Fluorescent Bulbs Are Known to Zap Domestic Tranquillity; Energy-Savers a Turnoff for Wives

By Blaine Harden
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 30, 2007; Page A01

NESKOWIN, Ore. -- Alex and Sara Sifford, who live here on the Oregon coast,
want to do the right thing to save a warming world.

To that end, Alex Sifford, 51, has been buying compact fluorescent light
bulbs . . . He sneaks them into sockets all over the house. This has been
driving his wife nuts. . . . the bulbs, with their initial flicker, slow
warm-up and slightly weird color, bug her. . . . Experts on energy
consumption call it the "wife test." And one of the dimly lighted truths of
the global-warming era is that fluorescent bulbs still seem to be flunking
out in most American homes. . . . A key to the abiding grass-roots
resistance to CFLs, Reed and other experts said, is indelible consumer
memories of the hideous looks and poor quality of earlier generations of
fluorescent lights. . . . "People remember them from 20 years ago and they
are not going to forgive," said Dave Shiller, vice president of new business
development for MaxLite, a Fairfield, N.J., company that manufactures CFL
bulbs.

(That's about all I can post and feel comfortable that I am staying within
the "fair use" copyright exception - I'll post the URL to the much longer
and complete article below although I believe that registration is still
required )-: even though it's still free (-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...9/AR2007042901
500.html

FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to warm
up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too bad,
because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone from
the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
want to look at something right away.

--
Bobby G.

"Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@YAH00.COM> wrote:

>FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to warm
>up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too bad,
>because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone from
>the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
>want to look at something right away.

Take care when you remove it lest you drop and break it.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...4-b62dee548fda

"Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
news:463652fe.1689880921@nntp.fuse.net...
> "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@YAH00.COM> wrote:
>
> >FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to
warm
> >up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too
bad,
> >because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone
from
> >the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
> >want to look at something right away.
>
> Take care when you remove it lest you drop and break it.
>
>
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...=aa7796aa-e4a5
-4c06-be84-b62dee548fda

I'm beginning to think CFL's are the gypsy moths of the '00's. Instead of
catching mercury spewing out of smokestacks like we should (along with
carbon) we're distributing toxic mercury all throughout the environment,
hoping it's all going to be properly recycled even thought we know Americans
aren't the best recyclers in the world. It is pretty bizarre, when you stop
and think about it. Perhaps the best we can hope for from CFL's is that
they will spur development of better alternatives that don't require
creating mercury vapor in fragile glass tubes in our homes.

--
Bobby G.

"Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@YAH00.COM> wrote in message
news:EfSdnWtUi4FiqqvbnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@rcn.net...

> FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to
> warm
> up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too bad,
> because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone from
> the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
> want to look at something right away.

I have a house full of those N:Vision PAR-30 floods equivalents. They come
in 2 or 3 colors. The warm ones are pretty good. Yes they take a long time
to warm up (30-90 secs). I commented on that in a prior post.

Currently I have 5 recessed cans in my kitchen and primary lighting, 7 in
the master suite, 4 in the great room and 6 more elsewhere in the house. If
I used incandescent in all of them the whirring of the electric meter would
be deafening. We have learned to adapt to the warm up.

Check the "color" of yours. The non-warm ones were pretty stark.


Dan Wright

"Dan Wright" <nobody@example.com> wrote in message
news:wzwZh.27197$n_.21475@attbi_s21...
>
> "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@YAH00.COM> wrote in message
> news:EfSdnWtUi4FiqqvbnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@rcn.net...
>
> > FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to
> > warm
> > up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too
bad,
> > because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone
from
> > the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
> > want to look at something right away.
>
> I have a house full of those N:Vision PAR-30 floods equivalents. They
come
> in 2 or 3 colors. The warm ones are pretty good. Yes they take a long
time
> to warm up (30-90 secs). I commented on that in a prior post.

I might have missed that because what surprised me the most when I first got
them was they were "instant on" - the speed at which they reached full
brightness floored me (and my wife). However, she, not I, was the first to
notice the ever-lengthening "warm up" times. Why would they work so
remarkably well right out of the blister pack and worsen, drastically, in
such a short amount of time?

I believe the trickle current from the X-10 autosense circuit has damaged or
is damaging something internally. I've had CFL bulbs plugged into appliance
modules begin to burn at the base while operating. Not sure if they would
have caught fire if I didn't happen to be standing there, but the areas
around the tube ends were burned dark black and brown. Lots of acrid, nasty
smoke too. SAF for CFL's dropped to an all time low, which is why I posted
the WaPo summary!

It might be a good idea to get two more new test bulbs and run one off a
mechanical timer vs. one on a appliance module on the same schedule as the
timer. That should tell me if the trickle current is ruining the bulb. I
may even get a third one to leave on all the time to see if it's repeated
on/off cycles that do the bulbs in.

> Currently I have 5 recessed cans in my kitchen and primary lighting, 7 in
> the master suite, 4 in the great room and 6 more elsewhere in the house.
If
> I used incandescent in all of them the whirring of the electric meter
would
> be deafening. We have learned to adapt to the warm up.

We have very different lighting schemes. Nearly all table and floor lamps.
The floodlight produced a very interesting effect with one of the table
lamps and really was astoundingly quick to reach full intensity. Now it
take 30 secs and from what you're saying, might soon take 90. This sounds
like another interesting problem to run to ground. Trickle current with
these bulbs may be quite destructive. With the local electrical rates
doubling and tripling here in the DC metro area, I want to try to get CFLs
to work. If it means some workaround of the trickle current problem, I'll
give it a shot. But I gotta test first and find the time to do it according
to CHA standards! (-:

> Check the "color" of yours. The non-warm ones were pretty stark.

It didn't seem so bad and my wife's *really* picky about light color as it
relates to cosmetics and food preparation. Lots of CFL and fluorescent
solutions have had low SAF for that very reason. The N-Vision bulbs have
been much more acceptable than past bulbs. Too bad the arthritic warm up
and the GE bulb beginning to burn up have caused CFL's to lose more ground
in her mind, approval-wise. And we're not talking about losing just a
little ground. We're talking about Poland-sized chunks. (-:

--
Bobby G.

> Check the "color" of yours. The
> non-warm ones were pretty stark.

In our condo in Brazil there is one light
that takes a minute or two to reach full
brightness. It's an extremely _white_
light. My wife bought the bulb and I
didn't pay attention when the electrician
installed the fixture so I wasn't aware
of the brand or even the type. However,
after reading your description I assume
this is a CFL. The light is an annoying
color. I hate using it even for a few
minutes. I guess I'll try to find a warm
color version next time we go down
there.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
941-925-8650
4883 Fallcrest Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34233
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

"Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@YAH00.COM> wrote:

>I believe the trickle current from the X-10 autosense circuit has damaged or
>is damaging something internally. I've had CFL bulbs plugged into appliance
>modules begin to burn at the base while operating. Not sure if they would
>have caught fire if I didn't happen to be standing there, but the areas
>around the tube ends were burned dark black and brown. Lots of acrid, nasty
>smoke too. SAF for CFL's dropped to an all time low, which is why I posted
>the WaPo summary!

If UL-approved, they might smoke, smell and discolor but the plastic should
not catch fire.

BTW, this seems to be another common complaint.

"Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@YAH00.COM> wrote:

>I'm beginning to think CFL's are the gypsy moths of the '00's. Instead of
>catching mercury spewing out of smokestacks like we should (along with
>carbon) we're distributing toxic mercury all throughout the environment,
>hoping it's all going to be properly recycled even thought we know Americans
>aren't the best recyclers in the world. It is pretty bizarre, when you stop
>and think about it. Perhaps the best we can hope for from CFL's is that
>they will spur development of better alternatives that don't require
>creating mercury vapor in fragile glass tubes in our homes.

There's an article in today's NYT (by the same bozo who thinks lighting uses
over 20% of US electricity) about coal and carbon sequestration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/sc...ml?ref=science

Some chemists have developed a method to convert carbon dioxide to carbon
monoxide. The CO can then be used to make other useful things (e.g.
synfuels, ethanol).

http://www.technologyreview.com/read....aspx?id=18582

On Apr 30, 4:35 pm, "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1...@YAH00.COM> wrote:
> "Dave Houston" <nob...@whocares.com> wrote in message
>
> news:463652fe.1689880921@nntp.fuse.net...> "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1...@YAH00.COM> wrote:
>
> > >FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to
> warm
> > >up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too
> bad,
> > >because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone
> from
> > >the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
> > >want to look at something right away.
>
> > Take care when you remove it lest you drop and break it.
>
> http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...html?id=aa7796...
> -4c06-be84-b62dee548fda
>
> I'm beginning to think CFL's are the gypsy moths of the '00's. Instead of
> catching mercury spewing out of smokestacks like we should (along with
> carbon) we're distributing toxic mercury all throughout the environment,
> hoping it's all going to be properly recycled even thought we know Americans
> aren't the best recyclers in the world. It is pretty bizarre, when you stop
> and think about it. Perhaps the best we can hope for from CFL's is that
> they will spur development of better alternatives that don't require
> creating mercury vapor in fragile glass tubes in our homes.
>
> --
> Bobby G.

http://dafnwebpd.sylvania.com/idmweb/doccontent.dll?LibraryName=ecomcspd^dafnctpd&Syste mType=2&LogonId=f7eecb462aecb681dcfbdc3351d22153&D ocId=003694126&Page=1

The mercury emitted by coal power plants to run an incandescent is 26
mg over 5 years. For a CFL this is 6 mg. Add to that the max 5 mg of
CFL in the bulb itself and you get 11 mg compared with 26 for the
incandescent. A mercury thermometer has between 500 and 1,000 mg.
And the 5 mg of mercury in a CFL is contained, as opposed to the
mercury emitted by coal power plants, which is breathed in or consumed
when eating fish. See the above link for what to do if a CFL breaks.

So, as long as 80% of our electricity comes from coal, it's still
better to use CFLs!

ericjhwilson@gmail.com wrote:

>On Apr 30, 4:35 pm, "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1...@YAH00.COM> wrote:
>> "Dave Houston" <nob...@whocares.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:463652fe.1689880921@nntp.fuse.net...> "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1...@YAH00.COM> wrote:
>>
>> > >FWIW, my N-vision CFL floodlight has begun to take a very long time to
>> warm
>> > >up and appears never able to reach its initial brightness level. Too
>> bad,
>> > >because it looked like a real winner at first. My wife wants it gone
>> from
>> > >the kitchen! I concur. Slow warmup is really, really annoying when you
>> > >want to look at something right away.
>>
>> > Take care when you remove it lest you drop and break it.
>>
>> http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...html?id=aa7796...
>> -4c06-be84-b62dee548fda
>>
>> I'm beginning to think CFL's are the gypsy moths of the '00's. Instead of
>> catching mercury spewing out of smokestacks like we should (along with
>> carbon) we're distributing toxic mercury all throughout the environment,
>> hoping it's all going to be properly recycled even thought we know Americans
>> aren't the best recyclers in the world. It is pretty bizarre, when you stop
>> and think about it. Perhaps the best we can hope for from CFL's is that
>> they will spur development of better alternatives that don't require
>> creating mercury vapor in fragile glass tubes in our homes.
>>
>> --
>> Bobby G.
>
>http://dafnwebpd.sylvania.com/idmweb/doccontent.dll?LibraryName=ecomcspd^dafnctpd&Syste mType=2&LogonId=f7eecb462aecb681dcfbdc3351d22153&D ocId=003694126&Page=1
>
>The mercury emitted by coal power plants to run an incandescent is 26
>mg over 5 years. For a CFL this is 6 mg. Add to that the max 5 mg of
>CFL in the bulb itself and you get 11 mg compared with 26 for the
>incandescent. A mercury thermometer has between 500 and 1,000 mg.
>And the 5 mg of mercury in a CFL is contained, as opposed to the
>mercury emitted by coal power plants, which is breathed in or consumed
>when eating fish. See the above link for what to do if a CFL breaks.
>
>So, as long as 80% of our electricity comes from coal, it's still
>better to use CFLs!

Many people have reported premature failures after a year or so. If you have
to replace the CFL annually, the 5 year score becomes CFL 31mg, Incandescent
26mg.