I've just read this article from a link at Energy Bulletin. The article also mentions this feature on an Australian website, listing the disadvantages of CFLs over existing bulbs.
Whilst I have taken the two articles with a proverbial grain of salt, they do raise some interesting points about CFLs that I wasn't previously aware of. Namely:
* CFLs use mercury in their manufacture. Recycling or disposing of these bulbs in Australia in the future is going to be interesting, we have no facilities to do so apparently.
* They require more ventilation than incandescent bulbs and should not be used in completely enclosed light fittings, as they will get too hot and fail prematurely. All of my light fittings are enclosed, of course, and I have nothing at all about CFLs not being suitable for these fittings, especially poorly ventilated "oyster" style ceiling fittings (like mine) designed for incandescents?
* CFLs cannot be used at very high or very low temperatures - for example the oven, microwave or your freezer. So what will we do if/ when these bulbs fail after incandescents have been banned?
* CFLs are (generally) larger and heavier than incandescents so transport energy use is much higher (obvious when you think about it).
"Food" for thought?
2 comments:
Very interesting!! Your posts are a goldmine of information. I have an oyster style light fitting in my bathroom and I did notice the CFL lamp seemed to last only a relatively short time... I replaced the CFL lamp but (for reasons not to be disclosed
here :-) ) I have not replaced the light shade. Maybe I won't, even though it looks a mite untidy.
Thanks Ms. Soup :-) I also had a light shade that I, er, "chose" not to replace for a while, but fortunately it was one that we replaced with a fan recently. The uncovered look certainly has a certain "je ne sais quois", lol.
Post a Comment