~~~
Day’s Verse:
Praise the Lord, O my soul.
O Lord my God, You are very great; You are clothed with splendor and majesty.
He wraps Himself in light as with a garment;
He stretches out the heavens like a tent
And lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters.

Psalm 104:1
~~~

You can, with this seriously bright idea.

7 thoughts on “Conquer the Incandescent Bulb

  1. Nothing to do with light bulbs–

    “Animal testing is a terrible idea–they get all nervous and give the wrong answers.”

    I saw that on a rubber stamp online.

  2. My dad discovered these a few years ago. They are awesome once you give them a while to warm up. And they use like a quarter or less the energy of a regular 100 watt bulb, but they drive my mom crazy because it takes a few minutes to get to their full lighting potential. I didn’t know that they had them online. It’s really cool.

  3. From the article – “Compact fluorescents, even in heavy use, last 5, 7, 10 years. Years.”

    That, quite simply, is a lie. I have spent over $200 on CFL’s in the last 8 years (they were $7 on sale, not $3 when I started buying them.) I have used them indoors, outdoors, in heavy use areas and in light use areas. I have rarely had one last more than 2 years. Most don’t make it to 18 months. Sure, you can send it back and get a replacement, IF you saved the receipt, but the postage will cost more than an incandescent that will last twice as long. We have incandescents that were here when we moved in 8 years ago and have never been replaced. Yes, you save engery while it’s working, but I bet if you amortize the energy cost of producing the respective bulbs, incandescents would be better for the environment. THAT’s the ugly truth (as with corn alchohol fuel, as well.)

    Gary
    (the crusader AGAINST CFL)

  4. Gary,

    I know you’ve mentioned your frustration with these before. One thing I was wondering as I read this article was whether the new CFLs that they’re talking about have solved the problem you’re talking about. The article does admit that older CFLs had lots of problems, but it contends that newer ones have solved those problems. Is your complaint fairly recent? I mean, have you just bought CFLs recently that fitzed out on you just like the old ones?

  5. I think this is a nice prospect but I’m hesitant. I’ve seen these swirly bulbs in ceiling fans and frankly they scare me. That aside, however, I think the energy and cost savings is pretty sweet.

    My only real qualm with fluorescent light is that it’s incredibly ugly. It makes food look unappetizing, it makes skin look unflattering, it hurts my eyes and I actually get headaches after being in an office for too long (that could also be my job haha).

    The article mentioned that fluorescent light used to have a pink or bluish tone to it, and as I look up into my office lights right now it still appears that way. I have yet to see a fluorescent light source that gives off a pleasing, sunshine-like glow that an incandescent bulb is capable of.

  6. I think that with these newest bulbs, they’ve overcome the icky light color. The lights in offices are different from the ones you’d be buying in that these “swirl bulbs” are designed for the home and they’ve worked hard to get rid of the strange deadly coloring. My family has these bulbs in some lights, and you honestly can’t tell by the light quality that it’s not incandescent.

  7. I actually had never heard of these until I swung by my local supermarket recently to replace a broken lightbulb, and saw one. I replaced my 100 watt bulb with this new bulb which claimed to equal a normal 100 watt bulb. It was close. But it was yellower, and it wasn’t quite as bright. I didn’t stick with it. But I also didn’t know there was a massive movement behind it.

    I really value the quality of my light, so I’ll likely stick with whichever one is brighter. But I’ll keep trying them, and maybe I can find a better brand than the one cheap kind they offer at Shaw’s.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.