Throughout 2013, Adding Light will take a look at practical decisions that everyone can take to contribute to making our communities more ecologically and economically resilient. Everything in this Daily Decisions comes from experience or research applied directly by our family or people we know directly.
When my oldest was in sixth grade, she did a science project (and in our family, when we say a child did something, they did it) comparing incandescent light bulbs, compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs, and light-emitting diodes (LED) in terms of energy to produce the light, amount of light, and ability to read by the light. She and her partners read a book by the light of each bulb, used a Kill-a-Watt to measure the electricity, and used a light meter to measure the light...(ok, so dad had to help in getting some of the supplies. When it was all said and done, they came to a pretty interesting conclusion: the compact fluorescent light worked best all around. The incandescent light definitely had the easiest light to read by, and the LED used the least energy by far. The bulb is no good if you cannot read using it, and the amount of energy wasted by the incandescent creates problems for others in terms of the emissions and pollution. CFL bulbs provided high enough quality light to see by, but used about one-third the energy of incandescent bulbs (and only a little more than twice as much as the LED). To make an immediate, and significant difference in energy usage without greatly sacrificing quality of light, we decided to make the switch to CFL bulbs for the house.
At the time (2006), luckily Home Depot had started to carry CFL bulbs in all the shapes and sizes that a house would need: flood lights, lamp-style, decorative. Homeowners have the choice of waiting until bulbs burn out to replace them, or they can make a wholesale replacement. The benefit of the first option comes in a more spread out cost of purchasing the bulbs; the benefit of the second comes in immediate and significant energy savings. Neither way is wrong. We chose wholesale replacement for all but four fixtures in the house.
The light quality changed slighting in the house, most notably when first starting the lamps, and for fixtures attached to dimming light switches. Fluorescent bulbs for home use will usually have a warm-up period, and newer bulbs have become better acclimated to dimming switches. For our purposes, we got used to the warm-up, and the bulbs would hum when the dimming switch was not at full power, which only required us to adjust the switch. All in all, it was a small sacrifice for the environmental benefit. That benefit was significant. We lowered the peak electricity usage in our house by about twenty percent (20%), and our monthly cost by about twenty-five percent (25%). In the time since that replacement, we have only had three out of about thirty bulbs burn out, and all three burnt out this past year (this summer will be seven years since the replacement). CFL have lived up to their billing, delivering quality light at a significantly reduced energy usage and significantly improved environmental performance.
A description of this decision must include a couple of words of caution about the installation, care, and disposal of CFL bulbs. These bulbs do contain mercury, which if the bulb breaks will cause a hazard for those near the bulb - a hazard similar to when we all used mercury thermometers to take our temperature. The situation does have risks, but not unmanageable. The EPA has a straightforward description of what to do in case of a break, and like any of our energy consuming systems, taking extra care will keep your family out of trouble. I should note that the concern about mercury has merit, and should not be taken lightly, however it should also be extrapolated. Much of the electricity production in the country, and especially the Midwest, comes from the burning of coal. That burning releases mercury into the atmosphere where it can be breathed, end up in the waterways, and end up in plant life. Those who live closest to these plants run risks of exposure in everyday life than those of us who use CFL do as long as we take care. The second concern from CFL has to do with the ultraviolet (UV) light that comes from them. Normally, a coating on the bulb protects us from the UV radiation, but in the "corkscrew" shaping, the coating may become chipped and open pathways for the UV radiation to escape. It is important to make sure that bulbs are not place in situations where a person may be within three feet of the bulb. In addition, bulbs can now be purchased with a "double casing" with a more standard surface shape to help protect. The exposure is no greater than the risk of going outside without sunscreen (and significantly lower unless you spend multiple hours sitting next to a completely uncovered CFL), and is also easily managed.
No comments:
Post a Comment