How do lightbulbs affect Global Warming?

Question

Great Britain is phasing out traditional bulbs in favor of the compact fluorescent ones. Here in the States, I've been seeing places sell these new bulbs, but I don't understand the benefits. Can someone explain?

Answer 1

To my knowledge there are three types of lighting when it comes to energy efficiency for the home, incandescent, compact florescent (CFL), & most recently the light-emitting diode (LED).

The watt per lumen for each type is 15 lumens per watt for the incandescent, 30 lumens per watt for the LED, and a whopping 63 watts per lumen for the CFL.

The life span of each tends to be 750-1000 hrs for the incandescent, 6,000-15,000 hrs for the CFL and about 60,000-100,000 hrs for the LED, however with time LED becomes dimmer making their actual usefulness around 10,000 to 15,000 hrs. These numbers may vary depending on the quality, size of the bulb, as well as the frequency of the on off cycle. For example I have bought dollar store incandescent bulbs that seemed to have expired within only a 100 hrs use. Talk about penny wise pound foolish.

As a side note an advantage of the LED is that they can be turned on and off more often without the ill affect that the CFL suffer or the energy waste of the incandescent and are not subject to heat issues in enclosed places. LED’s may be more suitable for places like closets where one is more likely to turn the light on & then right back off.



As for the matter of heat emissions the incandescent bulb converts approximately 90% of its energy into heat causing them to be vastly less efficient than the CFL which converts about 30%, which is less than 1/3 the amount of the incandescent.  

The qualities of each are low cost low efficiency for the incandescent, very high cost medium efficiency (yet can produce a natural variedty of color) for the LED, & medium cost yet much higher efficiency for the CFL. One criticism of CFL is their embodied energy expenditure in producing them however CFL can save over 2000 times its weight in green house gases making it exponentially more than worthwhile of a trade off.

One seeming drawback to CFL is the mercury contained within. Most are not aware of this but coal plants where most of our electricity comes from also emit mercury. Compared to a 5 year lifespan of a typical CFL the total mercury used is 6.4 mg with 2.4 mg of that coming from the power plant itself. With the incandescent it has a surpassing total of 10 mg coming from the power plant. That is 3.6 mg more than the CFL. And if you take the extra effort and expense to buy low mercury CFL which is about 1mg instead of 4mg per bulb ( put into perspective about this hype old styled thermometers had about 500mg of Mercury) then the hazardous factors are even lower for the CFL than the incandescent lighting..

Now for the million dollar question, how much money can be saved via efficient lighting choices? Well the average Indiana electric cost is 8.22 cents/per kw-hr. If you went out like I have recently buying an equivalent 75 watt CLF that actually only burns 18 watts you would save in energy cost alone $37. That means over the lifetime of this bulb (8,000 hrs or about 7 yrs) you would save over 7 times the cost of the bulb, plus 1002 lbs of CO2.

Factor in the longevity you save even more. To be fair I went to Amazon.com and found the cheapest 75 watt bulbs you could find. They last a wimpy 750 hours and cost 2.31 for a 4 pk. That is about .58 cents a bulb. At 750 hours the CFL last 10.6 times longer. Take 58 cents times $10.6 & you get $6.14. On the same web site you can buy a 75 watt CFL for $2.22. So over the life time of the bulb you almost triple your money back just in the cost of the bulb.

The over all savings in this case I’ve calculated is $40.92. Divide this by the number of years the bulb is expected to last (7) and you get $5.84 a year. That means in the first year alone you’ve already been able to buy back the cost of the incandescent plus saved $3.53.

There should never be a financial reason to buy incandescent bulbs that is unless you are living off the street, in which case I think you have greater worries than environmentally friendly lighting choices.

Think of it, each incandescent you buy you might as well throw in the trash over 40 bucks. Now times this by the number of bulbs you have in your house. In mine I have around 20 not counting my track lightening. That’s a total saving of $818.40. Now couldn’t we all use an extra $818 & save the environment to boot?

I know this from personal experience in that in the last 5 yrs I only had to replace about 3 bulbs. I’m not big into air conditioning so most of my electric is lighting. My June electric payment was $21.31. I don’t know about you but this seems like peanuts to me. I assume this low bill has something to do with my lighting choices. I consider myself proof positive of the results saving my time in having to buy & replace bulbs, quite a bit of money (approximately $818 every 5 yrs), & a clean conscience that I have done my part to minimize my ecological footprint.

Obviously I am way in favor of the CFL though there may be some legitimate applications for the incandescent (i.e. refrigerators & freezers), as well as the LED (i.e. closets & night lights). However the vast amount of your lighting needs can be fulfilled with CFL with all around win win benefits.

In lieu of this information I sincerely hope you will make such lifestyle changes or tweak an already existing one in the pursuit to make more mindful ecological choices. Though this can seem to be never ending process it also has never ending potential for progress.

Answer 2

basicly the new lights use 4-5 times less power and last 10 times longer.

they help prevent global warming by saving power. this prevents CO2 from entering the atmosphere,

Answer 3

If you use a light like the florescent ones, it uses less energy. That means power plants(which mostly use coal to produce energy) dont have to make more power. This means less coal is burned and less carbon dioxide is put into the air. Less carbon dioxide put into air equals less "global warming". Also, since the florescents use less electricity, use them because they lower your electric bill.

Answer 4

Traditional bulbs use more electricity.  Therefore, they cause more pollution due to more oil and coal being burned to generate the electricity.  Some people think it's all a scam to sell more bulbs, you decide :-)

Answer 5

The easiest way to "see" the difference is actually to feel it.  Buy one of the bulbs and put it in a lamp and turn it on.  Also turn a lamp on that has an old-fashioned bulb in it.  Let them warm up and then try to touch them both.  You'll notice that the normal bulb is too hot to touch while you can comfortably wrap your hand around the CFL.  That's because most of the energy burned by a normal bulb is wasted as heat.  Basically, you've got dozens of little heaters all over your house that just happen to also give off light.  CFLs generate the same amount of light but less heat.

Answer 6

Guess what will happen when the UK, EU and/or US get rid of the incndescent bulbs?

Oh, wait, it's already happening.

China, Brazil and other countries who are immune from the Kyoto agreements or have chosen to ignore them will make out like bandits and corner the market. This will, of course, send be a gift to the international companies as they will simply shift even more of their manufacturing to countries who spout much but care little about the environment, energy savings and the like.

Go take a peak at which country is cranking out the big pollution numbers these days. ... and speeding up car manufacturing ... and oil refining ... and coal mining. .... Hint: It's the same people who dumped lead-tainted toys on our kids, poisoned their exported pet foods and grains to hide their low-quality grains, strictly prohibit all international access

Answer 7

The idea is that the old fashioned incandescent bulb uses more energy than the compact fluorescent, and so the old bulbs should be made illegal.

It's completely ridiculous.

How many hippies does it take to change a light bulb?

Just like the black market for old toilets there's a black market for incandescent light bulbs looming ahead. As technology marches on all of our electrical devices are getting more efficient. That's good. And on that list is lighting. Gas discharge lamps, compact fluorescent, LED, and some others are available as alternatives to the old fashioned incandescent light bulb. Compact fluorescents are especially popular as replacements. LEDs are finding their way in compact lighting needs. These newer devices last longer and use less energy than the incandescent bulb. Over time the energy savings and replacement costs will generally save money. As this technology grows the incandescent bulb will become very lonely.

This is good for all of us. For those in a panic over the health of the Earth, these new devices use less energy thus saving fossil fuels and allow energy sources like solar to go farther. For the rest of us, we save money on the electric bill. And who wouldn't want to do that?

However, these new technologies don't work for every situation. There's a number of lighting fixtures in which a CFL will not fit. LED lighting is very expensive when used for equal light output of an incandescent. The initial cost of compact fluorescents is significantly higher. A light used sparingly such as in an attic or closet will not benefit from a compact fluorescent. An incandescent in such an application, costing only pennies to purchase, will last many many years. And fluorescent lighting actually consumes more power compared to incandescents when used for very short time periods. (Fluorescents use a lot of power starting up.) As delicate as the old light bulb is, fluorescents are less durable. They are also less forgiving when it comes to heat, power surges, and shock. A compact fluorescent bulb in enclosed fixtures may fail prematurely, offsetting the long term cost savings. And they aren't available to replace very large or very small outputs. Gas discharge lights are very expensive, noisy, and their colors are not well suited to in-home use. And none of these new technologies is easily dimmed. Dimmable versions are far more expensive.

Yet as supply and demand functions it's likely we'll see the costs come down. But there are still plenty of applications for the old fashioned incandescent light bulb. And that's too damned bad. Soon you won't be able to get them, at least not legally. Why can't our governments just let the natural progression take its course? No, they have to institute light bulb bans. Yup, you heard that right. The incandescent light bulb is being outlawed. Australia has already done this. Incandescent bulbs will no longer available for sale there in 2010. Using an incandescent bulb would be illegal. New Zealand is considering similar measures. Cuba and Venezuela began a plan to phase out their use 2 years ago. The European Union is considering banning their sale as well. The Netherlands is working on their plans to ban the bulbs. In Canada Nova Scotia and Ontario are considering bans. And oh yes, in the USA, at least three States are working towards light bulb bans. Plus, hidden away in the 800 some-odd page Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 signed by President goofball, is a bulb ban to be completed by 2014.

CFLs are great, except for the toxins in them, like mercury. The manufacturing process uses significantly more energy than building incandescents. The neat twisted glass requires more energy to make. They are larger and significantly heavier than their incandescent counterparts. Thus it takes more energy to ship them and you get fewer per truckload. And there's the oil and chemicals involved in the plastic base and the electronic ballast circuitry. Fluorescent lighting can cause headaches and it attacks the immune system. Still, the benefits probably out weigh the drawbacks over the long term.

But what about those situations where the best solution is the old fashioned light bulb? Theater lighting? Inside the clothes dryer? Or how about waiting for the thing to start when you open the refrigerator door? You'll have to buy them on the black market. You see, whenever government bans something people want they create a black market, alcohol, drugs, toilets, the abortion pill, and light bulbs. Good going government, giving in to the environmentalist lobby. You couldn't leave well enough alone. We already have increased use of these new technologies in more applications than ever. But you had to step in with more silly unnecessary laws. I recommend compact fluorescents. There's one here in my desk lamp. But they're not for every application. For example, they perform very poorly in extreme cold, hint hint Canada.

When you have something that works, something the public wants, and supports, you don't need legislation. What are they going to ban next? Rock and roll? (uh oh, better not say that too loudly)