ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (gfretwell), 32 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#163055 04/29/07 11:22 PM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 947
T
twh Offline OP
Member
Here is a criticism of CFLs:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/130307Dimwits.htm
The writer raises some interesting issues:
  • They can't be used in ovens or freezers
  • They need ventilation
  • They require more energy to manufacture
  • They have a short life if switched frequently
  • They don't fit in all fixtures
  • They contain mercury

The Energy Star site does little to dispel some of the concerns:
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=cfls.pr_cfls

How many of these items are going to be a problem?

twh #163194 05/03/07 05:50 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 444
S
Member
Heh, and like most technology, it will evolve and improve. Remember the first computer? The first TV set?

I believe CFL's are the way to go.

Sandro #163203 05/03/07 09:06 PM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 947
T
twh Offline OP
Member
A story about a broken CFL:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268747,00.html

If you break a CFL on the carpet in a bedroom, for the sake of discussion, lets say in the bedroom on your own child, what do you do?

I'm pretty sure that if a customer learned that I broke a CFL and spilled mercury in their child's bedroom, I'd be paying for a professional cleaning, and a probably a hotel bill on top of it.

That's a fairly hefty liability to install a new light fixture.

twh #163226 05/04/07 09:06 AM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 984
Likes: 1
G
Member
Well, first off you have lots of tiny bits of broken glass in a room where bare feet walk around.
Beyind that, I'd vaccuum everything up VERY well and call it good.

The EPA tends to go pretty wacko sometimes...just because you can assign a number that's greater than zero doesn't always mean that there's a problem. I'm sure that when you measure the PCB levels at a site and see that they're 'zero' doesn't mean that a better meter wouldn't find some.
We're gonna end up seeing 1 atom per planet and getting in a fuss about it.

Ask Walmart and Home Depot how they handle it...I'm sure that they get broken CFL lamps in their stores all the time based on the way they handle their stock. I've never seen an EPA tent and moonsuits at a store location.


Ghost307
twh #164606 06/07/07 01:42 AM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 288
Y
Member
Quote
The writer raises some interesting issues:


They can't be used in ovens or freezers
So what? Don't use them in those places. Cars can't be driven underwater, either.

They need ventilation
Some need it more than others. Again, where this is a problem, don't use them, or change out the fixture.

They require more energy to manufacture
I've heard that claimed, and it's probably true, but who can say how much? Let's say its 5x the energy to manufacture an incandescent (I doubt it's that much). The CFL lasts about 10x as long, and use 75% less energy. Do the math.

They have a short life if switched frequently
Define frequently. 2-4 operations per day will make a negligible difference. Motion sensor lights, on the other hand, are not a good application for CFLs.

They don't fit in all fixtures
No, but they do fit in most fixtures.

They contain mercury
Yes, they do, in very tiny amounts. However, in most areas, they actually reduce the mercury released into the environment, since most utilities burn coal, which releases mercury compounds into the air. The average US resident gets 50% of their electricity from coal. This graph shows the reduction. Keep in mind this reduction applies if the spent lamp is thrown in the garbage. If the lamp is recycled (which will become easier in the future), the reduction is even greater.

I consider all of these items but the last to be non-issues. The public needs to know about the mercury, and recycling needs to be made easier, but there is no reason to panic, nor does this mean that CFLs are not a "green" technology.

Also, I do not consider PrisonPlanet to be a credible source of any sort of information whatsoever.

ghost307 #164607 06/07/07 01:55 AM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 288
Y
Member
Originally Posted by ghost307
Beyind that, I'd vaccuum everything up VERY well and call it good.


I wouldn't use a vacuum. This page gives instructions on how to dispose of a broken CFL.

Oh yeah, and don't even get me started on Fox News! (Once again, consider the source.)

yaktx #164647 06/07/07 11:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 33
W
Member
I had a chat with a rep from Sylvania the other day concerning CFL lighting and the new legislation concerning the incandescent light bulb going the way of the Doe Doe bird. It sounds like there will not be a total ban on the incandescent, special light bulbs that can't be readily replaced will still be available ( until there is a viable alternative )

wacked #164651 06/08/07 01:11 AM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 288
Y
Member
I expect that is true.

Some applications where there is currently no good substitute for incandescent/halogen lighting:

Automobile headlamps
Studio photography (although I've had good luck with 3500K CFLs)
Flame-tip chandelier bulbs (Anyone ever see a flame-tip CFL that didn't look like something you can buy in a sex shop?)
Any type of spotlight (at least until LEDs improve in output, efficiency, and price)
Extreme temperatures (LEDs work well in the cold, but not in the oven)

Of course, LEDs will continue to improve, and there are other solid-state lighting technologies on the horizon. Who knows? In ten years, fluorescents may be dead as a dodo.

Last edited by yaktx; 06/08/07 01:12 AM.
yaktx #164878 06/13/07 12:29 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 265
S
Member
Originally Posted by yaktx
Flame-tip chandelier bulbs (Anyone ever see a flame-tip CFL that didn't look like something you can buy in a sex shop?)


LOL! They are pretty ugly. I've never seen them in use in a chandelier but seeing them in the package on the store shelves is enough for me not to recommend them.

As for other applications of CFL's, they do have their place. Some fixtures just don't look right with a CFL in them - for instance one that looks better with a clear bulb in it.


Sixer

"Will it be cheaper if I drill the holes for you?"
Sixer #164895 06/13/07 07:11 PM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 114
E
Member
"They can't be used in ovens or freezers"

"So what? Don't use them in those places. Cars can't be driven underwater, either."

I think the point is if the feel-good politicians ban them entirely, or otherwise resistrict their availability (like with special taxes), we will have a big problem. Routine replacement of CFLs that were installed in the wrong application will be more harmful to the environment, not less. Hopefully this won't happen, but were talking politicians...


"They require more energy to manufacture"

"I've heard that claimed, and it's probably true, but who can say how much? Let's say its 5x the energy to manufacture an incandescent (I doubt it's that much). The CFL lasts about 10x as long, and use 75% less energy. Do the math."

Its more than "probably" true. 10x the energy/pollution would be a good starting estimate. They cost 10 times as much (visit Menards) as incandescents. They are sold in very competitive markets, meaning the cost you pay is a reflection of the materials used and the difficulty in obtaining and/or manufacturing those materials (as opposed to cost being a funtion of some huge mark-up by a monopolist) Cost in a competitive market like this = energy and pollution. More labor results in more pollution as well. An incandescent is mainly glass, a filament, and metal base, and leaded or lead-free solder. All of these are present in the CFL, but in addition you have mercury, capacitors, inductors, diodes, resistors, a printed circuit board, insulated wire, and a plastic shell. These things require energy to produce and their production and disposal results in pollution. This is dirty stuff, and the pollution is real pollution, not just CO2.

Then there is infant mortality. When one bulb out of your four pack of incandescents is "Bad From Stock" or dies shortly after installation, you have not lost much money and the environmental impact is minimal. When one of four CFLs is BFS or dies prematurely the financial and environmental harm is much greater, since you already put many times the cost and pollution up front. The number of components, and the type of parts being used near or beyond their recomended temp ratings is likely to greatly affect CFL life. I'm sure we will see reliable data on typical use lifespan in the near future (rather than open fixture life). Without proof or independent validation, I don't accept the lifespan data provided by any manufacturer as real-world.

Also, accidental breakage is a negative for CFLs. Again, cost and pollution is put up front, so if you break a bulb you have the same cost and enironmental issues as with the Bad From Stock scenario. Not good for CFLs.

All that said, I use several at home. They make sense in many applications. They don't make as much sense in others. I'll decide which which is which, thank you very much Mr government man. I plan on replacing a couple more bulbs with CFLs - dang kids can't seem to turn a switch off when not in use.

The Foxnews story on hazardous cleanup came from here:

http://ellsworthmaine.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7446&Itemid=31

The hazardous cleanup issue was the result of the flourescent breaking over shag carpeting - can't simply sweep it up. Anyway, the negative comments about prisonplanet and Foxnews are ad hominem and are therefore losing arguments in any serious debate. Better to argue the facts.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5