Are energy saving bulbs actually environmentally friendly?

Question

They say that energy saving bulbs (like the ones you can buy everywhere now - with small flourescent tubes) consume less than 20% of the power of normal bulbs. This is great from an environmental point of view - apparently. But doesnt anyone ever stop to think about the energy processes gone into making them? The chemicals used and the resources needed to manufacture them? Surely making a PCB, assembling the components, manufacturing the tubes, coating them with phosphor etc. etc. is far more damaging to the environment than using a spherical blown bulb with a bit of tungsten in it? I'd like to do some research into this to find out exactly how much energy these so called energy saving bulbs actually save???

Answer 1

From what they've taught in my pollution prevention and control classes, the energy savings bulbs are only truly energy saving if you use them enough. Meaning, they should only be installed in areas with frequent use. To put them in a closet where they will be turned on and off, but not actually used for any length of time, is not energy efficient. If you put them in areas such as kitchens, living rooms, and dusk-to-dawn outdoor lighting, then they do actually save more energy that it takes to produce them. So, it all boils down to how long will the light be on during the course of it's life.

Another thing to consider is that these bulbs can be recycled, thus minimizing the potentially harmful materials put into landfills after use. Again, though, the benefits will depend on the consumer actually doing the right thing with the blown bulb.

So, I guess, if you're trying to be environmentally conscious, then these bulbs should be used only in the high use areas. However, if you're trying to save energy costs for yourself, I suppose, if the bulbs are cheap enough, you can place them everywhere.

Answer 2

As the low energy bulbs last about 10 times longer as well as using a fifth of the energy they are certainly more environmentally friendly. Don't forget that an ordinary bulb has a brass cap, lead alloy contacts, copper alloy supports as well as the glass bulb and argon gas filling. And you'd need ten of them in the same time 1 low energy bulb would be used.

Answer 3

I think you've asked an interesting question and I don't know about the manufacturing process. Using energy saving bulbs obviously uses less energy. And because they last that much longer, less are thrown away over a long period. I'm not saying that "less of something bad being thrown away is better than more of something not so bad." As I say I don't know the chemical/processes etc used in the manufacture and for that reason I wish you every success with your research.

Answer 4

You pay for the energy cost of making the bulb when you buy it.

Now consider the difference between a 100-watt tungsten bulb and a 22-watt compact fluorescent.  The tungsten bulb lasts about 1000 hours, the CF between 8000 and 15,000.  If the tungsten bulb costs $.75 and the CF costs $5.00, the CF is already cheaper than 8 tungsten bulbs.

Now consider the energy.  The 8 tungsten bulbs will use 800 kilowatt-hours of energy over 8000 hours; the CF will use 176 kWh.  At perhaps 10¢/kWh, that's $80 vs. $17.60, a savings of $62.40 in favor of the CF.

Now consider carbon emissions.  A kilowatt-hour of electricity takes roughly a pound of coal to generate.  What's better, burning 800 pounds or 176 pounds?  And don't forget that coal-fired powerplants emit mercury too (mercury sulfide in the coal is converted to mercury metal when the coal is burned).

I rest my case.

Answer 5

yes they are

a normal lightbulb usually wastes around 80% energy, whereas an energy saving lightbulb wastes considerably less (I can't remember the exact figure) and therefore not requiring as much energy than normal lightbulbs

I'm not sure about the energy consumed in the process of actually manufacturing the bulbs, but think about how many spherical bulbs are bought and used by consumers and compare that to the number of energy saving lightbulbs consumed...bearing in mind that energy saving lightbulbs also last considerably longer than spherical bulbs





edit: why the thumbs down on two of your questions?

Answer 6

they also have mercury vapor in them, so they mustn't get broke and must be recycled. As to assembly, regular light bulbs require some cost to make too; they're cheaper because they sell a lot of them. Not a big market for fluorescents....mainly because they won't fit into a typical light globe like a regular bulb. They are a bit longer.

Answer 7

Maybe, but they last about 10 times longer than ordinary bulbs too.

Answer 8

nope not realy thay call they energy saving bulbs be cuzz thay save us from haveing to wast a lot of enrgy reading with a flash light

Answer 9

its big saving for us, but yeah, if wat u says is true they cant say its environmental friendly.
thnx for the information. wud like to know the results in ur research.