English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

They say it gives better lighting, less costly, and longer lasting. .

2007-06-29 04:17:50 · 4 answers · asked by bryce d 1 in Home & Garden Maintenance & Repairs

4 answers

Yes, the flourescent bulbs are more energy efficient than refular bulbs. However, they are more expensive to buy, but you don't have to replace them as often as regular bulbs. The lighting they give off is the exact same as you would see in an industrial setting, so sometimes the colors of things in your home (like lampshades, furniture, wall colors) can look slightly different with the flourescent bulbs. I personally don't like the way they make everything look, so I only have them in some of my lights (like in the kitchen, where the lights are on all the time).

2007-06-29 04:27:59 · answer #1 · answered by MILF 5 · 0 0

We started using them not too long ago, and they're great. We have a light above our stove that used to burn out every few weeks. We put a compact fluorescent in there early last spring, and it's still going strong. Regular bulbs give off a yellowish light, but you don't get that as much with these. They are a little more expensive when you first buy them, but they use a lot less electricity, and between that and the fact that they last so much longer, I'm sure they'll more than pay for themselves. Not to mention that since you're using less electricity, you're also helping the environment.

2007-06-29 04:25:05 · answer #2 · answered by cross-stitch kelly 7 · 0 0

Yes. The light bulbs are called 'self-ballasted compact fluorescent lamps'. They typically have somewhere between 3-5 times both the 'efficacy' (a specialized form of efficiency referring to the amount of light generated per amount of energy used) and average life span of the more common household 'incandescent A-lamp'.

Example:
Philips self-ballast fluorescent 23-Watt EL/DT lamps has Lumen (visible light) output of 1400 lumens and a rated life of 6000 hours.
Philips incandescent 100-Watt A-19 lamp has between 1300-1700 lumens (depending on frosted, econ-o-watt, etc) and a life of between 1000-2000 hours (also depending on version).

This gives the self-ballasted fluorescent an efficacy of 60 lumens/Watt and the incandescent an efficacy of approximately 15 lumens/Watt. That's 4 times the efficiency of fluorescent over incandescent! ..and 3 times the rated life!

That's not to say fluorescent is without is problems. These lamps are currently not compatible with standard voltage dimming like you would use with incandescent. Also the color of the light and color rendering is slightly less and some individuals have a heightened sensitivity to the frequency of the discharge inside the lamp or the 'flicker'. In situations where these parameters would prohibit than fluorescent lamp use, then look to 'halogen' lamps which still have a higher efficiency then incandescent but still has all the same characteristics.

Essentially the energy efficiency of this type of technology is so large, and the quotient of the world's energy use that goes towards artificial lighting is so significant, that we may see a time very soon when legislation is going to dictate the minimum efficacy of commercially available lamp, or light bulb, sources available. When that time comes incandescent technology is going to be something that our kids are going to thank us for getting rid of.

2007-07-01 08:41:06 · answer #3 · answered by Dru 1 · 0 0

I have used them for many years and with kids that can't remember to turn the lights off it is definitely an cost saver. Do not use them in lights that have a dimmer.

2007-06-30 01:24:31 · answer #4 · answered by UVHS 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers