Paul Murray's weblog, with news you may have missed and my $0.02 worth on a number of topics.

"You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it."
- Art Buchwald

I bet you don't have a friend who's an acupuncturist

E-mail me: pmurray [at] despammed.com

Incandescent innovations. I seem to have stumbled into writing about light bulbs on a semi-regular basis (the Google ads on this page are testimony to that). In today's installment, courtesy of the New York Times, we learn that incandescent light bulbs may survive the 2012 Federal standards, thanks to some recent innovations:

“There’s a massive misperception that incandescents are going away quickly,” said Chris Calwell, a researcher with Ecos Consulting who studies the bulb market. There have been more incandescent innovations in the last three years than in the last two decades.”

The first bulbs to emerge from this push, Philips Lighting’s Halogena Energy Savers, are expensive compared with older incandescents. They sell for $5 apiece and more, compared with as little as 25 cents for standard bulbs.

But they are also 30 percent more efficient than older bulbs. Philips says that a 70-watt Halogena Energy Saver gives off the same amount of light as a traditional 100-watt bulb and lasts about three times as long, eventually paying for itself.

The line, for now sold exclusively at Home Depot and on Amazon.com, is not as efficient as compact fluorescent light bulbs, which can use 75 percent less energy than old-style bulbs. But the Energy Saver line is finding favor with consumers who dislike the light from fluorescent bulbs or are bothered by such factors as their slow start-up time and mercury content.

Read the article to find out some of the approaches they're using.

Labels: CFLs, energy, Light bulbs

posted by Paul Murray at 11:31 PM | permanent link |

The scare story about CFLs. For reasons even I don't entirely understand, I seem to write a lot (1, 2, 3) about compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). I think it's the many benefits that can result from such a simple act as changing light bulbs. It's one thing to try and persuade people that they should somehow sacrifice to reduce energy consumption -- good luck telling Americans that -- but CFLs end up saving users money, too. Everybody wins, pretty much.

Probably the biggest qualification behind that "pretty much" is the issue of CFL disposal. CFLs contain mercury. Throw one into a landfill and it's not a big deal, but when everyone starts using them and throwing them away, it becomes a serious problem.

Some people argue that the mercury is such a serious problem that rushing to CFLs is a big mistake. Earlier this week, Slate's Brendan I. Koerner looked at the CFL mercury issue and punched a hole in that argument with an interesting point:

The irony of CFLs is that they actually reduce overall mercury emissions in the long run. Despite recent improvements in the industry's technology, the burning of coal to produce electricity emits roughly 0.023 milligrams of mercury per kilowatt-hour. Over a year, then, using a 26-watt CFL in the average American home (where half of the electricity comes from coal) will result in the emission of 0.66 milligrams of mercury. For 100-watt incandescent bulbs, which produce the identical amount of light, the figure is 2.52 milligrams.

The math is less compelling in areas where significant amounts of power come from sources other than coal (hydroelectric, nuclear, etc.). And yes, we need to make it much easier to recycle CFLs. But avoiding their use due to mercury concerns doesn't make sense.

Labels: CFLs, environment, Light bulbs

posted by Paul Murray at 8:14 PM | permanent link |

Fluorescent light bulbs and the "wife test." I've noted here previously (1, 2) the benefits of compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs): they dramatically lower energy consumption, helping to reduce greenhouses gases and eventually more than paying for their higher initial cost. So why aren't they catching on more?

The current market share of CFL bulbs in the United States is about 6 percent, up from less than 1 percent before 2001. But that compares dismally with CFL adoption rates in other wealthy countries such as Japan (80 percent), Germany (50 percent) and the United Kingdom (20 percent). Australia has announced a phaseout of incandescent bulbs by 2009, and the Canadian province of Ontario decided last week to ban them by 2012.

The relatively glacial adoption rate of CFLs in most of the United States suggests continued stiff resistance on the home front, despite dramatically lower prices for the bulbs and impressive improvements in their quality.

"There is still a big hurdle in convincing Americans that lighting-purchase decisions make a big difference in individual electricity bills and collectively for the environment," said Wendy Reed, director of the federal government's Energy Star campaign, which labels products that save energy and has been working with retailers to market CFL bulbs.

"I have heard time and again that a husband goes out and puts the bulb into the house, thinking he is doing a good thing," Reed said. "Then, the CFL bulb is changed back out by the women. It seems that women are much more concerned with how things look. We are the nesters." ...

"My gut feeling is that the last remaining factor that we have not cracked in selling these bulbs is the 'wife test,' " said My Ton, a senior manager at Ecos Consulting, a company in Portland, Ore., that does market research on energy efficiency.

After a decade as a researcher in residential lighting, Ton said he has concluded that a major part of the CFL problem in penetrating the American home "is a lack of communication between the sexes."

"The guy typically brings a CFL home and just screws it into a lamp in the bedroom, without discussing it with his wife," Ton said. "She walks in, turns on the light and boom -- there is trouble. That is where the negative impressions begin, especially when the guy puts it into the bedroom or the bathroom, the two most sacred areas of the home."

Ton advises husbands and wives "to talk about it before the light bulb is screwed in."

Labels: environment, Light bulbs, men and women, money

posted by Paul Murray at 12:52 PM | permanent link |

Light bulbs for dummies. Another follow-up to a previous post, this one on the subject of light bulbs. The Washington Post has a nice infographic comparing the relative merits of incandescent, halogen and fluorescent light bulbs, and even explaining color temperature.

Labels: energy, Light bulbs

posted by Paul Murray at 3:27 PM | permanent link |

Little things making a difference. Too many people associate conservation with sacrifice. There are plenty of small steps we can take to reduce waste that require little or no sacrifice. Here's Exhibit A.

I'm becoming a fan of compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) -- the swirly designs that screw into conventional incandescent lightbulb sockets. They're an ideal way to conserve a lot of energy without making a huge sacrifice. As Fast Company magazine recently explained:

Compact fluorescents emit the same light as classic incandescents but use 75% or 80% less electricity.

What that means is that if every one of 110 million American households bought just one ice-cream-cone bulb, took it home, and screwed it in the place of an ordinary 60-watt bulb, the energy saved would be enough to power a city of 1.5 million people. One bulb swapped out, enough electricity saved to power all the homes in Delaware and Rhode Island. In terms of oil not burned, or greenhouse gases not exhausted into the atmosphere, one bulb is equivalent to taking 1.3 million cars off the roads.

CFLs are not perfect. To me, their worst attribute is that they take a little time to achieve full brightness, whereas a incandescent is instantaneous. They can't be used with dimmers, 3-way switches or photoelectric switches. They don't work in little lamps where a shade clamps into place on the bulb.

While they cost more, CFLs more than pay for themselves over time. The cheapest place I've found them is Costco, where you can get them for $2 apiece in a pack of eight.

CFLs will never replace every incandescent, but I'm looking for opportunities to use them.

Labels: energy, Light bulbs

posted by Paul Murray at 1:45 PM | permanent link |