The Fabricated Controversy Over the Demise of the Incandescent Light Bulb
We always start by telling our customers that the single most cost effective energy improvement measure out there, is switching out incandescent bulbs for CFLs or better yet, LEDs. So you can understand how this topic is near and dear to me.
As most of you should know by now, there was legislation introduced in 2007 designed to encourage both the adoption and growth of more energy efficient products in the lighting industry. This legislation, entitled the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 will phase out less efficient lighting technologies in favor of products which are at least 30% more efficient, starting with the 100 Watt bulb in 2012 and ending with the 40 Watt bulb in 2014. While there are several exemptions for specialty lighting, this will have a dramatic effect on reducing the amount of energy we consume in lighting our homes and businesses.
I must admit, that while I am not surprised, I am constantly amazed at how easily hysteria can be created in the media around any topic by those who are opposed to these types of efforts, whatever their underlying motives may be. Statements like “government interference”, “government intrusion”, “assault on our freedoms”, “over reaching”, “the government telling you what to buy”, etc. are used to tap into our innate distrust of government and fear of losing our freedoms, often to great effect. These organizations, which we’ll call “agents of inertia” are counting on the fact that we are too busy with life to bother researching the facts about the situation at hand and too tired at the end of the day to form a more rational opinion on the subject, favoring perhaps the more satisfying and immediate emotional desire to lash out against any change, whatever that may be. Without vilifying any one industry, it’s reasonable to assume that for every interest there are one or more counter interests e.g. solar industry vs. coal industry.
This holds true whether it’s about a carbon tax, higher fuel efficiency standards or clean air and water regulations. Businesses operate best when they know what to expect. When change (read uncertainty) is introduced, risk is introduced, known business models are challenged and so efforts to slow down or impede change are seen as sound business strategies, generally speaking. Especially so when a particular industry is wildly profitable (e.g. the petroleum industry) and has a substantial interest in maintaining the status-quo or when a particular company or group of companies does not have either the know-how, technology, products or skills to adapt to these changes fast enough.
Now, back to the light bulb. I can’t say with certainty from where the fuss is coming from, I suspect some of it may simply be partisan (not sure when being able to breathe clean air became partisan) and certainly some of it is likely from the utilities and product manufacturers, but if you look at the facts, this is really a non-issue.
Current incandescent light bulbs are only about 10% efficient (we’ve written about this before), meaning that of the 60 watts of energy used when you turn on a light, only 6 watts are used to produce actual light, a whopping 54 watts are used to generate heat. That’s why you can’t touch a light bulb once it has been on a for few minutes.
Simple math here: one 60 watt bulb burning 6 hours per day, 365 days per year will use a total of 131,400 watts of energy in a year (or 131.4kWh – 60w x 6hrs x 365days/1,000), at $0.10 per kWh, which is the average of Duke Energy and Progress Energy rates, it translates to a total operating cost of approximately $13.14 per year per bulb! Now compare this to an equivalent LED from NC’s very own Cree. The CR6, a 65W equivalent light, uses only 10.5W of power, or $2.30 per year to operate (10.5x6x365/1,000@$0.10 per kWh=$2.30). With an expected life span of 50,000 hours, you can expect to have to change this bulb once every 22.8 years. So, at about $50/light, it will have paid for itself in 5 years and then go on to save you an additional $190 over the life of the light.
Just in terms of sheer costs, you should be outraged. That’s 190 iTunes songs or 190 Red Box movies or 47 Amazon.com movie rentals, or…you get the idea, over the life of the light per light! Just think of what you could do with the savings. Now add to this waste of money, all the unnecessary pollution that one bulb is putting into the air we breathe and the land we live in and we should all be looking for better products to meet our lighting needs.
Yes there are limitations to CFLs (Compact Fluorescent Light) in the form of light quality and longevity and while LEDs have them beat hands down in these two areas, their up front costs are substantially higher than both CFLs and incandescent lights. Sometimes however, without a little push to get over our inherent inertia and stimulate the initial market demand, there is little incentive for companies to invest in these newer technologies. New technologies are expensive to develop, prototypes and research can cost a lot of money, but as demand grows costs will come down in turn fueling more demand thus driving down costs even further. Sometimes you need a little spark to get the fire burning, but once it’s burning, it can feed itself.
It’s fair to say that it would be easier and cheaper for us in the short term to simply drive down the road and dump our old refrigerator and used tires in a field, rather than bring them to a designated recycling facility on a specific day, or pay a recycling fee for our old tires. But if we all did that, we’d run short of clean space in a hurry. In fact, that’s just what happened a short while back. As a diver, I often find these relics from our past at the bottom of lakes and quarries and marvel at our lack of understanding back when it was deemed acceptable to simply toss these items in the middle of the water. ”out of sight, out of mind”, right?
The same is true of the pollution we create to sustain most aspects of our modern lifestyles. We have created a society and an economy that is very adept at hiding the unpleasantness of our energy infrastructure and we are quickly running out of “clean space” and “clean air”. It’s incumbent upon us, the rational adults to examine our choices based on the facts rather than that visceral, ancient, reptilian being at our center and not give in to the temptation to put it off for later, or expect someone else deal with it. We should all be asking ourselves, “what happens if they (that someone else) are expecting me to deal with it??”
So when it comes to phasing out the old incandescent heaters (aka lights), take a minute and let the facts illuminate the right path.
