Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] CFLs



Keeping CFLs in perspective--the big picture.

From the doe website www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs4a.html

Residential lighting uses less than 10 % of residential electricity and even less of resdential energy use. Conversion of all homes to CFLs would save about 32 billion kWh annually. However, total electrical use consumes about 4200 billion kWh annually so that is less than a 1% savings in electrical energy and a much smaller percentage in total energy savings. A 32 billion kWh savings is well worth while, but fundamentally this savings gets more than eaten up by a single year's population growth.

CFLs have become the 'poster child' for energy efficiency, but in the long run are miniscule in their effect. The one efficiency item that can really make a difference is a high mileage vehicle versus the 'average' U.S. vehicle (REAL fleet average under 20 mpg).

The cost factor of CFLs is about break-even (versus incandescents) taking into account 'real-world' lifetimes (I assume California prices are subsidized by your taxes--so you are still paying $2-5 per bulb). [I had a zero lifetime bulb--first CFL I bought was dropped trying to get it into a lamp--it didn't fit anyway.] My problem is that our house has about 20 65W floods--most on dimmers. The CFL equivalents take 2-3 minutes to come up to full brightness, and dimmable versions are way expensive.

Rick