Energy-saving bulbs

[Dave B]

:idea:

:!: Warning: rant ahead....

I'm all for a bit of energy saving, and pretty much every bulb in the house is an energy-saving jobby. But yesterday I wanted to buy a replacement for a reading light which doesn't take a standard fitting.

Energy saving bulb: £2.40 each.
Normal filament bulb: £0.44 for a pack of 2.

So guess which one I bought? Yup, my replacement bulb may use 60w instead of 11w, but even if I left it on for months at a time I reckon I'd still be better off.

I appreciate it's a non-standard bulb, but why such a price difference? Bearing in mind I paid less than a quid each for some really good quality low-energy bulbs for my ceiling lights? :s

The government announced recently that they're phasing out inefficient bulbs, beginning with 150w ones, but there's no massive incentive on the consumer to switch.

</rant> :p

[Mark]

Of course all they will do is put £2.18 tax on each normal bulb.

[BDunnell]

I save energy with regard to light bulbs through not buying any and living in complete darkness, save the light produced by my burning effigies of Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Littlejohn.

[Flat.tyres]

I bought an energy saving bulb and a shade a couple of months ago. Had to take the bulb back because it didn't fit in the shade and buy a normal one.

They look ugly too.

What's with the little halogen ones. Are they OK?

[Daniel]

I bought an energy saving bulb and a shade a couple of months ago. Had to take the bulb back because it didn't fit in the shade and buy a normal one.

They look ugly too.

What's with the little halogen ones. Are they OK?
Halogen lights aren't really that much more efficient. The light is just more "white" and more like daylight. What you really want is an LED bulb for your halogen light fitting. Much much more efficient and that's very much the way lighting is going to go in a few years.

[tinchote]

I bought an energy saving bulb and a shade a couple of months ago. Had to take the bulb back because it didn't fit in the shade and buy a normal one.


Same here. The new bulbs seem to come only in the standard fitting (E26). Then, at home, with very few exceptions all bulbs are smaller than that. Net result: we'll only switch to energy saving bulbs when it becomes mandatory, and it will makes us lose money :rolleyes:

And even without that, they are so much expensive than the standard bulbs that it is hard to believe that it will save us any money.

The problem here is that people waste so much energy that any change like that (mandatory energy saving bulbs) will reduce energy; which is good, but it is annoying that if you are already an energy conscious person, you end up losing. For example, the government here subsidizes programmable thermostats as a way to reduce gas consumption. When we finally bought one (with the promise of about 30% savings), the default programming of the thing increased our consumption by 50% :eek: It's not that the thing was badly programmed, it's only that people here waste so much heating, that the default setting will reduce the waste of the average home.

[Daniel]

Tinchote I don't know what it's like in Canada but in the US some or all of the energy saving bulbs have MERCURY in them. Yeah lets put a dangerous substance in something that's likely to be dropped and possibly broken :rolleyes:

[rah]

Changed all ours that can be changed to CF lights. After we moved into the house we replaced all the light fittings with newer ones that would take CF lights.
As for the cost of the CF bulbs, we got them free from our energy company. In fact the missus developed an addiction and kept on going back for more. Now we have enough to last a fair few years.

[BDunnell]

Changed all ours that can be changed to CF lights. After we moved into the house we replaced all the light fittings with newer ones that would take CF lights.
As for the cost of the CF bulbs, we got them free from our energy company. In fact the missus developed an addiction and kept on going back for more. Now we have enough to last a fair few years.

The image of a cupboard full of nothing but light bulbs is quite a nice one!

[Daniel]

The image of a cupboard full of nothing but light bulbs is quite a nice one!
Yes it certainly gets me going :mark: :p :

[Daniel]

Changed all ours that can be changed to CF lights. After we moved into the house we replaced all the light fittings with newer ones that would take CF lights.
As for the cost of the CF bulbs, we got them free from our energy company. In fact the missus developed an addiction and kept on going back for more. Now we have enough to last a fair few years.
Just hope you don't have a cupboard full of Mercury :p

[schmenke]

... the government here subsidizes programmable thermostats ...

Only in Saskatchewan?
Must look into that. I installed a programmable thermostat a couple of years ago (~$70.00 :s hock: ). Of course I'll be darned if I can find the receipt now :dozey: .

As for the energy-saving bulbs... no thanks. Until the price is reduced drastically, I'll stick to the normal incandescant jobbies.

[Daniel]

Only in Saskatchewan?
Must look into that. I installed a programmable thermostat a couple of years ago (~$70.00 :s hock: ). Of course I'll be darned if I can find the receipt now :dozey: .

As for the energy-saving bulbs... no thanks. Until the price is reduced drastically, I'll stick to the normal incandescant jobbies.
But energy saving bulbs typically only use 1/5th of the power a typical incandescent bulb plus they don't die as quickly. You'll more than make up for the extra cost soon enough and you won't have to replace those pesky light bulbs so often!!!!!

[BDunnell]

I think the cost is bound to come down pretty quickly anyway, once energy-saving bulbs become more 'normal'.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I find the energy efficient flouresents not as bright, I don't like their price and that said, I don't think they are a horrible thing, but the old tried and true is no real issue if you only have one on in the room you are in. How much power is really being saved if you only turn lights on for the rooms you are actually in? You know, be logical about your lighting choices. A Toaster burns more power in 5 mins than if you leave a light on all day. Much of this nonsense is just bullscat to fool the general public into thinking they are accomplishing something while the guy making the overpriced flourescents makes more money with a technology that wasn't cutting it before the Green scare.

As for LED lights, I have an LED wind up lantern that I bought for camping up north at the in-law's trailer camp. First day I had it, wound it up, went out into the dark...and realized LED lights don't toss a good light. It has to be really directed in ONE direction or it is so dull to be almost useless. LED's are just not very good at tossing large amounts of light where you need it unless they are directed. They are really dim for area lighting. They may be useful in some applications, but I think they are a little ways off. That said, they are the future I think for lighting of halls and the like. I just would like to see a little more honesty in the cost/benefits analysis of these lighting choices. The "energy savers" I think have many costs such as the mercury issue that are being ignored...to our peril. That is ok though, the "Green" elites are telling us they know what is best....even a blind squirrel can get lucky and find a few nuts...just not this time.

[Daniel]

That's why LED lights have different angles (as do halogen lights) at which they throw light given the reflector design and arrangement of the LED's. I have a Maglite with an LED in it and it's no different to how the incandescent bulb would throw light out. Also CF's WILL be darker when switched on. It needs to warm up at which stage it'll give the same or as near to the same amount of light out :)

[schmenke]

I find the energy efficient flouresents not as bright, I don't like their price and that said, I don't think they are a horrible thing, but the old tried and true is no real issue if you only have one on in the room you are in. How much power is really being saved if you only turn lights on for the rooms you are actually in? You know, be logical about your lighting choices. A Toaster burns more power in 5 mins than if you leave a light on all day. Much of this nonsense is just bullscat to fool the general public into thinking they are accomplishing something while the guy making the overpriced flourescents makes more money with a technology that wasn't cutting it before the Green scare....

I agree. Light bulbs are one of the least energy-consuming devices in my home, so I really don't see a significant environmental saving by switching to to CF bulbs. Until prices are reduced I'm not going to bother :mark:

[Drew]

Didn't I hear they are planning on banning the normal lightbulbs soon?

False economy there, perhaps? Cheap bulbs that use more electricity that then cost more money?

[Mark]

Didn't I hear they are planning on banning the normal lightbulbs soon?

Not for many years and only in phases.

[Dave B]

Not that many years: 150w bulbs by January '08, 100w by Jan '09, and 40w by Jan 2010.

[schmenke]

I don't think I've ever seen a 150W bulb :mark: .
The largest I've seen is 100W.

[Daniel]

Not that many years: 150w bulbs by January '08, 100w by Jan '09, and 40w by Jan 2010.
Noobish question but does this affect cars? I've ordered some 100w bulbs for my chariot. Will I have to put energy saving bulbs in it when they go? :p

[Dave B]

No it won't affect your car, but it will be illegal to leave it on standby overnight.

[janneppi]

Better yet, buy an Audi and get LED's, I saw an A5 on Saturday and it's lights looked rather cool.

[Daniel]

No it won't affect your car, but it will be illegal to leave it on standby overnight.
Doesn't affect me. I bought one of those standy saver things for it.

[Daniel]

Better yet, buy an Audi and get LED's, I saw an A5 on Saturday and it's lights looked rather cool.
I think the R8's have the same lights?

[BDunnell]

Better yet, buy an Audi and get LED's, I saw an A5 on Saturday and it's lights looked rather cool.

Here's the answer, then — buy an Audi A5 and shine its lights into your living room.

[Daniel]

Here's the answer, then — buy an Audi A5 and shine its lights into your living room.
As long as it's not a 4wd one. Evil evil evil!

[BDunnell]

As long as it's not a 4wd one. Evil evil evil!

Quite. I find extra traction highly offensive.

[oily oaf]

The image of a cupboard full of nothing but light bulbs is quite a nice one!

I'd get down to The Tate Modern with that one Mr D.
They go a bundle on that type of dualist conception art down there squire
But don't fall down that bloody great crack in the floor for Gawd's sake :(

[Dave B]

I read a headline in the week about the Tate having a giant hole, and thought to myself that the new series of Doctor Who was about to take a turn for the worse.... :s

:p

[jim mcglinchey]

Has nobody mentioned the fact that the energy saving bulbs take a minute or two to warm up, so they're a bit of a nerk in the toilet/ WC/ lavvy whatever you like to call it.

[oily oaf]

I read a headline in the week about the Tate having a giant hole, and thought to myself that the new series of Doctor Who was about to take a turn for the worse.... :s

:p

I wouldn't mind Dave but my pal Gus dived in there for a crafty nipsy last week and the curator offered him 10 grand if he didn't pull the chain.
Next thing he knew Tracey Eminn had claimed it as one of her own and named it "Floater In Torment" :(

[oily oaf]

Has nobody mentioned the fact that the energy saving bulbs take a minute or two to warm up, so they're a bit of a nerk in the toilet/ WC/ lavvy whatever you like to call it.

Chodbin. FACT!

[Drew]

Has nobody mentioned the fact that the energy saving bulbs take a minute or two to warm up, so they're a bit of a nerk in the toilet/ WC/ lavvy whatever you like to call it.

Yes, that's true. And also my gran couldn't watch her TV when there was an energy efficient light bulb in the same room. I refused to believe that at first, but it was really true. I've never understood why :confused:

[Dave B]

Has nobody mentioned the fact that the energy saving bulbs take a minute or two to warm up, so they're a bit of a nerk in the toilet/ WC/ lavvy whatever you like to call it.
All of mine are at full brightness within less than a second. I think some of the older designs used to suffer like that, but no more.

[Daniel]

Jim. I mentioned it :) Ours probably take about 20 seconds to get properly warmed. Small price to pay for paying less for lighting!

[Hondo]

In my experience, they don't last as long as a regular bulb and cost about 4 times as much. you can keep them.

[Crypt]

They save money and energy, until one breaks and you shell out a couple grand to have the mercury cleaned up.

[veeten]

Here's some help to find out about "energy saver" Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL's). :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp

btw, 15+ years Electrician here, and has several of them in my house. :)

[Dave B]

They save money and energy, until one breaks and you shell out a couple grand to have the mercury cleaned up.
My hoover cost less than £300 and cleans up all manner of stuff. Normal flourescent tubes have had mercury for decades, and nobody's complained. Even if you ate an entire energy-saving bulb you wouldn't ingest enough mercury to harm you.

[schmenke]

...Even if you ate an entire energy-saving bulb you wouldn't ingest enough mercury to harm you.

But would your teeth be brighter?

[veeten]

... not to mention that retailers like IKEA, Home Depot and other hardware/home centres are accepting them for recycling when they expire.

It's not a bad deal. :)

[Drew]

My hoover cost less than £300 and cleans up all manner of stuff. Normal flourescent tubes have had mercury for decades, and nobody's complained. Even if you ate an entire energy-saving bulb you wouldn't ingest enough mercury to harm you.

Hang on, you spent somewhere around £300 on a hoover and you're moaning about a few extra quid for lightbulbs?

Am I missing something here? :p :

[airshifter]

I don't think I've ever seen a 150W bulb :mark: .
The largest I've seen is 100W.

Here anything with wattage higher than 100W is usually an industrial type bulb, with clear glass and often larger in size. The one I have in the garage is 150W IIRC.

[Crypt]

My hoover cost less than £300 and cleans up all manner of stuff. Normal flourescent tubes have had mercury for decades, and nobody's complained. Even if you ate an entire energy-saving bulb you wouldn't ingest enough mercury to harm you.

I read an article a year or so ago about a women in the states who had one of these bulbs break and had to have a pro clean it up. Anyways, there is a good argument for the increase of these bulbs and what they are doing overall when just thrown away as oppossed to being recycled.

http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSN2744810520070328?pageNumber=4

[BDunnell]

My hoover cost less than £300 and cleans up all manner of stuff. Normal flourescent tubes have had mercury for decades, and nobody's complained. Even if you ate an entire energy-saving bulb you wouldn't ingest enough mercury to harm you.

Thanks. I was wondering what to have for tea tomorrow.

[tinchote]

Only in Saskatchewan?
Must look into that. I installed a programmable thermostat a couple of years ago (~$70.00 :s hock: ). Of course I'll be darned if I can find the receipt now :dozey: .


Only in SK... that's why people from Calgary and Edmonton are moving here ;) :p :

It was (is?) a program from Saskenegy.


As for the energy-saving bulbs... no thanks. Until the price is reduced drastically, I'll stick to the normal incandescant jobbies.


But energy saving bulbs typically only use 1/5th of the power a typical incandescent bulb plus they don't die as quickly. You'll more than make up for the extra cost soon enough and you won't have to replace those pesky light bulbs so often!!!!!

I agree with schmenke. Our power consumption is mostly given by the oven, the fridge, the range, the washer, the drier, the computers, the tv, the stereo, the microwave and the furnaces (plus the toaster, the coffee maker, etc.). After all that, I don't think that a big percentage of our consumption is given by bulbs.

A 60W bulb uses 1MW-h every 16 hours more or less. The cost here for 1MW-h is roughly 1 cent. That means that if the bulb stays on 2 hours a day, it costs me around 4 cents a month. The equivalent ES bulb will consume about 1 cent a month. So the difference is 3 cents/month. The difference in cost between the two is (being optimistic) about $2 to $.50. So I need to offset $1.5 at 3 cents/month: that is, 50 months=4 years. I know that probably neither bulb will last four years. But then, at home there are many lights which are on way less that 2 hours/day in average, and many others which are less than 60W. And the regular bulbs last certainly more than one year. In fact, we bought the house more than three years ago, and still many bulbs we have never changed.

And all that, without factoring that I would need to change most of the fittings in the house. It will probably take me decades to offset the cost.

(Edit: I did a quick calculation here (http://www.saskpower.com/calculator/residential), and the "non-bulb" electricity consumption at home seems to account for more than 70% of our bill. That means that are bulb electricity consumption is on the order $20/month. If we change all the bulbs (at what cost?) we could reduce that to $5 a month, at most).

[Mark]

$15 a month saving. That sounds pretty good to me. And the bulbs should last way longer than 4 years. One of ours has been going for 20ish.

[veeten]

I agree with schmenke. Our power consumption is mostly given by the oven, the fridge, the range, the washer, the drier, the computers, the tv, the stereo, the microwave and the furnaces (plus the toaster, the coffee maker, etc.). After all that, I don't think that a big percentage of our consumption is given by bulbs.

And all that, without factoring that I would need to change most of the fittings in the house. It will probably take me decades to offset the cost.

(Edit: I did a quick calculation here (http://www.saskpower.com/calculator/residential), and the "non-bulb" electricity consumption at home seems to account for more than 70% of our bill. That means that are bulb electricity consumption is on the order $20/month. If we change all the bulbs (at what cost?) we could reduce that to $5 a month, at most).

... sort of makes you want to take a long look at all of the other appliances in your house, just to see if you can find more efficient versions of them that will reduce your overall bill. That $5 return can be looked at as a start point.

and remember, the only appliance in that group that runs on a constant basis, 24/7/52, is the fridge.

[tinchote]

$15 a month saving. That sounds pretty good to me. And the bulbs should last way longer than 4 years. One of ours has been going for 20ish.

Mark, that's before offsetting the cost of buying all the new bulbs and their fittings. For the whole house that's surely above $300 (of course, this if I change them all myself). And that's assuming that the estimates from the electric company about my appliances consumption are ok: if anyone of them uses more, then difference could be less. I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to switch to ES: all I'm saying is that it doesn't sound too tempting.


... sort of makes you want to take a long look at all of the other appliances in your house, just to see if you can find more efficient versions of them that will reduce your overall bill. That $5 return can be looked at as a start point.

and remember, the only appliance in that group that runs on a constant basis, 24/7/52, is the fridge.

If I have to change an appliance, I will certainly try and look for a more efficient one. Now, spending thousands of dollars in replacing everything doesn't sound like a very interesting investment. I have the same situation with the furnaces: if I replace them with more efficient ones, it will take me at least 20 years to recover the investment.

As for the fridge, mine is using about $3 a month. How much more efficient than that can you get?

[rah]

Why do you have to change the fittings? Is it the bulbs are too large?

[rah]

Just hope you don't have a cupboard full of Mercury :p
The mercury issue is a non issue. It does not contain anywhere near enough to do damage. Otherwise we would all have it anyway from standard flouro lights.

[tinchote]

Why do you have to change the fittings? Is it the bulbs are too large?

no, it's the opposite. Almost every bulb at home has a very small fitting (probably E12, I didn't really check). All of the ES bulbs I've seen for sale have an E26 fitting.

[rah]

no, it's the opposite. Almost every bulb at home has a very small fitting (probably E12, I didn't really check). All of the ES bulbs I've seen for sale have an E26 fitting.

Ah, fair enough, that would make it more difficult. I have only seen the standard size here. But we only have 2 of the smaller fittings in the house.

[Mark]

Energy saving bulbs are usually bigger than their incandescent counterparts. Particularly the ballast, i.e. the plastic white bit on the base which contains all the electronic trickery. The newer ones can be a lot smaller but there are cases where they just won't fit. Our bathroom light for example, there aren't any energy saving bulbs on the market that will fit that.

I've seen pubs where they've put energy saving bulbs into the old fitments and they stick out of the top and look dreadful.

[slinkster]

Aside from the price, I find energy saving light bulbs really pretty dim too. I need good light to work under ( I make models for illustrations) and I find energy saving bulbs pretty useless. :(

[Daniel]

Aside from the price, I find energy saving light bulbs really pretty dim too. I need good light to work under ( I make models for illustrations) and I find energy saving bulbs pretty useless. :(
As has been pointed out they do need to warm up :) Last night Caroline switched our computer room cfl on and it was woefully dim but about 30 seconds later I suspect though of course can't confirm that it was just as bright as the advertised equivalent. Flourescent lights have never been the best work lights anyway.

I'd use something like this

http://www.xytronic.com/np/lamp.htm

Or perhaps look into something that gives something more similar to daylight. If you want to be environmentally friendly and have proper work lighting get an LED light. Produces much better light and it's even more energy efficient than a CFL plus lasts even longer than a CFL. People say the light is blue but they're wrong :p it's just more white than what we're used to.

Seems Caroline was lied to :mark: Not found any evidence to back up the statement that UK CFL's don't have mercury in them. Rah :) I'm not all that bothered about mercury. Was only joking. CFL's are so much stronger than incandescents anyway. But no mercury is better than hardly any of course.

[rah]

Aside from the price, I find energy saving light bulbs really pretty dim too. I need good light to work under ( I make models for illustrations) and I find energy saving bulbs pretty useless. :(

I have a very bright CFL that I use sometimes when I am working on intricate jobs. It is 45W from memory and is very bright. It also has a relatively high colour temp. Got it from a hardware.

[edv]

Schmenke, do what I do and buy your CFs with Canadian Tire Money. lol

[slinkster]

Well thank you Daniel for that very informative response :) I shall bare all that in mind. I do have a daylight bulb but it's not an energy saving one. I'll keep an eye out!

[Daniel]

There's a fairly good writeup on wikipedia about colour temperature :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature

You'd be amazed at how much difference a change in lighting temperature can make. The workshop at the company I used to work at in Australia had quite "warm" (or cold depending on how you judge it) but for simplicity's sake lets say low K lighting and had a few dead tubes. So the workshop manager asked that they all be replaced at the same time and they got replaced with some very high K tubes which as the link below suggests made it look a bit more "High tech" as in what you imagine a large well lit medical research lab would look like if that makes sense. Everything just seemed lighter, cleaner and newer looking simply because of a change in the temperature of the lighting. I'm coming off like an interior designer aren't I? :mark:

http://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/article_view.asp?ArticleID=26

[555-04Q2]

Not an energy saving lightbulb in my house and proud of it. <green peace bite me>

[schmenke]

Schmenke, do what I do and buy your CFs with Canadian Tire Money. lol

Nah, I was gonna use my CT money towards a new set of snow tires :mark:

[CarlMetro]

Surely the whole point of energy saving bulbs is not to save the person money but to use less energy and therefore reduce the demands on energy production plants thus reducing carbon emmisions and greenhouse gases?

I'm gradually replacing all the bulbs in my house with CFL's, not going out purposely to replace them all at once but whenever a bulb goes it gets replaced with a CFL.

The same thing applies when purchasing electrical appliances, energy consumption is an issue for me, not just the cost of the appliance or because it will reduce my bills, because it will reduce my energy consumption and reduce the demand on the National Grid.

It might only be a small thing but if each of us did the same, it might make a bit of difference.

[Daniel]

Surely the whole point of energy saving bulbs is not to save the person money but to use less energy and therefore reduce the demands on energy production plants thus reducing carbon emmisions and greenhouse gases?

I'm gradually replacing all the bulbs in my house with CFL's, not going out purposely to replace them all at once but whenever a bulb goes it gets replaced with a CFL.

The same thing applies when purchasing electrical appliances, energy consumption is an issue for me, not just the cost of the appliance or because it will reduce my bills, because it will reduce my energy consumption and reduce the demand on the National Grid.

It might only be a small thing but if each of us did the same, it might make a bit of difference.
In the end any increase in capacity on the national grid is paid for by the user in the end Carl, so that's a really good way of thinking of it :) In the end we'll all pay for people using less efficient lighting and applicances.

[nicemms]

I have a free energy saving bulb in my room and its useless. They say its as bright as a 60w normal but it isn't. Won't be buying one.

[tinchote]

Surely the whole point of energy saving bulbs is not to save the person money but to use less energy and therefore reduce the demands on energy production plants thus reducing carbon emmisions and greenhouse gases?

I'm gradually replacing all the bulbs in my house with CFL's, not going out purposely to replace them all at once but whenever a bulb goes it gets replaced with a CFL.

The same thing applies when purchasing electrical appliances, energy consumption is an issue for me, not just the cost of the appliance or because it will reduce my bills, because it will reduce my energy consumption and reduce the demand on the National Grid.

It might only be a small thing but if each of us did the same, it might make a bit of difference.


I understand that. Now, since even with our old-fashioned high-energy consumption bulbs and applicances our energy use is less than 50% of everybody else we know here, I guess we'll stick to the cheap thing ;)

[Hondo]

In most states, public utility companies are guaranteed to make a minimun percent of profit. Should profits fall below that level they can go before the state utility commission and request rate hikes and increase prices.

Not too long ago during one of California's droughts, the local water company urged and begged people to conserve water. They did. Matter of fact, they got so good at it and so fond of their lower water bills that they continued to conserve water after the drought ended. The water company went complaining to the state about their profits being down so far and got the rates almost doubled. Now the good and enraged citizens are paying water bills like they had before the drought, for half the water.

If you want to conserve things because it makes you feel better, by all means do so. If you think you're going to save money by doing it, I wouldn't count on it. Why would any company that increases and protects their profits by selling you more, honestly try to get you to buy less? Anytime I see a situation like that, I look for the rat that's there somewhere.

[fandango]

I'm amazed at how much people have to say about lightbulbs! If you start this thread from the top you're worn out before you're halfway through...

[oily oaf]

I'm amazed at how much people have to say about lightbulbs! If you start this thread from the top you're worn out before you're halfway through...

Next week:

Wearing baggy trousers and it's effect on climate change.
Be there or be square Fanny ;)

[Dave B]

Oh do keep up, oafy oil. Next week's hot topic is obesity - can fat kids be used to plug the hole in the ozone layer? :p

[airshifter]

I understand that. Now, since even with our old-fashioned high-energy consumption bulbs and applicances our energy use is less than 50% of everybody else we know here, I guess we'll stick to the cheap thing ;)


My thoughts exactly. It takes more than a bulb to conserve energy.

If the governments really wanted to do something, they would give incentive for energy efficiency based on use, not gadgets. We got a tax credit for installing new windows, but would have got the credit whether we wasted energy or not.

[Daniel]

very true airshifter. But still energy conservation can only be a good thing.

[airshifter]

very true airshifter. But still energy conservation can only be a good thing.

I was looking at it from the point of view that Tinchote first expressed.

An energy saving bulb is great if not misused, but just as with a car and driving habits, it's often misused. Which is better, a buld that uses half the energy and is on twice as much, or one that uses twice the energy and is on half as much?

I personally think governments should stay out of trivial things like light bulbs, and concern themselves more with the things that waste greater amounts of electricity.

[Mark]

I personally think governments should stay out of trivial things like light bulbs, and concern themselves more with the things that waste greater amounts of electricity.

Agreed. But, it is something we can all do, and it doesn't cost much in the grand scheme of things.