Via Glenn Reynolds, Life with fluorescent bulbs.
The reason I linked this is that my wife and I have compact fluorescent bulbs in the ceiling fan fixture in our living room. We installed them because the fan is very high up – it was a pain to get the ladder out all the time to change incandescent bulbs.
Well, a few days ago one of the bulbs blew out. (Not anywhere near the promised lifespan, mind you. It had been up there less than one year.) So today we got a new bulb.
When we screwed it in and flipped the switch, it began making a loud buzzing sound. It flickered – looking a lot like the Joe Versus the Volcano clip. Then it settled out and worked.
A couple of hours later, the bulb began to buzz again and the light flickered. A lot. I got the ladder back out and swapped it out for another from the package we had bought. That one appears to be working right now.
What does this all have to do with the great scheme of things? Not much. But I also don’t think the CF bulb is going to save the planet.
I had a CF bulb in the hallway – five years on the label – that lasted ten minutes. I hope the planet is grateful that I haven’t changed the light bulb since and left the light off.
I am still experiencing about a 20% failure rate with CFL bulbs failing shortly after installation. I still like them. I have brighter bulbs pulling the same wattage as conventional bulbs and that makes the house brighter and makes it easier to read. The remaining 80% seem to be working OK.
I take it the “Billion Mercury Bulbs in America” camapign was such a bright idea.
Neither will be the over-priced electric golf-carts known as Smart Cars.
Sorry, after his bird flu scare and the incessant fear of his own mortality I don’t take the Insta-guy seriously.
He’s a Law Professor, the most crazy insane of all professions fercryinoutloud.
The Crabitat is so much better than that tenured-blog.
Same thing happened to me. So I called the company, name and ph. no. on the package, and they sent me a new bulb.
I have experienced about the same 20% failure rate as feeblemind. I’m not quite as sanguine about it, however, as the darn things cost so much more than incandescent bulbs that even a single failure is equivalent to the failure of several incandescents, financially. And I have never had that high a failure rate with incandescents – probably less than 1%. Either there is some problem with the CFL bulbs or their quality control sucks and they don’t care because they are the the cat’s meow with the government and conservationists so they figure the failure rate doesn’t matter.
Forcing us all to use those things presents no ideological problem for control-crazed, centralization-happy Democrats. It should, however, have been a flashing light (heh) for Republicans. That it was not certainly shows the depths of ideological corruption to which the Republican Party has fallen.
my electric company sent me two at the end of last year (but that is another story entirely), so i put one in the light that used the most. it blew out in less that two weeks. i threw the other bulb away as well.
what a waste of everything involved with this bulb
I have a lot of CFLs in our house and for the most part like them. However, I agree with the other commenters that most of them don’t last anywhere near as long as their supporters claim. They burn out at about the same rate as the incandescent bulbs do in my experience.
Where are your CFLs made? Mine are all from China, which seems to not care about quality control of anything it exports (unless a big stink is raised).
You should read the fine print on the package and see if your use matches the warranty.
Mostly I do not like the quality of light from them; but I have gotten used to it, sort of…
“have been a flashing light (heh) for Republicans. That it was not certainly shows the depths of ideological corruption to which the Republican Party has fallen.”
Perhaps you might wish to revisit the Congressional records which showed numerous Republicans condemning the stupid “Mercury Light Bulb Act”.
I would say that Centrists are responsible for helping the Progressive Left impose all those draconian Luddite environmental laws.
The Center is not as Moderate a position as Moderates have convinced themselves to be.
Go after the Centrist for a while because they’re more Left in their actions than are their words of middle-of-the-road moderate; the moderate position is based more on the fear of being perceived uncool than based on any reasonable and sane position.
Take a look at what the EPA recommends for clean up of a broken CFL in the home. Then take a look at what this same EPA says about the toxicity of Mercury itself. The environmental fascists are creating a toxic nightmare in the name of saving the planet.
syn, you are right, of course. If you mean what I think, then the people the MSM call “moderate Republicans” all should be prosecuted foe false advertising, since they are mislabeled Democrats.
If you swap out a CFL for an incan bulb, the light I see is only a dull glow, not enough to read, let alone use a sharp knife in the kitchen. I’ve spoken with a lot of elder folk who have the same problem with CFL bulbs — guess it’s the wavelength of the light?
A friend of mine who is a mercury specialist with the govt says those bulbs are naaasty if/when they break!
Not only are they naaasty, they are, in many states, classified as hazmats, and require special disposal. The ordinary trashcan is not appropriate. Please consult your local enviro-people to find out how much THAT will cost you. Imagine the dump, or the ocean, full of all that mercury! Three headed fish and all that. Stop eating canned tuna NOW. Short sighted enviro-wackoids. (Believe me, in a very few years, it’s going to be another government made nightmare…) I am stocked up on incan bulbs that I keep off when I am out of the room, thank you very much. Besides, “flourescents over forty” is baaad for how your wrinkles look.
Even some Europeans are having second thoughts about CFLs. The following is a copy and paste from SPIEGEL ONLINE article titled “Are Fluorescents Really the Way to Go”
Potentially even more concerning, an environmentally oriented German consumer protection magazine in October came to the conclusion that some of the energy-efficient bulbs on the market are hardly better than their incandescent counterparts. According to the controversial study by Öko Test, many of the bulbs tested take at least a minute before they reach their optimal brightness and many of their lifespans are much shorter than indicated by the manufacturers. Furthermore, they are prone to high-frequency flickering, leading to headaches and other complaints, though no concrete proof was offered for this claim.
The test was blasted by environmental groups and by bulb manufacturers. Still, many are asking that CFLs be more closely examined and that issues related to their disposal be addressed.
Furthermore, consumers will have to become much savvier about the energy-efficient lamps now on the market. According to the Öko Test result, one of the most expensive bulbs on the market, the Swiss Lights Classic 68, not only burns out quicker than promised, but it also uses more energy than it is supposed to. Indeed, compared to a traditional 60 Watt bulb, the energy-saving lamp uses 14 percent more energy.
How did I get two posts? Sorry about that…
I deleted the duplicate – no clue as to how it happened.