Complete and Utter Zebu

Finally, we have confirmation that the new-style CFL lightbulbs are not as bright as the incandescent bulbs we must replace them with. Despite the fact that we could hardly help notice that they are significantly dimmer, give out a muddier light and take ages to warm up, Environment Minister Dan Norris and umpteen government websites have repeatedly told us that we are mistaken.

Now Engineering and Technology magazine has published a study which shows that, far from emitting the same amount of light, CFLs give out only about 60% of the light of the corresponding incandescent bulbs. What’s more, they lose a quarter of their brightness over their lifetime. Of 18 that were tested by German consumer organisation Warentest, three gave up the ghost completely before 10,000 hours, which is how long these bulbs are supposed to last.

As the editor of the magazine, Dickon Ross, says:

“There is a big difference between what most bulbs’ packaging promises and what the reality is. It’s no wonder so many consumers are dissatisfied with the bulbs.”

In fact, anybody could have discovered this for themselves as the EU’s own website on CFLs says: “Currently, exaggerated claims are often made on the packaging about the light output of compact fluorescent lamps.”

Fiddling the figures

Read the full report, however, and you’ll learn even more shocking facts about CFLs and the switchover. You’ll learn that Britain’s Energy Saving Trust – supposedly independent but funded by the government – is fiddling the numbers to make CFCs seem more impressive than they really are.

The European CFL Quality Charter requires bulbs’ on/off cycles to be the same as the number of hours they last. An American test found a quarter of bulbs failed to do this, so the Energy Saving Trust has now dropped that requirement.

The European CFL Quality Charter requires CFL bulbs to get to 30% of their full brightness in two seconds and 80% within a minute. As too many bulbs failed to do so, the Energy Saving Trust shaded it to 20% and 70% respectively. Engineering and Technology’s article says:

“It might be tempting to characterise these discrepancies as just another battle between the British Government and the European Union, except for the fact that one of the organisations responsible for formulating the EU CFL Quality Charter was the UK Energy Savings Trust itself.”

New European legislation that has just come into effect is, it transpires, considerably less stringent both than its own CFL Quality Charter and the Energy Savings Trust’s standards.

Why bother with CFCs at all?

So CFLs aren’t as bright as they say, they don’t last as long as old-style incandescent bulbs and they are a nightmare to dispose of, containing as they do toxic mercury, only recently banned in most other devices such as thermometers and barometers.

The enforced switch to CFLs might be understandable if there were no alternative, but there is. Solid state lighting, based on Light Emitting Diodes, is already being installed in traffic lights. LED bulbs, now beginning to come onto the retail market, are warmer and brighter, are more adaptable and several times more efficient than CFLs, last for decades rather than years, will work with dimmer switches and contain nothing toxic.

Would it not have made sense to wait a short time until LEDs were more widely available, rather than introduce a dangerous and discredited technology like CFLs?

Our bulbs may not be incandescent any more, but it’s no surprise if we are.

Read more about CFLs and other Complete and Utter Zebu in our book.

To return to the main page, click on the blog title or the “Home” button