The Truth About Fluorescent Lighting
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2009
by Nancy Daniels
Voice Dynamic
Come 2012, America will begin phasing out incandescent lighting in favor of fluorescent lighting; and, I am disheartened at the brainwashing that has taken hold of the American public in regards to the energy savings that will result from the use of fluorescents. Please understand that I like fluorescent lighting given the right situation. What I am against is the use of it in every single room, in every single situation.
The reason is that it takes a tremendous amount of energy to ‘start' the fluorescent light bulb. The real problem with this type of lighting is that it is an expensive, wasteful choice for short term lighting. Over an extended period of use, however, it is cheaper to run the fluorescent bulb because the amount of energy it uses is much less than the steady running of the incandescent bulb. So, if you plan to study or sew or work on a hobby for a few hours, great choice. But if you turn it on and then turn it off again, you just wasted a lot of money and a lot of energy!
On the health sides of fluorescent lighting,
do you know what happens if you break a bulb? The EPA will tell you to air out the room for a quarter of an hour. Wear gloves. Double-bag the refuse. Use duct tape to lift the residue from a carpet. Don't use a vacuum cleaner, as that will only spread the problem. The next time you vacuum the area, immediately dispose of the vacuum bag. What are the harmful products in the CFLs? Mercury and phosphorus. [What happens if your Lab puppy eats the CFL bulb? Lab pups are known for eating light bulbs as well as everything else. Of course, not to worry. Labs eat everything because they know they can always vomit later! Incidentally, my lab pup ate an incandescent bulb so I speak from experience; but, if she had gotten her paws on a CFL, I don't know if she would have survived!]
Did you know that the radio frequency output of the various types of fluorescent lighting is dangerous to one's health and for some people induces headaches? Because the electronics in the fluorescents produce an RF signal as well as a constant flickering that is unnoticed by the human eye, many people report headaches after long term exposure to this type of lighting.
Fluorescent bulbs will not work in oven or dryers because the heat will damage the electronics and melt the casing which encloses the CFLs. (I plan to stock up on incandescent bulbs because I like seeing inside my dryer and oven!) And, I'd love to know what they plan to do with my refrigerator. I don't like keeping my refrigerator door open for 15 minutes at a time. And how many times do we open the refrigerator every day? Of course, we could just build our refrigerators so that that bulb inside stays on permanently whether the door is open or closed!
As you can see, fluorescent lighting certainly has its good point: over an extended period of time, it will save you money.
But for practical reasons, it is not the answer. Why not try something my mother taught me? When you leave a room, turn off the light and then make it a habit. Add fluorescent lighting to areas in which you will be using light for extended periods of time; but, leave the incandescent bulb alone. We have enough problems in this country. Just wait until you see what happens when we become ‘fluorescentized.'
If Al Gore really wants to save the earth, he should turn off his air conditioning, install fans, and hang his clothes out to dry because our clothes dryers and air conditioners deplete our energy a lot faster than the simple light bulb!
This Article has been viewed 1,314 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More comments"The reason is that it takes a tremendous amount of energy to ‘start' the fluorescent light bulb" -- this isn't true, but it is a very widespread myth...the energy required to "fire-up" a flourescent bulb is equivalent to the amount used about 5 seconds of on time (even less with some of the newer designs, down to about 1 second of on time).If the light is to be off for more than 5 seconds, you're saving energy by turning it off - so unless you're just sat by the switch turning it on and off repeatedly, you're going to be using less energy if you have a fluorescent lamp rather than an incandescent bulb.The reason behind the 15 minute figure is actually to do with the fact that turning the fluorescent lamp on and off can shorten its operational life slightly, meaning you have to pay for a new one sooner.The actual "minimum time" for best economy depends on several factors - cost of the bulb, the cost of electricity etc (if you pay a high rate for your electricity, the time could be reduced to ~5 mins). But each time you have your light on for MORE than 15 mins you're saving money every minute after than compared to the incandescent bulb. Have just one light on for 3 or 4 hours and your savings with a fluorescent lamp will massively outweigh the cost of the few times where you've turned a light on for less than 15 mins.Unless you *regularly* have *most* of your lights on for less than this minimum time you will be saving money overall by using the fluorescent lamps.Unless you turn them on and off more frequently than once per 5 seconds you will be always be saving energy by using the fluorescent lamps.Ben,Thank you for your comment...I really wish you were right; however, the United States Environmental Protection Agency US Dept of Energy has stated that: "Energy Star qualified CFLs provide the greatest savings in fixtures that are on for a substantial amount of time each day. At a minimum, ENERGY STAR recommends installing qualified CFLs in fixtures that are used at least 15 minutes at a time or several hours per day." They further state that the best places to use qualified CFLs are in family and living rooms, kitchens, dining rooms, bedrooms, and outdoors.Incidentally, you can find this information on the energystar (.gov) page. While today, especially, I am not in total agreement with what the government says or does, on this one I tend to think they are right. My question is why this information hasn't had more attention? I like fluorescent lighting; I just don't want it everywhere.Even in that quote they say "at a minimum", as the *biggest* savings (in terms of energy AND money) come from the fixtures that are used at least 15 minutes at a time or used for several hours per day.However, there can be smaller savings (mainly energy, rather than money but sometimes both) on other fixtures as well.I agree that there may still be a place for incandescent bulbs (although probably LED lights would be best in many of those cases), but I don't think it is helpful to repeat the myth about fluorescent lamps using large amounts of power when you turn them on.This myth is confirmed on the energy star page (in the FAQ) that you mentioned:"You may also have heard that CFLs use a lot of energy when turning on and off. While there is a brief surge in energy use when a CFL is turned on, with today's starting technology, that surge usually lasts about a tenth of a second and consumes about as much energy as five seconds of normal operation"Lights that are regularly used for less than 15 minutes (but more than 5-10 seconds) and rarely or never used for much longer durations will cost you slightly more *money* with a fluorescent lamp than with an incandescent bulb, but will still be likely to *save energy*.Ben,Thank you for your comment on a comment. Yes, I read the FAQ; however, if the government recommends placing the CFLs in areas where they will be on for 15 minutes or longer, why are you so intent on the entire replacement of our incandescents? Should I walk into my closet for 10 seconds to grab my shoes (and need light to do so), would it not be wiser to turn on an incandescent bulb in this particular situation?Besides the debate over energy savings (which is not fully resolved because of the additional erergy use required to manufacture CFLs), I personally do not want to surround myself with additional RF emissions, buzzing ballasts, or the potential health hazards of broken CFL bulbs.I've got another one for you Ben...I am a firm believer in recycling; however, do you know how much energy is depleted in the recycling process itself?Sometimes issues are not entirely black and white. (One of the reasons I am not in favor of the extreme left nor the extreme right. Both sides are extreme.) If only we could all see a little gray.I'm not intent on replacing all incandescent bulbs with fluorescent lamps, far from it... I just wanted to set the facts straight about the energy used in powering up a fluorescent lamp, and clarify the differences in savings when looked at in terms of energy or money.
The additional energy required to produce a CFL is offset by its (much) longer lifespan, but I agree about the potential hazards when they break, and also have concerns about their mercury content (which has been significantly reduced in recent years but is still a worry) in terms of safe disposal.
Another concern I have with CFLs is the fact that they give out a small amount of UV, so prolonged exposure can be equivalent to a couple of minutes in the sun. Not a major problem for most people, but certainly worth being aware of!
I agree that incandescent bulbs are still a better choice overall for certain situations, but those situations are ones with minimal light use and so don't really use much energy either way. Even so, incandescent bulbs are extremely inefficient - I think other technologies like LED might be better replacements for them than CFL in certain circumstances...especially in closests and fridges where there's a need for instant light, but only for very short periods.
One other problem with CFL lighting is that, I think, they can cause problems for partially sighted people, due to the delay in reaching full brightness and the diffuse nature of the light they give out.
What a wonderful article, and I have learned things that I didn't know about the fluorescent lighting. Wow, it contains Mercury and phosphorus? I do not like fluorescent lighting that much, it always reminds me of a Chinese Cafe. Bright, containing absolutely no soft hues for that ambiance of atomspheres. I like "soft" lighting, not harsh, and I am with you, I think I will stock up on the regular light bulbs. I found this article, as usual, very educational, and well researched. I look forward to reading more of your work!! Well done. That is why I just became a fan of yours!!!Gary,Thank you so much. I appreciate your kudos and plan on a lot more of the 'opinion' pieces. (Wish I could just write for SearchWarp as I enjoy it so much!) I plan to stock up too, buying cases of incandescents. Without a doubt, an underground system is underway. I can just see what people will be buying on Ebay!Again, my thanks
hi nancy,this was a well written, interesting article with a lot of facts most people are probably not aware of. thanks for keeping us informed,my best regards,sueSue,Thanks for reading this. I appreciate it.
Nancy,Very good article, and helpful as well. Good job! Thanks for sharing it with us.Ronyae,You are welcome and I thank you for reading this article.
Well lot of info and not really sure about the saving of energy.Doris,I'm not really sure what you mean by the saving of energy. Suffice it to say. Use fluuorescent for long term lighting and use the incandescents for brief lighting.Thank you for reading this.
Very interested article. I had no idea this was going to happen. However, I believe both light bulbs will still be around for a long time.Gregory,I'm not taking any chances. I'll be stocking up before 2012.Thanks for reading my article.
Nancy, excellent article. You have a great argument backed up with facts. I never knew many of the details you mentioned.Thanks for making this interesting and informative. :)Peter,I guess we should be thankful they won't be phasing out ovens, a big source of energy for those of us who cook!Thanks for your comment.I second that, Nancy and Peter!Ronyae,Now I know something more about you!Do writers for SearchWarp ever do a big get-together?
Hi Nancy, thanks for this great article. Filled with facts and info I wasn't aware of. I learned something new today :-)
Yes. Let's hear more about issues and products that directly affect the masses. Also, let's suggest more practical ways to save energy, time and resources.
First, I did not read all of the comments. The toxic nature of the CFL, is extremely dangerous to use around children or pets. Our landfills will soon be overcome with extremely high levels of Mercury Poisoning. Also, I am attempting to find the nature of the Phosphors in bulbs. Articles are all over the place as to whether it is phosphorous or a synthetic phosphor. I believe we have at least 2 issues to address Phosphor and Mercury.This is an older article, but tells the TRUTH about the cost of the TOXIC Mercury cleanup. Also, witness the Glenn Beck cleanup video......... and the article in Natural News (com) regarding the cleanup cost of one bulb for a lady in Maine - she has to pay $2,000 for the cleanup.
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.