Australia phasing out light bulbs by 2009 !
By crazynurse
@crazynurse (7482)
United States
February 20, 2007 12:29pm CST
Taking the lead in an effort to help the enviornment, the Australian government is going to phase out regular light bulbs by 2009 in favor of the compact fluorescent bulbs. The argument for the newer bulbs is that they use 50% less energy when burned. The argument againest the new bulbs is that they give off mercury vapor if broken. What are your thoughts on the new bulbs?
2 people like this
8 responses
@mom2chriskel (1060)
• United States
20 Feb 07
I think they would be great as long as they truly didn't give off a mercury vapor. If they can fix that part, then I'd be all for it.
I know they have those spiral light bulbs now that are supposed to last longer but I'm not sure if they use less energy?
Is this the same type of bulb? Do we already have them in the U.S or is this a newer kind of bulb?
1 person likes this
@crazynurse (7482)
• United States
20 Feb 07
We do have the bulbs, and they do have a spiral=type shape. We haven't mandated their use as yet in the states, we are encouraging their use. I belive there is one state that is getting read to take it before their legislature. I can't remember which state.
@crazynurse (7482)
• United States
22 Feb 07
I wish someone who has used these bulbs would fill us in on the longevity and the pros and cons of them!
@TJHornibrook (196)
• United States
3 Mar 07
I believe the state is California. The amount of glass and power saved from this one move will be great. Energy savings is also great. 20 watts verses 100 watts for the same amount of light
@villageanne (8553)
• United States
26 Feb 07
I have heard this but I really have a problem with it. I cant be around florescent lights too much as they make my head hurt worse. I did a discussion on the new bulbs a few weeks ago and got over 100 comments. They were very interesting. The GE site tells alot of info and it is not all good. You should wear gloves if you have to clean up one that has broken and you sould open the window to let it air out and the list goes on and one. You should read all the comments on my discussion. it was an eyeopener for me.
1 person likes this
@TJHornibrook (196)
• United States
3 Mar 07
I will read the comments. I haven't broken a bulb in a long time but I will read.
@emeraldisle (13138)
• United States
22 Feb 07
Well I've been looking to switch to the new bulbs especially before the summer months when our electric bill doubles if not triples due to the summer heat. The problem comes in I can buy a 4 pack of regular bulbs for a $1 but the new ones a 4 packs costs around $7. Yes they last longer and are cheaper to run but the initial output is what hurts. I'm still going to but I'm going to have to do it very gradually. I'm not too worried about the mercury vapor. Over all in the past 5 years I think I've broken one light bulb so I don't think it's that big of a concern.
1 person likes this
@TJHornibrook (196)
• United States
3 Mar 07
In Tennessee the local energy company offers a home energy audit and sends you light bulbs for free and those foam panels to put around your plugs. You should see if your energy company does the same.
@bonbon664 (3466)
• Canada
6 Mar 07
I use the new bulbs in my house now. They are more expensive yes, but, last a really, really long time. I don't have any complaints with them. I applaud Australia for taking such a measure. It's insane how much of our electricity is spent on lighting.
@sweetlady10 (3611)
• United States
20 Feb 07
It will be such a wonderful bulb to have if they really save 50% energy when are in use. We need more and more of those things which save energies. Hope it will be popular and other country will also use it.
And ofcourse it should not be costly, so that all people can use it.
1 person likes this
@crazynurse (7482)
• United States
20 Feb 07
If I understand correctly, they cost a little more but do last longer.
@TJHornibrook (196)
• United States
3 Mar 07
they do cost about 2-5 dollars each but run for 7000 hours. The comon bulb only runs for 700 hours. With the use of CFLs you have to replace the bulbs less often and more importantly, at least to me you don't have to climb up and change them as often. But they do flicker when you turn them on and near the end of there life
@Debs_place (10520)
• United States
22 Feb 07
Actually LED are much more energy efficient, but they are very expensive.
Mythbusters did a thing on light bulbs and the LEDs were much cheaper to run. I was going to run out and get a few...but i think they started at $30 a pop...that is a lot to spend on an initial outlay to burn less electric.
Any appliance that gives off heat is wasting energy.
1 person likes this
@TJHornibrook (196)
• United States
3 Mar 07
also did you see that light? it was weird looking and they are better for up and down light over general lighting.
@TJHornibrook (196)
• United States
3 Mar 07
The ones in the untied states saves 2/3 energy 20 watts for 100 watt output. I have rarely broken one. I think your government is wise in there vote to replace the light bulb with CFLs. I will save a lot of power and reduce a lot of the CO2 that goes into the air. For ever KWH saved that is one less KWH that needs to be produced.
The untied states needs to do this also.
For further info go to:
http://www.nativeenergy.com/
@hezoid (2144)
•
6 Mar 07
I'm sure this is supposed to be happening in the UK too at some point, though i don't think a date has been set. In the UK these bulbs are quite cheap, not as expensive as they used to be, and they save loaddddds of energy! Plus, they save you m,oney becuase they don't blow so often and of course you have a smaller electric bill to pay!
