I bought a bunch of those energy saving light bulbs but they didn't lower my electric bill and they didn't

Question

last the 5 years as the packages said. So why should I spend extra maoney to add mecury in my home and not save any energy?

Answer 1

I replaced all of our incandescents in 2004 and I have replaced one so far.

In winter I do not see much of an energy saving, but in summer I do observe a good reduction in electrical usage. However, I could be bundling into my billing changes that come from replacing older appliances with energy star appliances.

I am using the cheap China made curly bulbs, and they appear to be very satisfactory.

Answer 2

check your kwatt hr cost. mine is up 20%. You should be happy you had the foresite to get the bulbs when you did. also dont for get its SUMMER most of us are using more electricity.

Answer 3

You're getting more mercury from the coal burned to power the higher wattage bulb, and that mercury is in the air you breathe and the food you eat, not trapped safely in a glass tube.

Most of your electricity bill probably comes from appliances, so small variations on loads of laundry, dishwasher, and the fan in your furnace for heating and cooling are major components.  If you bought electronics (big screen TV, home theater system, computers) that could be a factor as well.

Answer 4

Those light bulbs do not save people money. There is no reason to buy them until there is an obvious cost benefit.

Answer 5

You're only adding the mercury to your home if you break the bulbs.  If they didn't meet the manufacturer's promise, return them.

Answer 6

Your experience is pretty much unique.

The obvious answer is that you must be using other things to use more energy.  You can't replace a 75 watt bulb with a 20 watt bulb, and not save energy.

For all the people concerned about the tiny amount of mercury.  Have you removed every fluorescent light bulb from your house (including the one you're likely staring at right now)?  The long ones contain MORE mercury and are a lot easier to break.

Answer 7

rabble, rabble, rabble!

Answer 8

Two facts I quickly discovered - the CFLs didn't even last as long as the Edison lamps, warranty notwithstanding.  I actually write the date put into service with a felt pen to track their lifespan.

Second fact - went to a recycling center who charged me $2 for *each* lamp to dispose them properly.

I dont have the means to find out if they actually save power usage because there are so many other devices I have at home.

Bottom line - this product is the definition of "greenwash".

Edit: fine print on manufacturer's warranty - need to mail back the CFL to the manufacturer.  Guess how much that costs.

Answer 9

BECAUSE!!!! Comrades want you to.

Answer 10

If your electric bill wasn't lowered, all that means is that you consumed more than normal amounts of electricity somewhere else.  It's a fact that the CFL uses less electricity than an incandescent bulb.  

For example:

If you replace 20 100-watt incandescent light bulbs with 22-watt CFL's. You drop from 2000 watts of electricity per hour to 440 watts.  If each light averaged 4-hours on-time daily, that would mean (for 1 year):

4 x 2000 x 365 = 2920 kwh

4 x 440 x 365 = 642 kwh

The average kwh cost in the US is around $0.10.  So you'd save:

2920 x $0.10 = $292.00

642 x $0.10 = $64.20

292 - 64.20 = $227.80

20 22-watt CFL's cost about $40.  So even if the bulbs only last 1 year, you're still ahead by almost $200.

Answer 11

Boy are you gullible.

Answer 12

I can tell you that almost every light inside my business location are "energy" savers-- they give off 60 watts of light for 14 watts of power-- and some of them have been burning 14 hours a day for 6 years now.

About $3.50 at Wal Mart for 2 bulbs--

EDIt-- come-on now-- you are not going to let a little mercury stop you from saving money-- are you? You know when I was young everyone used to drink from a water hose outside! and no one actually died!   :)  AND there were no "date codes" on any food products-- if it smelled bad you threw it away!   :)

Answer 13

I hear you.

I fell for the same scam.

Kilowatt's per hour usage is no lower

and all the ones I've used only last

about 6 months!!

Yeah...'five years' my Irisharse!

Answer 14

well have you tried turning them off?

haha/

Answer 15

Very true.  It's not the only thing proposed by our government and media that costs more and actually ruins the environment.  There will be a lot more to come.

I wish they made bulbs like they used to (but those are not profitable).

http://www.nbc11.com/news/16174940/detai...

Edit: Bob--isn't that why we shouldn't start making every bulb into a fluorescent bulb (because it will increase the problem)?  Mercury is one of the most toxic elements--second only to plutonium!

Answer 16

Wow, I am suprised. I bought one for every single light bulb and I bet it was at least 20 dollars less a month. Ours say they last 8 years and had the pg&e sign on them. Did yours?

Answer 17

The AGW proponents are LIARS.    They claimed all along that it was not just a pretext for more government control over our daily lives and more taxes - - - and what are they doing?    Dictating what kind of lightbulbs we'll be able to use and proposing a mandatory carbon credit system.