Matt Prescott argues that we should “just ban incandescent bulbs” as Not such a bright idea, but his readers look more deeply into the issue:
Focusing on light bulbs may help people see the light, but it doesn’t address the upstream issues that trickle down to all our energy use decisions: the price we pay doesn’t reflect the true cost of production and distribution. Tax electricity (which is easier than taxing bulbs) and you’ll see usage go down. Use the proceeds to subsidise training or low-power capital expenditure — including for electricity companies — if you want to avoid annoying business.
Ant Evans, LondonThe sad truth of most environmentalists is that in promoting energy efficient technologies, they rarely present information on the manufacture of those technologies. How much energy is consumed in manufacturing a single CFL, compared to the standard incandescent? I notice that statistic is significantly absent here. Do the energy savings of the bulbs outweigh the energy use to manufacture and ship to end-user? If not you’ve just off-shored your energy consumption.
Josh Berkow, Buffalo USAI find the fluorescent bulbs last no longer than incandescent ones, I guess the starter electronics fails. This makes them costly to me and a much greater pollution risk when disposed of. I heard circuit boards take thousands of years to decay in landfill. Regarding waste, the waste is heat, and as my house has heating that kicks in when the thermostat says it’s cold, is there really waste, just because the bulb generates the heat rather than the electric heater?
Neil, Liverpool