent of year 2000 is dead, Improved incandescents are coming. The CFL is a good step on the way to improved & efficient lighting and is improving all the time. The LED's are another big step - their time is only now arriving. 
Edited by Russ - 11/27/09 at 10:35pm

Russ, you stated
"Mountain's Canadian problem is one thing - I don't know if CFL's are being totally stopped there or not. In the US they are NOT! "
Reply : It's incandecents that will be banned, and the problem is the market is presently flooded by generally low-Q CFLs, which are not a good replacement at all.

"The heat from an incandescent bulb released is near the ceiling and only part of the heat is considered for credit in the heating of a house. Different studies seem to allow for different percentages of the heat to be given credit as useful heat in the home. At best it is a lousy way to heat the home"
Reply : My statement was made in the contect of large multi-dwelling units & commercial buildings. Never suggested using incandecents as a heating source. The point was to illistrate the mistaken assumption that heat from any bulb is wasted energy. It is definately not.

My workplace is a ski area with 2500 hotel rooms, and lots of commercial space. I am the head electrician & electric utility manager. The experiences thus far with CFLs have been often quite poor. Many CFLs can't handle high electrical harmonic content (typical at many ski-hills), short life, work poorly in cold areas etc. The list of problems is long & the value is often not good. Where fluorescent lighting is suitable it's already in place (generally quality T8 stuff). The requirement for dimming is significant. (Restaraunts & retail)

At home I bought quality CFLs from my electrical supplier when I built my house 3 years ago. I've had only one burn out. Quality CFLs from reputable dealers aren't the problem.

M

Sorry - meant to say incandescents are not being stopped in the US. For once the guys in Washington did something right - surprise!

I suppose a big part of the problem with the ski area is less stable power due to being end of the line with big on/off consumers (lift motors for one)? I expect there may be more problems with electronics in general?

In a large multi-floor building the heat from a lamp would be maintained within the structure better and therefore be of more use - agreed. 

Your last statement is very important - buy quality brands and not the cheapest available.

In a resort such as yours the cost of changing lamps must be significant in itself.