Weather Alert: High Wind Warning expires at 10:00 PM on 5/26, issued at 4:19 AM Blanding, UT | Dutch John, UT | La Sal, UT | Manila, UT

Incandescent light bulbs being phased out


Story Comments Share
Updated: 2/08/2011 10:09 pm | Published: 2/08/2011 4:59 pm

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - The government has mandated that by next January it’s lights out for the 100-watt incandescent light bulb. So what should you chose to replace it? The compact fluorescent or the LEDs. We’re taking action to help you make the choice.

Steve Hansen from Lighting Design says there is no reason to panic.

No reason at all to panic about the phasing out of the 100-watt light bulbs starting January 1. There will be light bulbs available. They’ll probably be available in the 88-92-watt range.”

Incandescent bulbs are being phased out in favor of more energy efficient, cost effective lights. The two choices have their pros and cons, but the technology is getting better for each of them. The main complaint is that the lighting with the new, energy efficient bulbs is simply not as good as the incandescent bulbs, or we’re simply not used to it.

So, are the new lights worth it? Well, for a new $2 CFL, you can save an average of $3 over the life span of the bulb. And the LEDs can be even more cost effective over the long run. Also, the CFLs contain mercury and to reduce the possibility of releasing mercury into the environment, they must be recycled properly. LEDs have no mercury.

So it really comes down to your needs. Do you want to have the best lighting with the best savings while doing the best for the environment? Or do you want the best bang for your buck that provides a quick return on your cash while still helping the environment?

Steve Hansen has a few suggestions.

The best lighting available right now for overall efficiency and everything else without considering any cost is the LED. The LED is very, very efficient and gives off great quality of light. The best bang for the buck right now is your CFL bulbs. They give us a great efficiency of lighting and energy use, but also you have to be careful you get a good quality one that gives us good color.

By quality, he means they are durable and by color, he’s talking about the various hues and shadings you get out of your lights. So don’t be too concerned about losing incandescent light bulbs. You’ll still be able to get them and you’ll have many other options. Although the LED lamps are more expensive, they are more efficient and will save you more money in the long run, and…they contain no mercury.

For more information on this topic, go to the following websites:

The Phase-Out of Incandescent Light Bulbs: What You Need To Know:

http://earth911.com/news/2010/10/28/the-phase-out-of-incandescent-light-bulbs-what-you-need-to-know/

Cost effectiveness of LEDs:

http://www.articlesbase.com/sales-articles/is-led-light-energy-efficient-and-cost-effective-4102941.html

Story Comments Share
3 Comment(s)
Comments: Show | Hide

Here are the most recent story comments.View All

The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of ABC4

AndyHorlacher - 2/8/2011 8:54 PM
0 Votes
Ok, you guys obviously pulled a switcheroo on us. What I heard on you evening newscast and read in this article shortly thereafter is that CFLs improve Mercury level environmental quality over Incandescent lights, but now I see that the text has been corrected to indicate that it says that the CFLs CAUSE Mercury level problems if not recycled properly. Thanks for correcting this. It may be noted that many Home Depot stores will accept CFLs (and I think flourescent tubes) for recycling at the returns counter at the entrance. The biggest problem that I see with CFLs and I think LEDs as well is that they cannot be used in locations where the power is controlled by a dimmer. This may be the reason why some people are hoarding incandescent bulbs. A solution to this problem should be addressed - probably only with LED lighting. But I totally agree that CFLs and even better LEDs are the way to go, especially in the summertime because since incandescent lights output so much heat, switching to a more efficient lighting not only saves money on lighting costs, but air conditioning costs as well.

AndyHorlacher - 2/8/2011 8:34 PM
0 Votes
I have to disagree with the statement that CFL usage leads to less Mercury in the environment than incandescent lighting. The truth is just the opposite! The facts are that incandescent lights contain NO MERCURY and CFLs and Flourescent tubes contain small amounts of Mercury and must be disposed of by being taken to a reclamation (recycling) center. Check with your city or garbage collectors' website to learn where your reclamation center is. Many Home Depot stores will take them at the returns desk by the entrance. One problem with CFL and LED lights is that they cannot be used where the power is controlled by a dimmer. A solution to this problem needs to be addressed. But I still agree that for now CFLs are a major step forward, and ultimately LEDs should take over. This is especially true during the summertime because incandescent lights generate a lot of heat which increases air conditioning costs (assuming air conditioning is used). So using CFLs or LEDs during the summertime saves not only on the cost of lighting, but also cooling. Andy Horlacher - Sandy, Utah

MC Mike - 2/8/2011 5:53 PM
0 Votes
Bull. Incandescents have no Mercury. CFL's do.
YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION:
*First Name:

*Last Name:

*Email:
  Phone:
  Message:

* indicates required field

ABC 4 Poll
Inergize Digital This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.
Mobile advertising for this site is available on Local Ad Buy.